Optimal Intensity Targets for Greenhouse Emissions Trading Under Uncertainty
AbstractUncertainty is an obstacle for commitments under cap and trade schemes. We assess how well intensity targets, where countries' permit allocations are indexed to future realised GDP, can cope with uncertainties in international greenhouse emissions trading. We present some empirical foundations for intensity targets and derive a simple rule for the optimal degree of indexation to GDP. Using an 18-region simulation model of a cooperative, global cap-and-trade treaty in 2020 under multiple uncertainties and endogenous commitments, we show that optimal intensity targets could reduce the cost of uncertainty and achieve significant increases in global abatement. The optimal degree of indexation to GDP would vary greatly between countries, including super-indexation in some advanced countries, and partial indexation for most developing countries. Standard intensity targets (with one-to-one indexation) would also improve the overall outcome, but to a lesser degree and not in all individual cases. Although target indexation is no magic wand for a future global climate treaty, gains from reduced cost uncertainty and the potential for more stringent environmental commitments might justify the increased complexity and other potential downsides of intensity targets.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network in its series Economics and Environment Network Working Papers with number 0605.
Length: 30 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2006
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://een.anu.edu.au/
climate policy; emissions trading; uncertainty; flexible targets; intensity targets; optimality; simulation modelling;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- Q00 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2007-05-19 (All new papers)
- NEP-ENE-2007-05-19 (Energy Economics)
- NEP-ENV-2007-05-19 (Environmental Economics)
- NEP-RES-2007-05-19 (Resource Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Philippe Quirion, 2004.
"Prices versus Quantities in a Second-Best Setting,"
Environmental & Resource Economics,
European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(3), pages 337-359, November.
- Adam Rose & Brandt Stevens & Jae Edmonds & Marshall Wise, 1998. "International Equity and Differentiation in Global Warming Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 25-51, July.
- Philippe Quirion, 2005.
"Does uncertainty justify intensity emission caps?,"
- Pizer, William A., 2002. "Combining price and quantity controls to mitigate global climate change," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 409-434, September.
- Barros, Vincente & Grand, Mariana Conte, 2002. "Implications of a dynamic target of greenhouse gases emission reduction: the case of Argentina," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(03), pages 547-569, July.
- Holtz-Eakin, Douglas & Selden, Thomas M., 1995.
"Stoking the fires? CO2 emissions and economic growth,"
Journal of Public Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 85-101, May.
- Douglas Holtz-Eakin & Thomas M. Selden, 1992. "Stoking the Fires? Co2 Emissions and Economic Growth," NBER Working Papers 4248, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Frank Jotzo, 2006. "Quantifying uncertainties for emission targets," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0603, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
- Peter Bohm & Björn Carlén, 2002. "A Cost-effective Approach to Attracting Low-income Countries to International Emissions Trading: Theory and Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(2), pages 187-211, October.
- John C. V. Pezzey & Frank Jotzo, 2006. "Mechanisms for Abating Global Emissions Under Uncertainty," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0604, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
- Toman, Michael, 2003. "Economic Analysis and the Formulation of U.S. Climate Policy," Discussion Papers dp-02-59, Resources For the Future.
- Nordhaus, William D, 1991. "To Slow or Not to Slow: The Economics of the Greenhouse Effect," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 920-37, July.
- M. L. Weitzman, 1973.
"Prices vs. Quantities,"
106, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Kolstad, Charles D., 2005. "The simple analytics of greenhouse gas emission intensity reduction targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(17), pages 2231-2236, November.
- Stavins, Robert N., 1996. "Correlated Uncertainty and Policy Instrument Choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 218-232, March.
- Frank Jotzo, 2010.
"Comparing the Copenhagen Emissions Targets,"
CCEP Working Papers
0110, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Jotzo, Frank, 2010. "Comparing the Copenhagen emissions targets," Research Reports 107577, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
- Frank Jotzo, 2010. "Comparing the Copenhagen emissions targets," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1078, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
- Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008.
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 221-233, November.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael R., 2009.
"Emissions Targets and the Real Business Cycle: Intensity Targets versus Caps or Taxes,"
dp-09-47, Resources For the Future.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael, 2011. "Emissions targets and the real business cycle: Intensity targets versus caps or taxes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 352-366.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael R., 2011. "Emissions Targets and the Real Business Cycle: Intensity Targets versus Caps or Taxes," Discussion Papers dp-09-47-rev, Resources For the Future.
- Pezzey, John C.V., 2006. "Neither the rock nor the hard place: using payment thresholds to balance the politics and the economics of emissions control," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139892, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
- Frank Jotzo & John C. V. Pezzey, 2006. "A better Kyoto: options for flexible commitments," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0610, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jack Pezzey) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Jack Pezzey to update the entry or send us the correct address.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.