IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v11y2011i4p1113-1130.html

Effective, efficient or equitable: using allowance allocations to mitigate emissions leakage

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Heilmayr
  • James A. Bradbury

Abstract

The European Union (EU), the US and Australia have each adopted, or are considering, free allocations to emissions-intensive, trade-exposed industries (EITEIs) in order to minimize emissions leakage and industrial offshoring resulting from climate policy. Differences in the design of these schemes, including how a country defines eligible EITEIs, the scale of allocation and the method of distribution, all have the potential to affect the outcomes of the programmes. In crafting their EITEI allocation formulas, policymakers in each country must balance three important priorities - the economic efficiency of the cap and trade programme, an equitable distribution of the programme's allowances and the effectiveness of the allocations in addressing leakage and competitiveness concerns. These three priorities provide a useful framework for considering the tradeoffs inherent in designing allocation schemes for EITEIs. Through this lens, policy approaches taken by the EU, US and Australia are evaluated with respect to four important questions of allocation policy design: the definition of EITEIs, the costs to be covered, the methodology for distributing allowances and the duration of free allocation.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Heilmayr & James A. Bradbury, 2011. "Effective, efficient or equitable: using allowance allocations to mitigate emissions leakage," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(4), pages 1113-1130, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:11:y:2011:i:4:p:1113-1130
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2011.579291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2011.579291
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2011.579291?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan, 2004. "Output-Based Allocations of Emissions Permits: Efficiency and Distributional Effects in a General Equilibrium Setting with Taxes and Trade," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-37, Resources for the Future.
    2. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2009. "Comparing Policies to Combat Emissions Leakage: Border Tax Adjustments versus Rebates," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-02, Resources for the Future.
    3. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen L. & Kahn, Danny, 2005. "Allocation of CO2 Emissions Allowances in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Cap-and-Trade Program," Discussion Papers 10650, Resources for the Future.
    4. Trevor Houser & Rob Bradley & Britt Childs, 2008. "Leveling the Carbon Playing Field: International Competition and US Climate Policy Design," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 4204, July.
    5. Garnaut,Ross, 2008. "The Garnaut Climate Change Review," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521744447, August.
    6. Fischer, Carolyn, 2001. "Rebating Environmental Policy Revenues: Output-Based Allocations and Tradable Performance Standards," Discussion Papers 10709, Resources for the Future.
    7. Goulder, Lawrence, 2002. "Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of CO2 Abatement Policies on Energy-Intensive Industries," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-22, Resources for the Future.
    8. Ho, Mun S. & Morgenstern, Richard & Shih, Jhih-Shyang, 2008. "Impact of Carbon Price Policies on U.S. Industry," RFF Working Paper Series dp-08-37, Resources for the Future.
    9. Goulder, Lawrence H., 2002. "Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of CO2 Abatement Policies on Energy-Intensive Industries," Discussion Papers 10642, Resources for the Future.
    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. Frédéric Branger & Misato Sato, 2017. "Solving the clinker dilemma with hybrid output-based allocation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 483-501, February.
    2. Christoph Böhringer & Brita Bye & Taran Fæhn & Knut Einar Rosendahl, 2017. "Output-based rebating of carbon taxes in a neighbour's backyard: Competitiveness, leakage and welfare," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(2), pages 426-455, May.
    3. Christoph Böhringer & Brita Bye & Taran Fæhn & Rosendahl Knut Einar, 2014. "Output-based rebating of carbon taxes in the neighbor’s backyard," Working Papers V-382-15, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Jun 2014.
    4. Erik Laes & Pieter Valkering & Yves De Weerdt, 2019. "Diagnosing Barriers and Enablers for the Flemish Energy Transition," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-19, October.
    5. Yun-Fei Yao & Qiao-Mei Liang, 2016. "Approaches to carbon allowance allocation in China: a computable general equilibrium analysis," 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 333-351, November.

