IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/sunrpe/1999_0015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Large-Country Effects in International Emissions Trading: A Laboratoty Test

Author

Listed:

Abstract

The Experiment mimics carbon emissions trade among twelve industrialized countries during the end of a five-year-long trading period when traders are likely to have nearly full information about the underlying net demand. Trade is assumed to be governed by so-called double-auction rules. The hypotheses are i) and ii) that larger countries would not be able to influence price levels to their advantage. The findings support the first hypothesis but are inconclusive regarding the second. although they illustrate that large country may not be able to sustain favorable prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlén, Björn, 1999. "Large-Country Effects in International Emissions Trading: A Laboratoty Test," Research Papers in Economics 1999:15, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:sunrpe:1999_0015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ledyard, John O. & Szakaly-Moore, Kristin, 1994. "Designing organizations for trading pollution rights," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 167-196, October.
    2. Hizen, Y. & Saijo, T., 2000. "Designing GHG Emissions Trading Institutions in the Kyoto Protocol: an Experimental Approach," ISER Discussion Paper 0492, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    3. Robert W. Hahn, 1984. "Market Power and Transferable Property Rights," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 99(4), pages 753-765.
    4. Smith, Vernon L. & Williams, Arlington W., 1982. "The effects of rent asymmetries in experimental auction markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 99-116, March.
    5. Gjerstad, Steven & Dickhaut, John, 1998. "Price Formation in Double Auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-29, January.
    6. Robert Godby, 2002. "Market Power in Laboratory Emission Permit Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(3), pages 279-318, November.
    7. Bohm, Peter & Carlen, Bjorn, 1999. "Emission quota trade among the few: laboratory evidence of joint implementation among committed countries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 43-66, January.
    8. Friedman, Daniel, 1991. "A simple testable model of double auction markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 47-70, January.
    9. R. Andrew Muller & Stuart Mestelman & John Spraggon & Rob Godby, 1999. "Can auctions control market power in emissions trading markets," Department of Economics Working Papers 1999-12, McMaster University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bohm, Peter, 2003. "Experimental evaluations of policy instruments," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 437-460, Elsevier.
    2. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    3. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata & Duke, Charlotte, 2003. "Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 469-491, October.
    4. Cason, Timothy N. & Friedman, Daniel, 1996. "Price formation in double auction markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(8), pages 1307-1337, August.
    5. Morten Søberg, 2000. "Imperfect competition, sequential auctions, and emissions trading: An experimental evaluation," Discussion Papers 280, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    6. Corgnet, Brice & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2020. "The distribution of information and the price efficiency of markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    7. Beat Hintermann, 2011. "Market Power, Permit Allocation and Efficiency in Emission Permit Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 327-349, July.
    8. Giuseppe Attanasi & Samuele Centorrino & Ivan Moscati, 2011. "Double Auction Equilibrium and Efficiency in a Classroom Experimental Search Market," LERNA Working Papers 11.03.337, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    9. X. Fernández, Bernardo & Fernández Q, Vladimir & Aldazosa, E. René, 2018. "Una subasta doble de divisas para la determinación del tipo de cambio en Bolivia," Revista Latinoamericana de Desarrollo Economico, Carrera de Economía de la Universidad Católica Boliviana (UCB) "San Pablo", issue 29, pages 152-189, May.
    10. Lewis, Tracy R. & Sappington, David E. M., 1995. "Using markets to allocate pollution permits and other scarce resource rights under limited information," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 431-455, July.
    11. Itzhak Rasooly, 2022. "Competitive equilibrium and the double auction," Economics Series Working Papers 974, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    12. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    13. Kirchsteiger, Georg & Niederle, Muriel & Potters, Jan, 2005. "Endogenizing market institutions: An experimental approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(7), pages 1827-1853, October.
    14. Sabiou M. Inoua & Vernon L. Smith, 2022. "Perishable goods versus re-tradable assets: A theoretical reappraisal of a fundamental dichotomy," Chapters, in: Sascha Füllbrunn & Ernan Haruvy (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Finance, chapter 15, pages 162-171, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Francisco Álvarez & Francisco André, 2015. "Auctioning Versus Grandfathering in Cap-and-Trade Systems with Market Power and Incomplete Information," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(4), pages 873-906, December.
    16. Kirchsteiger, G. & Niederle, M. & Potters, J.J.M., 1998. "The Endogenous Evolution of Market Institutions : An Experimental Investigation," Discussion Paper 1998-67, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    17. Tai, Chung-Ching & Chen, Shu-Heng & Yang, Lee-Xieng, 2018. "Cognitive ability and earnings performance: Evidence from double auction market experiments," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 409-440.
    18. Katerina Sherstyuk & Krit Phankitnirundorn & Michael J. Roberts, 2021. "Randomized double auctions: gains from trade, trader roles, and price discovery," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1325-1364, December.
    19. Alvarez, Francisco & André, Francisco J., 2013. "Auctioning vs. Grandfathering in Cap-and-Trade Systems with Market Power and Incomplete Information," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 162381, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    20. Mandel, Antoine & Gintis, Herbert, 2016. "Decentralized Pricing and the equivalence between Nash and Walrasian equilibrium," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 84-92.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Carbon emission trading; Market Power; Experimental economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:sunrpe:1999_0015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anne Jensen (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/neisuse.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.