IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v53y2005i4p461-476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Consequences of Cobenefits for the Efficient Design of Carbon Sequestration Programs

Author

Listed:
  • Hongli Feng
  • Catherine L. Kling

Abstract

In this paper, we study the social efficiency of private carbon markets that include trading in agricultural soil carbon sequestration when there are significant cobenefits (positive environmental externalities) associated with the practices that sequester carbon. Likewise, we investigate the efficiency of government run conservation programs that are designed to promote a broad array of environmental attributes (both carbon sequestration and its cobenefits) for the supply of carbon. Finally, policy design and efficiency issues associated with the potential interplay between a private carbon market and a government conservation program are studied. Empirical analyses for an area that represents a significant potential source of carbon sequestration and its associated cobenefits illustrate the magnitude and complexity of these issues in real world policy design. Dans le présent article, nous avons examiné l'efficacité sociale des marchés privés d'échange de droits d'émission de carbone y compris les échanges liés à la séquestration du carbone dans les sols agricoles lorsqu'il y a des avantages accessoires considérables (effets favorables sur l'environnement) associés aux pratiques qui permettent de séquestrer le carbone. Nous avons également analysé l'efficacité des programmes de conservation administrés par le gouvernement et conçus pour promouvoir diverses caractéristiques environnementales (dont la séquestration du carbone et ses avantages accessoires) pour l'offre du carbone. Finalement, nous avons examiné les problèmes de conception et d'efficacité des politiques en présence d'interaction entre un marché privé d'échange de droits d'émission de carbone et un programme de conservation administré par le gouvernement. Des analyses empiriques dans le cas d'une région qui représente une source considérable de séquestration du carbone et d'avantages accessoires ont illustré l'importance et la complexité des problèmes liés à la conception de politiques.

Suggested Citation

  • Hongli Feng & Catherine L. Kling, 2005. "The Consequences of Cobenefits for the Efficient Design of Carbon Sequestration Programs," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 53(4), pages 461-476, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:53:y:2005:i:4:p:461-476
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2005.00030.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7976.2005.00030.x
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Feng, Hongli & Zhao, Jinhua & Kling, Catherine L., 2002. "Time Path and Implementation of Carbon Sequestration (The)," Staff General Research Papers Archive 5068, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    2. Feng, Hongli, 2005. "The dynamics of carbon sequestration and alternative carbon accounting, with an application to the upper Mississippi River Basin," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 23-35, July.
    3. Hongli Feng & Lyubov A. Kurkalova & Catherine L. Kling & Philip W. Gassman, 2004. "Environmental Conservation in Agriculture: Land Retirement versus Changing Practices on Working Land," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 04-wp365, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    4. Burtraw, Dallas & Krupnick, Alan & Palmer, Karen & Paul, Anthony & Toman, Michael & Bloyd, Cary, 2003. "Ancillary benefits of reduced air pollution in the US from moderate greenhouse gas mitigation policies in the electricity sector," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 650-673, May.
    5. Butt, Tanveer A. & McCarl, Bruce A., 2004. "Farm and Forest Carbon Sequestration: Can Producers Employ it to Make Some Money?," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 19(3), pages 1-6.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Alejandro Caparrós & Emilio Cerdá & Paola Ovando & Pablo Campos, 2010. "Carbon Sequestration with Reforestations and Biodiversity-scenic Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 49-72, January.
    2. Glenk, Klaus & Shrestha, Shailesh & Topp, Cairstiona F.E. & Sánchez, Berta & Iglesias, Ana & Dibari, Camilla & Merante, Paolo, 2017. "A farm level approach to explore farm gross margin effects of soil organic carbon management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 33-46.
    3. Shrestha, Shailesh & Glenk, Klaus, 2016. "A farm level approach to explore economic trade offs of soil organic carbon management in Scottish crop farms," 90th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2016, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 236363, Agricultural Economics Society.
    4. Majeed, Fahd & Khanna, Madhu & Miao, Ruiqing & Blanc, Elena & Hudiburg, Tara & DeLucia, Evan, 2020. "Designing payments for GHG mitigation to induce low carbon bioenergy production," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304394, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Garnache, Cloe & Merel, Pierre R., 2012. "Carbon market policy design: Investigating the role of payments aggregation," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124960, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Heberling, Matthew T. & García, Jorge H. & Thurston, Hale W., 2010. "Does encouraging the use of wetlands in water quality trading programs make economic sense?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 1988-1994, August.
    7. Rodríguez-Entrena, Macario & Espinosa-Goded, María & Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús, 2014. "The role of ancillary benefits on the value of agricultural soils carbon sequestration programmes: Evidence from a latent class approach to Andalusian olive groves," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 63-73.
    8. Neuman, Amber D. & Belcher, Ken W., 2011. "The contribution of carbon-based payments to wetland conservation compensation on agricultural landscapes," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 75-81, January.
    9. Kovacs, Kent F. & Haight, Robert G. & Jung, Suhyun & Locke, Dexter H. & O'Neil-Dunne, Jarlath, 2013. "The marginal cost of carbon abatement from planting street trees in New York City," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 1-10.

