IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/nathaz/v84y2016i1d10.1007_s11069-015-2093-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal pricing of the Taiwan carbon trading market based on a demand–supply model

Author

Listed:
  • Wan-Yu Liu

    (Aletheia University)

  • Qunwei Wang

    () (Soochow University)

Abstract

Abstract This study establishes theoretical models of supply and demand for carbon trading and proposes conditions for optimal trading prices and periods. Taiwan’s carbon market is used to verify the validity of the models. Simulations and empirical analysis position firms that emit greenhouse gases as the market buyers, and landowners that convert agricultural lands into plantation forests as the market sellers. The study compares four trading scenarios to determine optimal trading prices and time periods. There were four key conclusions. First, the higher the buyer’s cost to reduce carbon emissions, the higher the demand price is in the carbon trading market. The longer the trading period, the higher the carbon offsets, and the higher the demand price is for emissions trading. Second, the higher the emission trading price, the longer the optimal forest rotation period is for landowners. If emission costs do not exist at the time of logging, landowners are encouraged to log early, reducing the length of rotation periods. Furthermore, as the extension period in the trading scenarios increases, landowners’ costs increase, raising the market equilibrium price. Third, when landowners participate in forest carbon trading mechanisms or carbon subsidy policies, they may not always lengthen forest rotation periods. Therefore, if and when the government implements these mechanisms or policies, it should consider the factors affecting the length of forest rotation period. Finally, to respond to international interest in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the government should design separate carbon programs and trading mechanisms for different types of private landowners. This would strengthen incentives for participating in the afforestation program.

Suggested Citation

  • Wan-Yu Liu & Qunwei Wang, 2016. "Optimal pricing of the Taiwan carbon trading market based on a demand–supply model," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 84(1), pages 209-242, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:nathaz:v:84:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11069-015-2093-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s11069-015-2093-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11069-015-2093-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    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. Pablo C. Benítez & Timo Kuosmanen & Roland Olschewski & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2006. "Conservation Payments under Risk: A Stochastic Dominance Approach," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 88(1), pages 1-15.
    2. Paul J. Ferraro & R. David Simpson, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Conservation Payments," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 339-353.
    3. Oscar J. Cacho & Robyn L. Hean & Russell M. Wise, 2003. "Carbon-accounting methods and reforestation incentives," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(2), pages 153-179, June.
    4. Heng-Chi Lee & Bruce McCarl & Uwe Schneider & Chi-Chung Chen, 2007. "Leakage and Comparative Advantage Implications of Agricultural Participation in Greenhouse Gas Emission Mitigation," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 471-494, May.
    5. Oscar Cacho & Russell Wise & Kenneth MacDicken, 2004. "Carbon Monitoring Costs and their Effect on Incentives to Sequester Carbon through Forestry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 273-293, July.
    6. Bao-jun Tang & Cheng Shen & Yi-fan Zhao, 2015. "Market risk in carbon market: an empirical analysis of the EUA and sCER," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 75(2), pages 333-346, February.
    7. Pagiola, Stefano & Arcenas, Agustin & Platais, Gunars, 2005. "Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 237-253, February.
    8. Miko Kirschbaum, 2006. "Temporary Carbon Sequestration Cannot Prevent Climate Change," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 11(5), pages 1151-1164, September.
    9. Peter J. Parks & Ian W. Hardie, 1995. "Least-Cost Forest Carbon Reserves: Cost-Effective Subsidies to Convert Marginal Agricultural Land to Forests," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 71(1), pages 122-136.
    10. Pedro Moura Costa & Charlie Wilson, 2000. "An equivalence factor between CO2 avoidedemissions and sequestration – description andapplications in forestry," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 51-60, March.
    11. Terry Cannon & Detlef Müller-Mahn, 2010. "Vulnerability, resilience and development discourses in context of climate change," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 55(3), pages 621-635, December.
    12. Woerdman, Edwin, 2001. "Emissions trading and transaction costs: analyzing the flaws in the discussion," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 293-304, August.
    13. Woerdman, Edwin, 2000. "Organizing emissions trading: the barrier of domestic permit allocation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(9), pages 613-623, July.
    14. Olschewski, Roland & Benítez, Pablo C. & de Koning, G.H.J. & Schlichter, Tomás, 2005. "How attractive are forest carbon sinks? Economic insights into supply and demand of Certified Emission Reductions," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 77-94, September.
    15. Zbinden, Simon & Lee, David R., 2005. "Paying for Environmental Services: An Analysis of Participation in Costa Rica's PSA Program," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 255-272, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:nathaz:v:84:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11069-015-2093-z. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.