IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i18p8226-d1748454.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can the Energy Rights Trading System Become the New Engine for Corporate Carbon Reduction? Evidence from China’s Heavy-Polluting Industries

Author

Listed:
  • Xue Lei

    (School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

  • Jian Xu

    (School of Economics and Management, Qingdao Agricultural University, Qingdao 266109, China)

  • Ziyan Zhang

    (School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China)

Abstract

As global climate change intensifies with unprecedented urgency, nations worldwide have increasingly adopted market-based environmental regulatory instruments to advance carbon reduction objectives. In 2017, China launched energy rights trading pilots, thereby providing a crucial policy instrument for controlling total energy consumption at its source. However, the specific impacts and transmission pathways through which this system influences corporate carbon reduction behavior remain insufficiently explored through rigorous empirical investigation. Drawing upon panel data from heavy-polluting companies listed on the Shanghai and Shenzhen A-share markets, this study employs a difference-in-differences methodology to identify the causal effects of energy rights trading systems on corporate carbon reduction. Our findings reveal that energy rights trading systems significantly reduce corporate carbon emission intensity, generating pronounced emission reduction effects. Further mechanism analysis demonstrates that this system operates through two principal pathways: first, by promoting increased green investment among enterprises, whereby short-term emission reductions are achieved through procurement of energy-saving equipment and environmental protection facilities, and second, by stimulating corporate green technological innovation, whereby long-term sustainable emission reductions are realized through the development of energy-saving technologies and clean processes. Additionally, the research reveals that enterprises with lower financing constraints and stronger supply chain bargaining power respond more actively to policy implementation, with policy effects exhibiting significant heterogeneity. This study not only enriches the theoretical understanding of market-based environmental regulatory policy effects but also provides crucial empirical evidence for improving the energy rights trading system design and enhancing policy implementation effectiveness, thereby offering important policy insights for promoting corporate green transformation and achieving “dual carbon” objectives.