    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. Feng, Hongli & Kling, Catherine L., 2005. "Carbon Sequestration in Agriculture: an Offset Program versus Other Conservation Programs," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19177, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Timothy Capon & Michael Harris & Andrew Reeson, 2013. "The Design of Markets for Soil Carbon Sequestration," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 32(2), pages 161-173, June.
    3. Feng, Hongli & Kling, Catherine L. & Gassman, Philip W., 2004. "Carbon Sequestration, Co-Benefits, and Conservation Programs," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 19(3), pages 1-6.
    4. Joseph Aldy & Matthew J. Kotchen & Mary Evans & Meredith Fowlie & Arik Levinson & Karen Palmer, 2020. "Cobenefits and Regulatory Impact Analysis: Theory and Evidence from Federal Air Quality Regulations," NBER Chapters, in: Environmental and Energy Policy and the Economy, volume 2, pages 117-156, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Hongli Feng & Catherine L. Kling & Lyubov A. Kurkalova & Silvia Secchi & Philip W. Gassman, 2005. "The Conservation Reserve Program in the Presence of a Working Land Alternative: Implications for Environmental Quality, Program Participation, and Income Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(5), pages 1231-1238.
    6. Caparros, Alejandro & Cerda, Emilio & Ovando, P. & Campos, Pablo, 2007. "Carbon Sequestration with Reforestations and Biodiversity-Scenic Values," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 9323, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    7. Pizer, William A. & Burtraw, Dallas & Harrington, Winston & Newell, Richard G. & Sanchirico, James N., 2005. "Modeling Economywide versus Sectoral Climate Policies Using Combined Aggregate-Sectoral Models," Discussion Papers 10502, Resources for the Future.
    8. Stern, Roger J., 2010. "United States cost of military force projection in the Persian Gulf, 1976-2007," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(6), pages 2816-2825, June.
    9. Jimena González-Ramírez & Catherine L. Kling & Adriana Valcu, 2012. "An Overview of Carbon Offsets from Agriculture," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 145-160, August.
    10. Xue, Bing & Ma, Zhixiao & Geng, Yong & Heck, Peter & Ren, Wanxia & Tobias, Mario & Maas, Achim & Jiang, Ping & Puppim de Oliveira, Jose A. & Fujita, Tsuyoshi, 2015. "A life cycle co-benefits assessment of wind power in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 338-346.
    11. Fraser, Rob W., 2006. "On the Choice of Tax Base to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Context of Electricity Generation," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139729, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. John K. Stranlund & Insung Son, 2019. "Prices Versus Quantities Versus Hybrids in the Presence of Co-pollutants," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(2), pages 353-384, June.
    13. Tol, Richard S.J., 2012. "A cost–benefit analysis of the EU 20/20/2020 package," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 288-295.
    14. Hediger, Werner, 2009. "The non-permanence of optimal soil carbon sequestration," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51057, Agricultural Economics Society.
    15. Ikefuji, M. & Magnus, J.R. & Sakamoto, H., 2010. "Climate Change, Economic Growth, and Health," Discussion Paper 2010-86, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    16. Lutsey, Nicholas P., 2008. "Prioritizing Climate Change Mitigation Alternatives: Comparing Transportation Technologies to Options in Other Sectors," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5rd41433, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    17. Elbakidze, Levan & McCarl, Bruce A., 2007. "Sequestration offsets versus direct emission reductions: Consideration of environmental co-effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 564-571, January.
    18. Milan Ščasný & Emanuele Massetti & Jan Melichar & Samuel Carrara, 2015. "Quantifying the Ancillary Benefits of the Representative Concentration Pathways on Air Quality in Europe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(2), pages 383-415, October.
    19. Bonilla, Jorge & Coria, Jessica & Sterner, Thomas, 2012. "Synergies and Trade-offs between Climate and Local Air Pollution: Policies in Sweden," Working Papers in Economics 529, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    20. J. West & Arlene Fiore & Larry Horowitz, 2012. "Scenarios of methane emission reductions to 2030: abatement costs and co-benefits to ozone air quality and human mortality," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 114(3), pages 441-461, October.

    More about this item

    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:bla:canjag:v:53:y:2005:i:4:p:461-476. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.