IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/masfgc/v25y2020i6d10.1007_s11027-019-09904-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market-induced carbon leakage in China’s certified emission reduction projects

Author

Listed:
  • Huiying Ye

    (China University of Petroleum-Beijing
    China University of Petroleum-Beijing
    IFP School)

  • Qi Zhang

    (China University of Petroleum-Beijing
    China University of Petroleum-Beijing)

  • Xunzhang Pan

    (China University of Petroleum-Beijing
    China University of Petroleum-Beijing)

  • Arash Farnoosh

    (IFP School)

Abstract

The topic of climate change has aroused increasingly widespread concern around the world. Under the agreement at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), covened in Paris, France (Paris Agreement), which requires all Parties to undertake emission reductions, the developing countries who were once exempted from emission reduction obligations are now becoming more and more important. This study focuses on mitigation actions in China, the largest carbon emitter, as well as the largest developing country in the world. Specifically, we examine Chinese Certified Emission Reduction (CCER) projects. The objective is to compare the reduction efficiency of three types of projects: simple abatement and completely renewable energy alternative projects at the supply side and demand side projects. From market-induced carbon leakage point of view, a dual market equilibrium model was built, with results showing that the key factors affecting the leakage rates are price elasticities of both demand and supply sides and market share parameters. In most cases, renewable energy alternative projects show the least leakage rate while demand side projects show the highest. Sensitivity analysis finds that leakage rates for the three types of projects are more sensitive to price elasticity parameters than market share parameters. Moreover, factors E c de $$ {E}_c^{de} $$ (electricity price elasticity of coal demand from coal-fired generation) and E e d $$ {E}_e^d $$ (electricity price elasticity of electricity demand) affect not only the leakage rate of each project but also the comparative results between them. Although our study is based on China, the theoretical analysis is applicable in other regional voluntary emission reduction markets around the world. So, a systematic approach to comprehensively analyze the issue is summarized, based on which, we recommend two mitigation strategies to cope with the issue in offset projects in order to give managerial insights for the government. Firstly, the calculated leakage rates for different types of projects provide a new perspective to evaluate various offset projects, thus helping consider project types for priority validation. Secondly, we suggest to establish an accurate and classified discount coefficient system according to the project types to deal with the issue; the sensitivity analysis is helpful to find the most influential factors. A top-down approach to implement the strategy is proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Huiying Ye & Qi Zhang & Xunzhang Pan & Arash Farnoosh, 2020. "Market-induced carbon leakage in China’s certified emission reduction projects," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 25(6), pages 987-1012, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:25:y:2020:i:6:d:10.1007_s11027-019-09904-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11027-019-09904-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-019-09904-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11027-019-09904-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Perthuis, Christian & Trotignon, Raphael, 2014. "Governance of CO2 markets: Lessons from the EU ETS," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 100-106.
    2. Zhang, Zhong Xiang, 2012. "Competitiveness and Leakage Concerns and Border Carbon Adjustments," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 225-287, December.
    3. Jean-Marc Burniaux & Joaquim Oliveira Martins, 2016. "Carbon Leakages: A General Equilibrium View," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Graciela Chichilnisky & Armon Rezai (ed.), The Economics of the Global Environment, pages 341-363, Springer.
    4. Lining Wang & Wenying Chen & XunZhang Pan & Nan Li & Huan Wang & Danyang Li & Han Chen, 2018. "Scale and benefit of global carbon markets under the 2 °C goal: integrated modeling and an effort-sharing platform," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 23(8), pages 1207-1223, December.
    5. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13539 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Brian C. Murray & Bruce A. McCarl & Heng-Chi Lee, 2004. "Estimating Leakage from Forest Carbon Sequestration Programs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(1), pages 109-124.
    7. repec:dau:papers:123456789/7970 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Jared C. Carbone, 2013. "Linking Numerical and Analytical Models of Carbon Leakage," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(3), pages 326-331, May.
    9. Tan, Xiujie & Liu, Yu & Cui, Jingbo & Su, Bin, 2018. "Assessment of carbon leakage by channels: An approach combining CGE model and decomposition analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 535-545.
    10. Steffen Kallbekken, 2007. "Why the CDM will reduce carbon leakage," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 197-211, May.
    11. Erickson, Peter & Lazarus, Michael & Spalding-Fecher, Randall, 2014. "Net climate change mitigation of the Clean Development Mechanism," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 146-154.
    12. Carolyn Fischer & Mads Greaker & Knut Einar Rosendahl, 2014. "Robust Policies against Emission Leakage: The Case for Upstream Subsidies," CESifo Working Paper Series 4742, CESifo.
    13. Kallio, A. Maarit I. & Solberg, Birger & Käär, Liisa & Päivinen, Risto, 2018. "Economic impacts of setting reference levels for the forest carbon sinks in the EU on the European forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 193-201.
    14. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2013. "Assessing alternative solutions to carbon leakage," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 299-311.
    15. Naegele, Helene & Zaklan, Aleksandar, 2019. "Does the EU ETS cause carbon leakage in European manufacturing?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 125-147.
    16. Jhonathan Fernandes Torres Souza & Sergio Almeida Pacca, 2019. "How far can low-carbon energy scenarios reach based on proven technologies?," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 687-705, June.