Suggested Citation

  • Xue Lei & Jian Xu & Ziyan Zhang, 2025. "Can the Energy Rights Trading System Become the New Engine for Corporate Carbon Reduction? Evidence from China’s Heavy-Polluting Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-19, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8226-:d:1748454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8226/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8226/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2025. "Lessons Learned from Three Decades of Experience with Cap and Trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Economics of Environment, Climate Change, and Wine Selected Papers of Robert N Stavins Volume 3 (2011–2023), chapter 9, pages 235-264, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. Wu, Qingyang & Wang, Yanying, 2022. "How does carbon emission price stimulate enterprises' total factor productivity? Insights from China's emission trading scheme pilots," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    3. Cramton, Peter & Kerr, Suzi, 2002. "Tradeable carbon permit auctions: How and why to auction not grandfather," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 333-345, March.
    4. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    5. Yang, Bo & Cui, Ya, 2025. "Can the energy consumption rights trading system enhance energy resilience?–A synergistic perspective of green finance and financial technology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 322(C).
    6. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    7. William Lazonick, 2003. "The Theory of the Market Economy and the Social Foundations of Innovative Enterprise," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 24(1), pages 9-44, February.
    8. Roel Brouwers & Frederiek Schoubben & Cynthia Van Hulle, 2018. "The influence of carbon cost pass through on the link between carbon emission and corporate financial performance in the context of the European Union Emission Trading Scheme," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1422-1436, December.
    9. Madhu Khanna, 2001. "Non‐Mandatory Approaches to Environmental Protection," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 291-324, July.
    10. Song, Malin & Zheng, Huanyu & Shen, Zhiyang, 2023. "Whether the carbon emissions trading system improves energy efficiency – Empirical testing based on China's provincial panel data," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    11. Xue Lei & Shouchao He, 2025. "Climate shocks and innovation persistence: evidence from extreme precipitation," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, December.
    12. Popp, David C., 2001. "The effect of new technology on energy consumption," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 215-239, July.
    13. Xueguo Xu & Hetong Yuan & Xue Lei, 2024. "From Technological Integration to Sustainable Innovation: How Diversified Mergers and Acquisitions Portfolios Catalyze Breakthrough Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Lei, Xue & Xu, Xueguo, 2024. "Storm clouds over innovation: Typhoon shocks and corporate R&D activities," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 244(C).
    15. Zhang, Shengling & Wang, Yao & Hao, Yu & Liu, Zhiwei, 2021. "Shooting two hawks with one arrow: Could China's emission trading scheme promote green development efficiency and regional carbon equality?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    16. Pan, Yuling & Dong, Feng, 2022. "Design of energy use rights trading policy from the perspective of energy vulnerability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    17. Malin Song & Jun Tao & Shuhong Wang, 2015. "FDI, technology spillovers and green innovation in China: analysis based on Data Envelopment Analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 228(1), pages 47-64, May.
    18. Easwaran Narassimhan & Kelly S. Gallagher & Stefan Koester & Julio Rivera Alejo, 2018. "Carbon pricing in practice: a review of existing emissions trading systems," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(8), pages 967-991, 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. Martin Zapf & Hermann Pengg & Christian Weindl, 2019. "How to Comply with the Paris Agreement Temperature Goal: Global Carbon Pricing According to Carbon Budgets," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Yan, Xiaolei & He, Taiyi, 2024. "Wish fulfilment or wishful thinking? – Assessing the outcomes of China's pilot carbon emissions trading scheme on green economy efficiency in China's cities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    3. Joltreau, Eugénie & Sommerfeld, Katrin, 2016. "Why does emissions trading under the EU ETS not affect firms' competitiveness? Empirical findings from the literature," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-062, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Jindal, Abhinav & Puri, Shivam & Shrimali, Gireesh, 2025. "Designing a prospective carbon trading market in India: Key properties, enabling features and linkages," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 386(C).
    5. Dong, Zhaoyingzi & Xiao, Yue, 2024. "Carbon emissions trading policy and climate injustice: A study on economic distributional impacts," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    6. Ren, Shenggang & Yang, Xuanyu & Hu, Yucai & Chevallier, Julien, 2022. "Emission trading, induced innovation and firm performance," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    7. Shobande, Olatunji A. & Ogbeifun, Lawrence & Tiwari, Aviral Kumar, 2024. "Extricating the impacts of emissions trading system and energy transition on carbon intensity," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 357(C).
    8. Ritter, Hendrik & Zimmermann, Karl, 2019. "Cap-and-Trade Policy vs. Carbon Taxation: Of Leakage and Linkage," EconStor Preprints 197796, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    9. Zhangsheng Liu & Liuqingqing Yang & Liqin Fan, 2021. "Induced Effect of Environmental Regulation on Green Innovation: Evidence from the Increasing-Block Pricing Scheme," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Liu, Beibei & He, Pan & Zhang, Bing & Bi, Jun, 2012. "Impacts of alternative allowance allocation methods under a cap-and-trade program in power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 405-415.
    11. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2025. "Policy Evolution under the Clean Air Act," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Economics of Environment, Climate Change, and Wine Selected Papers of Robert N Stavins Volume 3 (2011–2023), chapter 10, pages 267-298, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Dogterom, Nico & Ettema, Dick & Dijst, Martin, 2018. "Behavioural effects of a tradable driving credit scheme: Results of an online stated adaptation experiment in the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 52-64.
    13. Zhang, Shengling & Wang, Yao & Hao, Yu & Liu, Zhiwei, 2021. "Shooting two hawks with one arrow: Could China's emission trading scheme promote green development efficiency and regional carbon equality?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    14. Cheng, Zhen & Ding, Chante Jian & Zhao, Kunqian, 2025. "Energy use rights trading and carbon emissions," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    15. Chu, Baoju & Dong, Yizhe & Liu, Yaorong & Ma, Diandian & Wang, Tianju, 2024. "Does China's emission trading scheme affect corporate financial performance: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    16. Patricia Laurens & Christian Le Bas & Stéphane Lhuillery & Antoine Schoen, 2017. "The determinants of cleaner energy innovations of the world’s largest firms: the impact of firm learning and knowledge capital," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 311-333, May.
    17. Simone Lazzini & Zeila Occhipinti & Angela Parenti & Roberto Verona, 2021. "Disentangling economic crisis effects from environmental regulation effects: Implications for sustainable development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(5), pages 2332-2353, July.
    18. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    19. Spyros Arvanitis & Michael Peneder & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2016. "Competitiveness and ecological impacts of green energy technologies: firm-level evidence for the DACH region," KOF Working papers 16-420, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    20. Roy, Sunanda & Singh, Rajesh & Weninger, Quinn, 2023. "Entry under placement uncertainty," ISU General Staff Papers 202102240800001096, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8226-:d:1748454. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.