    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. Steffen Hentrich & Patrick Matschoss & Peter Michaelis, 2009. "Emissions trading and competitiveness: lessons from Germany," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 316-329, May.
    2. Bode, Sven, 2006. "Multi-period emissions trading in the electricity sector--winners and losers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 680-691, April.
    3. Christoph Böhringer & Jared C. Carbone & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2018. "Embodied Carbon Tariffs," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 183-210, January.
    4. Bernard, Alain L. & Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2007. "Is there a rationale for output-based rebating of environmental levies?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 83-101, May.
    5. Miria A. Pigato, 2019. "Fiscal Policies for Development and Climate Action," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 31051, April.
    6. Monjon, Stéphanie & Quirion, Philippe, 2011. "Addressing leakage in the EU ETS: Border adjustment or output-based allocation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 1957-1971, September.
    7. repec:old:wpaper:340 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Fischer, Carolyn & Fox, Alan K., 2009. "Comparing Policies to Combat Emissions Leakage: Border Tax Adjustments versus Rebates," RFF Working Paper Series dp-09-02, Resources for the Future.
    9. Boehringer Christoph & Fischer Carolyn & Rosendahl Knut Einar, 2010. "The Global Effects of Subglobal Climate Policies," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 1-35, December.
    10. Carol McAusland & Nouri Najjar, 2015. "Carbon Footprint Taxes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(1), pages 37-70, May.
    11. Bréchet, Thierry & Jouvet, Pierre-André & Rotillon, Gilles, 2013. "Tradable pollution permits in dynamic general equilibrium: Can optimality and acceptability be reconciled?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 89-97.
    12. Karen Palmer & Dallas Burtraw & Danny Kahn, 2006. "Simple rules for targeting CO 2 allowance allocations to compensate firms," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 477-493, July.
    13. Burtraw, Dallas & Kahn, Danny & Palmer, Karen, 2006. "CO2 Allowance Allocation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and the Effect on Electricity Investors," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 79-90, March.
    14. Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2008. "Incentives and prices in an emissions trading scheme with updating," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 69-82, July.
    15. Paul, Anthony & Palmer, Karen & Woerman, Matt, 2014. "Designing by Degrees: Flexibility and Cost-Effectiveness in Climate PolicyAbstract: Substantially reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from electricity production will require a transformation of the resources used to produce power. This paper ana," RFF Working Paper Series dp-14-05, Resources for the Future.
    16. Sterner, Thomas & Muller, Adrian, 2006. "Output and Abatement Effects of Allocation Readjustment in Permit Trade," RFF Working Paper Series dp-06-49, Resources for the Future.
    17. Bao, Qin & Tang, Ling & Zhang, ZhongXiang & Wang, Shouyang, 2013. "Impacts of border carbon adjustments on China's sectoral emissions: Simulations with a dynamic computable general equilibrium model," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 77-94.
    18. Bassi, Andrea M. & Yudken, Joel S., 2011. "Climate policy and energy-intensive manufacturing: A comprehensive analysis of the effectiveness of cost mitigation provisions in the American Energy and Security Act of 2009," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 4920-4931, September.
    19. Holland, Stephen P., 2012. "Emissions taxes versus intensity standards: Second-best environmental policies with incomplete regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 375-387.
    20. Karsten Neuhoff & Markus Åhman & Regina Betz & Johanna Cludius & Federico Ferrario & Kristina Holmgren & Gabriella Pal & Michael Grubb & Felix Matthes & Karoline Rogge & Misato Sato & Joachim Schleich, 2006. "Implications of announced phase II national allocation plans for the EU ETS," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(4), pages 411-422, July.
    21. Anthony Paul & Karen Palmer & Matthew Woerman, 2015. "Incentives, Margins, And Cost Effectiveness In Comprehensive Climate Policy For The Power Sector," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(04), pages 1-27, November.

    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:taf:tcpoxx:v:11:y:2011:i:4:p:1113-1130. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tcpo20 .

    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.