    17. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Kuik, Onno & Paglialunga, Elena, 2016. "Mitigation of adverse effects on competitiveness and leakage of unilateral EU climate policy: An assessment of policy instruments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 246-259.
    18. Glomsrød, Solveig & Wei, Taoyuan & Liu, Gang & Aune, Jens B., 2011. "How well do tree plantations comply with the twin targets of the Clean Development Mechanism? -- The case of tree plantations in Tanzania," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1066-1074, April.
    19. Johannes Bollen & Arjen Gielen & Hans Timmer, 1999. "Clubs, Ceilings and CDM: Macroeconomics of Compliance with the Kyoto Protocol," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 177-206.
    20. Louise Aukland & Pedro Moura Costa & Sandra Brown, 2003. "A conceptual framework and its application for addressing leakage: the case of avoided deforestation," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 123-136, June.
    21. Sakai, Marco & Barrett, John, 2016. "Border carbon adjustments: Addressing emissions embodied in trade," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 102-110.
    22. Branger, Frédéric & Quirion, Philippe, 2014. "Would border carbon adjustments prevent carbon leakage and heavy industry competitiveness losses? Insights from a meta-analysis of recent economic studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 29-39.
    23. Werner Antweiler & Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2001. "Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 877-908, September.
    24. Rosendahl, Knut Einar & Strand, Jon, 2009. "Simple model frameworks for explaining inefficiency of the clean development mechanism," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4931, The World Bank.
    25. Kuosmanen, Timo & Vöhringer, Frank & Dellink, Rob B., 2004. "A Proposal for the Attribution of Market Leakage to CDM Projects," HWWA Discussion Papers 262, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    26. Kim, Man-Keun & Peralta, Denis & McCarl, Bruce A., 2014. "Land-based greenhouse gas emission offset and leakage discounting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 265-273.
    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. Pan, Wenqi & Kim, Man-Keun & Ning, Zhuo & Yang, Hongqiang, 2020. "Carbon leakage in energy/forest sectors and climate policy implications using meta-analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    2. Sun, YongPing & Xue, JinJun & Shi, XunPeng & Wang, KeYing & Qi, ShaoZhou & Wang, Lei & Wang, Cheng, 2019. "A dynamic and continuous allowances allocation methodology for the prevention of carbon leakage: Emission control coefficients," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 220-230.
    3. Clora, Francesco & Yu, Wusheng, 2022. "GHG emissions, trade balance, and carbon leakage: Insights from modeling thirty-one European decarbonization pathways towards 2050," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Tan, Xiujie & Liu, Yu & Cui, Jingbo & Su, Bin, 2018. "Assessment of carbon leakage by channels: An approach combining CGE model and decomposition analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 535-545.
    5. Valeria Costantini & Francesco Crespi & Elena Paglialunga, 2019. "Capital–energy substitutability in manufacturing sectors: methodological and policy implications," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(2), pages 157-182, June.
    6. Delacote, Philippe & Robinson, Elizabeth J.Z. & Roussel, Sébastien, 2016. "Deforestation, leakage and avoided deforestation policies: A spatial analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 192-210.
    7. Bellora, Cecilia & Fontagné, Lionel, 2023. "EU in search of a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    8. Michael Jakob & Jan Christoph Steckel & Ottmar Edenhofer, 2014. "Consumption- Versus Production-Based Emission Policies," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 297-318, October.
    9. Zhang, Zengkai & Zhang, Zhongxiang, 2017. "Intermediate input linkage and carbon leakage," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(6), pages 725-746, December.
    10. Zhang, Zengkai & Zhu, Kunfu, 2017. "Border carbon adjustments for exports of the United States and the European Union: Taking border-crossing frequency into account," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 188-199.
    11. D. Rajagopal, 2017. "A synthesis of unilateral approaches to mitigating emissions leakage under incomplete policies," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(5), pages 573-590, July.
    12. He, Ling-Yun & Chen, Kun-Xian, 2023. "Does China's regional emission trading scheme lead to carbon leakage? Evidence from conglomerates," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    13. Aliénor Cameron & Marc Baudry, 2023. "The case for carbon leakage and border adjustments: where do economists stand?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 25(3), pages 435-469, July.
    14. Huiying Ye & Qi Zhang & Xunzhang Pan & Arash Farnoosh, 2020. "Market-induced carbon leakage in China’s certified emission reduction projects," Post-Print hal-03114163, HAL.
    15. Beck, Ulrik R. & Kruse-Andersen, Peter K. & Stewart, Louis B., 2023. "Carbon leakage in a small open economy: The importance of international climate policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    16. Jakob, Michael, 2021. "Climate policy and international trade – A critical appraisal of the literature," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    17. Zhong, Jiarui & Pei, Jiansuo, 2022. "Beggar thy neighbor? On the competitiveness and welfare impacts of the EU's proposed carbon border adjustment mechanism," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    18. Antoci, Angelo & Borghesi, Simone & Iannucci, Gianluca & Sodini, Mauro, 2021. "Should I stay or should I go? Carbon leakage and ETS in an evolutionary model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    19. Alex Borodin & Vladislav Zaitsev & Zahid F. Mamedov & Galina Panaedova & Andrey Kulikov, 2022. "Mechanisms for Tax Regulation of CO 2 -Equivalent Emissions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-15, September.
    20. Filewod, Ben & McCarney, Geoff, 2023. "Avoiding leakage from nature-based offsets by design," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117927, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:spr:masfgc:v:25:y:2020:i:6:d:10.1007_s11027-019-09904-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.