IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zur/iewwpx/429.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An experimental study of auctions versus grandfathering to assign pollution permits

Author

Listed:
  • Jacob K. Goeree
  • Charles A. Holt
  • Karen Palmer
  • William Shobe
  • Dallas Burtraw

Abstract

We experimentally study auctions versus grandfathering in the initial assignment of pollution permits that can be traded in a secondary spot market. Low and high emitters compete for permits in the auction, while permits are assigned for free under grandfathering. In theory, trading in the spot market should erase inefficiencies due to initial mis-allocations. In the experiment, high emitters exercise market power in the spot market and permit holdings under grandfathering remain skewed towards high emitters. Furthermore, the opportunity costs of �free� permits are fully �passed through.� In the auction, the majority of permits are won by low emitters, reducing the need for spot-market trading. Auctions generate higher consumer surplus and slightly lower product prices in the laboratory markets. Moreover, auctions eliminate the large �windfall profits� that are observed in the treatment with free, grandfathered permit allocations.

Suggested Citation

  • Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt & Karen Palmer & William Shobe & Dallas Burtraw, 2009. "An experimental study of auctions versus grandfathering to assign pollution permits," IEW - Working Papers 429, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    • Handle: RePEc:zur:iewwpx:429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econ.uzh.ch/apps/workingpapers/wp/iewwp429.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Dallas Burtraw & Jacob Goeree & Charles A. Holt & Erica Myers & Karen Palmer & William Shobe, 2009. "Collusion in auctions for emission permits: An experimental analysis," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 672-691.
    3. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
    4. Matti Liski & Juan-Pablo Montero, 2005. "A Note on Market Power in an Emission Permits Market with Banking," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(2), pages 159-173, June.
    5. Kagel, John H & Levin, Dan, 1993. "Independent Private Value Auctions: Bidder Behaviour in First-, Second- and Third-Price Auctions with Varying Numbers of Bidders," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(419), pages 868-879, July.
    6. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Bharvirkar, Ranjit & Paul, Anthony, 2002. "The Effect on Asset Values of the Allocation of Carbon Dioxide Emission Allowances," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 51-62, June.
    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. Aniol Llorente-Saguer & Ro’i Zultan, 2014. "Auction Mechanisms And Bidder Collusion: Bribes, Signals And Selection," Working Papers 1406, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Julien Chevallier, 2008. "Strategic Manipulation on Emissions Trading Banking Program with Fixed Horizon," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 17(14), pages 1-9.
    5. Gabuthy, Yannick & Jacquemet, Nicolas & Marchand, Nadège, 2008. "Does resorting to online dispute resolution promote agreements? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 259-282, February.
    6. repec:dau:papers:123456789/4213 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. 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).
    8. Olivier Rousse & Benoît Sévi, 2005. "Behavioral Heterogeneity in the US Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Allowance Trading Program," ERSA conference papers ersa05p550, European Regional Science Association.
    9. Andersson, Fredrik, 1997. "Small Pollution Markets: Tradable Permits versus Revelation Mechanisms," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 38-50, January.
    10. Beat Hintermann, 2017. "Market Power in Emission Permit Markets: Theory and Evidence from the EU ETS," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(1), pages 89-112, January.
    11. Gabuthy, Yannick & Jacquemet, Nicolas & Marchand, Nadège, 2008. "Does resorting to online dispute resolution promote agreements? Experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 259-282, February.
    12. Shobe, William & Holt, Charles & Huetteman, Thaddeus, 2014. "Elements of emission market design: An experimental analysis of California's market for greenhouse gas allowances," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 402-420.
    13. Panagiotis Koromilas & Angeliki Mathioudaki & Sotirios Dimos & Dimitris Fotakis, 2023. "Modeling Intertemporal Trading of Emission Permits Under Market Power," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(1), pages 241-278, January.
    14. Dormady, Noah C., 2014. "Carbon auctions, energy markets & market power: An experimental analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 468-482.
    15. Yoon, Kyoung-Soo & Oh, Hyungna, 2021. "Impacts of ETS allocation rules on abatement investment and market structure," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    16. Jiasen Sun & Guo Li, 2020. "Designing a double auction mechanism for the re-allocation of emission permits," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 291(1), pages 847-874, August.
    17. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:17:y:2008:i:14:p:1-9 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Li, Shoude, 2013. "Emission permit banking, pollution abatement and production–inventory control of the firm," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 679-685.
    19. Llorente-Saguer, Aniol & Zultan, Ro’i, 2017. "Collusion and information revelation in auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 84-102.
    20. Chen, Yihsu & Tanaka, Makoto, 2018. "Permit banking in emission trading: Competition, arbitrage and linkage," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 70-82.
    21. Alvarez, Francisco & André, Francisco J., 2015. "Auctioning emission permits in a leader-follower setting," MPRA Paper 61698, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    22. Holland, Stephen P. & Moore, Michael R., 2013. "Market design in cap and trade programs: Permit validity and compliance timing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 671-687.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Pollution permits; auctions; grandfathering; experiments;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: 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:zur:iewwpx:429. 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: Severin Oswald (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.