IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/usu/wpaper/2009-08.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Matching Traders in a Pollution Market: The Case of Cub River, Utah

Author

Listed:

Abstract

This paper applies two recently developed trading algorithms to a water quality trading (WQT) market located in the Cub River sub-basin of Utah; a market that includes both point and nonpoint sources. The algorithms account for three complications that naturally arise in WQT markets: (1) combinatorial matching of traders, (2) trader heterogeneity, and (3) discreteness in abatement technology. The algorithms enable a full characterization of the market’s performance by distinguishing a specific pattern of trade among market participants, which in turn results in as detailed a reduced- cost trading benchmark as possible for the basin. Contrary to the commonly held belief that relatively high point-source abatement costs necessitate nonpoint-source abatement effort, we find that in a WQT market where each source is required to reduce its pollution loadings it may be cheaper for point sources to sell abatement credits to nonpoint sources.

Suggested Citation

  • Arthur J. Caplan & Yuya Sasaki, 2009. "Matching Traders in a Pollution Market: The Case of Cub River, Utah," Working Papers 2009-08, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:usu:wpaper:2009-08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.bus.usu.edu/RePEc/usu/pdf/eri2009-08.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    2. Freeman, Jody & Kolstad, Charles D., 2006. "Moving to Markets in Environmental Regulation: Lessons from Twenty Years of Experience," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195189650, Decembrie.
    3. Kling, Catherine L., 1994. "Environmental benefits from marketable discharge permits or an ecological vs. economical perspective on marketable permits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 57-64, September.
    4. Dallas Burtraw, 1996. "The So2 Emissions Trading Program: Cost Savings Without Allowance Trades," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(2), pages 79-94, April.
    5. Atkinson, Scott E. & Lewis, Donald H., 1974. "A cost-effectiveness analysis of alternative air quality control strategies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 237-250, November.
    6. O'Ryan, Raul E., 1996. "Cost-Effective Policies to Improve Urban Air Quality in Santiago, Chile," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 302-313, November.
    7. Seskin, Eugene P. & Anderson, Robert Jr. & Reid, Robert O., 1983. "An empirical analysis of economic strategies for controlling air pollution," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 112-124, June.
    8. A. Myrick Freeman III, 2002. "Environmental Policy Since Earth Day I: What Have We Gained?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 125-146, Winter.
    9. Atkinson, Scott E. & Tietenberg, T. H., 1982. "The empirical properties of two classes of designs for transferable discharge permit markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 101-121, June.
    10. King, Dennis M., 2005. "Crunch Time for Water Quality Trading," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-5.
    11. Jock R. Anderson, 1994. "Environmental economics," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 93-94, September.
    12. McGartland, Albert M. & Oates, Wallace E., 1985. "Marketable permits for the prevention of environmental deterioration," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 207-228, September.
    13. Kling, Catherine L., 1994. "Environmental Benefits from Marketable Discharge Permits or an Ecological vs. An Economical View of Marketable Permits," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1605, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    14. Yuya Sasaki & Arthur Caplan, 2008. "Matching Heterogeneous Traders in Quantity-Regulated Markets," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 341-362, May.
    15. Arthur Caplan, 2008. "Incremental and Average Control Costs in a Model of Water Quality Trading with Discrete Abatement Units," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(3), pages 419-435, November.
    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. Caplan, Arthur J. & Sasaki, Yuya, 2014. "Benchmarking an optimal pattern of pollution trading: The case of Cub River, Utah," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 502-510.
    2. Yuya Sasaki & Arthur Caplan, 2008. "Matching Heterogeneous Traders in Quantity-Regulated Markets," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 31(4), pages 341-362, May.
    3. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    4. Newell, Richard G & Stavins, Robert N, 2003. "Cost Heterogeneity and the Potential Savings from Market-Based Policies," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 43-59, January.
    5. Stavins, Robert & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Abatement-Cost Heterogeneity and Anticipated Savings from Market-Based Environmental Policies," Working Paper Series rwp00-006, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Raúl O'Ryan, 2002. "Factors that Determine the Efficiency Ranking of Second-Best Instruments for Environmental Regulation," Documentos de Trabajo 147, Centro de Economía Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
    7. Chao-Ning Liao, 2009. "Technology adoption decisions under a mixed regulatory system of tradable permits and air pollution fees for the control of Total Suspended Particulates in Taiwan," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 135-153, April.
    8. Raúl O'Ryan & José Miguel Sánchez, 2002. "Comparing the Net Benefits of Incentive Based and Command and Control Regulations in a Developing Context: the Case of Santiago, Chile," Documentos de Trabajo 221, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    9. Tom Tietenberg, 1995. "Tradeable permits for pollution control when emission location matters: What have we learned?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(2), pages 95-113, March.
    10. Winebrake, James J. & Farrell, Alexander E. & Bernstein, Mark A., 1995. "The clean air act's sulfur dioxide emissions market: Estimating the costs of regulatory and legislative intervention," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 239-260, November.
    11. Kuwayama, Yusuke & Brozović, Nicholas, 2013. "The regulation of a spatially heterogeneous externality: Tradable groundwater permits to protect streams," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 364-382.
    12. Don Fullerton & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2002. "Environmental Controls, Scarcity Rents, and Pre-existing Distortions," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 26, pages 504-522, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. Ben-David, Shaul & Brookshire, David S. & Burness, Stuart & McKee, Michael & Schmidt, Christian, 1999. "Heterogeneity, Irreversible Production Choices, and Efficiency in Emission Permit Markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 176-194, September.
    14. Martin Larsson, 2017. "EU Emissions Trading: Policy-Induced Innovation, or Business as Usual? Findings from Company Case Studies in the Republic of Croatia," Working Papers 1705, The Institute of Economics, Zagreb.
    15. Tietenberg, Tom, 1998. "Ethical influences on the evolution of the US tradable permit approach to air pollution control," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 241-257, February.
    16. Schwartz Sonia, 2007. "Market Power Effects on Market Equilibrium in Ambient Permit Markets," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, February.
    17. John Swinton, 2004. "Phase I Completed: An Empirical Assessment of the 1990 CAAA," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(3), pages 227-246, March.
    18. Boisvert, Richard N. & Poe, Gregory L. & Sado, Yukako, 2007. "Selected Economic Aspects of Water Quality Trading: A Primer and Interpretive Literature Review," EB Series 121835, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    19. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    20. Morgan, Cynthia L. & Coggins, Jay S. & Eidman, Vernon R., 2000. "Tradable Permits For Controlling Nitrates In Groundwater At The Farm Level: A Conceptual Model," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 32(2), pages 1-10, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    advancement algorithm; retreat algorithm; water quality trading;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • Q19 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Other

    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:usu:wpaper:2009-08. 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: John Gilbert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edusuus.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.