IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/vfsc16/145721.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Linking Emissions Trading Schemes in the Presence of Research and Develoment Spillovers

Author

Listed:
  • Nachtigall, Daniel

Abstract

I analyze the role of research and development (R&D) spillovers on the incentives to link emissions trading schemes (ETSs) under different timings with respect to the determination of the emissions reduction target (ERT) and to the linking decision. When countries decide upon linking their ETSs prior to setting their ERTs, the permit importing country may not consent to link in the absence of R&D spillovers. The reason is that the other country strategically decreases its ERT to increase its revenues from permit trading, thereby increasing the costs for the permit importing country. However, in the presence of R&D spillovers, the permit importing country benefits from higher R&D spillovers and from lower environmental damage under linking relative to autarky and is therefore willing to link. When countries determine their ERTs prior to the linking decision, the role of R&D spillovers on the linking decision reverses. In the absence of R&D spillovers, both countries unambiguously are willing to link their ETSs due to the efficiency gains from trade. However, if R&D spillovers are relevant, the permit exporting country may be worse off under linking because its R&D spillovers deteriorate due to lower abatement effort by the other country. Hence, there is a trade-off between the efficiency gains from trade and the reduced R&D spillovers, causing the permit exporting country to reject linking if the spillover effect is sufficiently large.

Suggested Citation

  • Nachtigall, Daniel, 2016. "Linking Emissions Trading Schemes in the Presence of Research and Develoment Spillovers," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145721, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:vfsc16:145721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/145721/1/VfS_2016_pid_6729.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marschinski, Robert & Flachsland, Christian & Jakob, Michael, 2012. "Sectoral linking of carbon markets: A trade-theory analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 585-606.
    2. Mustafa Babiker, John Reilly and Laurent Viguier, 2004. "Is International Emissions Trading Always Beneficial?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2), pages 33-56.
    3. Mads Greaker & Cathrine Hagem, 2014. "Strategic Investment in Climate Friendly Technologies: The Impact of Global Emissions Trading," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(1), pages 65-85, September.
    4. Carbone, Jared C. & Helm, Carsten & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2009. "The case for international emission trade in the absence of cooperative climate policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 266-280, November.
    5. Wolfgang Buchholz & Kai Konrad, 1994. "Global environmental problems and the strategic choice of technology," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 60(3), pages 299-321, October.
    6. Anger, Niels, 2008. "Emissions trading beyond Europe: Linking schemes in a post-Kyoto world," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 2028-2049, July.
    7. Holtsmark, Bjart & Sommervoll, Dag Einar, 2012. "International emissions trading: Good or bad?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 362-364.
    8. Golombek, Rolf & Hoel, Michael, 2008. "Endogenous technology and tradable emission quotas," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 197-208, May.
    9. Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2004. "Cost-effective environmental policy: implications of induced technological change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 1099-1121, November.
    10. Helm, Carsten, 2003. "International emissions trading with endogenous allowance choices," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(12), pages 2737-2747, December.
    11. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Mathai, Koshy, 2000. "Optimal CO2 Abatement in the Presence of Induced Technological Change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-38, January.
    12. Golombek Rolf & Hoel Michael, 2006. "Second-Best Climate Agreements and Technology Policy," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-30, January.
    13. MacKenzie, Ian A., 2011. "Tradable permit allocations and sequential choice," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 268-278, January.
    14. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-121, January.
    15. Golombek Rolf & Hoel Michael, 2004. "Unilateral Emission Reductions and Cross-Country Technology Spillovers," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-27, September.
    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. Doda, Baran & Quemin, Simon & Taschini, Luca, 2019. "Linking permit markets multilaterally," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    2. Holtsmark, Katinka & Midttømme, Kristoffer, 2021. "The dynamics of linking permit markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    3. Simon Quemin & Christian Perthuis, 2019. "Transitional Restricted Linkage Between Emissions Trading Schemes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 1-32, September.
    4. Carsten Helm & Stefan Pichler, 2015. "Climate Policy with Technology Transfers and Permit Trading," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(1), pages 37-54, January.
    5. Mads Greaker & Cathrine Hagem, 2010. "Strategic investment in climate friendly technologies: the impact of permit trade," Discussion Papers 615, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    6. Habla, Wolfgang & Winkler, Ralph, 2018. "Strategic delegation and international permit markets: Why linking May fail," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 244-250.
    7. Arvaniti, Maria & Habla, Wolfgang, 2021. "The political economy of negotiating international carbon markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    8. Chu‐chuan Cheng & Hsun Chu, 2020. "International emissions trading in a political economy," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 429-446, May.
    9. Baran Doda & Simon Quemin & Luca Taschini, 2017. "A Theory of Gains from Trade in Multilaterally Linked ETSs," Working Papers 1706, Chaire Economie du climat.
    10. Bjart Holtsmark & Dag Einar Sommervoll, 2012. "International emissions trading in a noncooperative climate policy game," Discussion Papers 693, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    11. Marschinski, Robert & Flachsland, Christian & Jakob, Michael, 2012. "Sectoral linking of carbon markets: A trade-theory analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 585-606.
    12. Qi, Tianyu & Weng, Yuyan, 2016. "Economic impacts of an international carbon market in achieving the INDC targets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 886-893.
    13. Mads Greaker & Cathrine Hagem, 2014. "Strategic Investment in Climate Friendly Technologies: The Impact of Global Emissions Trading," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(1), pages 65-85, September.
    14. Holtsmark, Bjart & Sommervoll, Dag Einar, 2012. "International emissions trading: Good or bad?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 362-364.
    15. Gilbert E. Metcalf & David Weisbach, 2012. "Linking Policies When Tastes Differ: Global Climate Policy in a Heterogeneous World," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(1), pages 110-129.
    16. De Cian, Enrica & Tavoni, Massimo, 2012. "Do technology externalities justify restrictions on emission permit trading?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 624-646.
    17. Harvey E. Lapan & Shiva Sikdar, 2019. "Is Trade in Permits Good for the Environment?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(2), pages 501-510, February.
    18. Golombek Rolf & Hoel Michael, 2006. "Second-Best Climate Agreements and Technology Policy," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(1), pages 1-30, January.
    19. Birgit Bednar-Friedl, 2012. "Climate policy targets in emerging and industrialized economies: the influence of technological differences, environmental preferences and propensity to save," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 191-215, May.
    20. Qi, Tianyu & Winchester, Niven & Karplus, Valerie J. & Zhang, Xiliang, 2013. "Expanding international GHG emissions trading: The role of Chinese and U.S. participation," Conference papers 332348, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H41 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Public Goods
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    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:zbw:vfsc16:145721. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfsocea.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.