IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tcpoxx/v16y2016i1p26-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The (ir)relevance of transaction costs in climate policy instrument choice: an analysis of the EU and the US

Author

Listed:
  • Fabian Joas
  • Christian Flachsland

Abstract

This article assesses the relevance of ex post transaction costs in the choice of climate policy instruments in the EU (focusing mainly on the example of Germany) and the US. It reviews all publicly available empirical ex post transaction cost studies of climate policy instruments broken down by the main private and public sector cost factors and offers hypotheses on how these factors may scale depending on instrument design and other contextual factors. The key finding from the evaluated schemes is that it is possible to reject the hypothesis that asymmetries in ex post transaction costs across instruments are large and, thus, play a pivotal role in climate policy instrument choice. Both total and relative ex post transaction costs can be considered low. This conjecture differs from the experience in other areas of environmental policy instruments where high total transaction costs are considered to be important factors in the overall assessment of optimal environmental policy choice. Against this background, the main claim of this article is that in climate policy instrument choice, ex post transaction cost considerations play a minor role in large countries that feature similar institutional characteristics as the EU and the US. Rather, the focus should be on the efficiency properties of instruments for incentivizing abatement, as well as equity and political economy considerations (and other societally relevant objectives). In order to inform transaction cost considerations in climate policy instrument choice in countries that adopt new climate policies, more data would be desirable in order to enable more robust estimates of design- and context-specific transaction-cost scaling factors. Policy relevance The findings of this study can help inform policy makers who plan to set up novel climate policy instruments. The results indicate that ex post transaction costs play a minor role for large countries that feature similar institutional characteristics as the EU and the US. For instrument design the focus should rather be on efficiency properties of instruments in incentivizing abatement, as well as equity and political economy considerations (and other societally relevant objectives).

Suggested Citation

  • Fabian Joas & Christian Flachsland, 2016. "The (ir)relevance of transaction costs in climate policy instrument choice: an analysis of the EU and the US," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 26-49, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tcpoxx:v:16:y:2016:i:1:p:26-49
    DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2014.968762
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14693062.2014.968762
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14693062.2014.968762?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. Kalkuhl, Matthias & Edenhofer, Ottmar & Lessmann, Kai, 2013. "Renewable energy subsidies: Second-best policy or fatal aberration for mitigation?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 217-234.
    2. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    3. repec:dau:papers:123456789/10174 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    2. De Cara, Stéphane & Henry, Loïc & Jayet, Pierre-Alain, 2018. "Optimal coverage of an emission tax in the presence of monitoring, reporting, and verification costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 71-93.
    3. Simone Borghesi & Chiara Franco & Giovanni Marin, 2020. "Outward Foreign Direct Investment Patterns of Italian Firms in the European Union's Emission Trading Scheme," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(1), pages 219-256, January.
    4. Edenhofer, Ottmar & Flachsland, Christian & Kalkuhl, Matthias & Knopf, Brigitte & Pahle, Michael, 2019. "Optionen für eine CO2-Preisreform," Working Papers 04/2019, German Council of Economic Experts / Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung.
    5. Helene Naegele, 2018. "Offset Credits in the EU ETS: A Quantile Estimation of Firm-Level Transaction Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 77-106, May.
    6. Naegele, Helene, 2018. "Offset Credits in the EU ETS: A Quantile Estimation of Firm-Level Transaction Costs," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 70(1), pages 77-106.
    7. Wang, Xu & Zhu, Lei & Fan, Ying, 2018. "Transaction costs, market structure and efficient coverage of emissions trading scheme: A microlevel study from the pilots in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 657-671.

    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. Christian Gambardella & Michael Pahle & Wolf-Peter Schill, 2016. "Do Benefits from Dynamic Tariffing Rise? Welfare Effects of Real-Time Pricing under Carbon-Tax-Induced Variable Renewable Energy Supply," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1621, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Rezai, Armon & van der Ploeg, Frederick, 2017. "Climate policies under climate model uncertainty: Max-min and min-max regret," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(S1), pages 4-16.
    3. Zhishuang Zhu & Hua Liao, 2019. "Do subsidies improve the financial performance of renewable energy companies? Evidence from China," 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. 95(1), pages 241-256, January.
    4. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    5. Susann Stritzke & Malcolm Bricknell & Matthew Leach & Samir Thapa & Yesmeen Khalifa & Ed Brown, 2023. "Impact Financing for Clean Cooking Energy Transitions: Reviews and Prospects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-26, August.
    6. Sironen, Susanna & Primmer, Eeva & Leskinen, Pekka & Similä, Jukka & Punttila, Pekka, 2020. "Context sensitive policy instruments: A multi-criteria decision analysis for safeguarding forest habitats in Southwestern Finland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    7. Zhang, M.M. & Zhou, D.Q. & Zhou, P. & Chen, H.T., 2017. "Optimal design of subsidy to stimulate renewable energy investments: The case of China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 873-883.
    8. Abolhosseini, Shahrouz & Heshmati, Almas, 2014. "The main support mechanisms to finance renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 876-885.
    9. Pereira, Alfredo & Pereira, Rui, 2017. "The Role of Electricity for the Decarbonization of the Portuguese Economy - DGEP Technical Report," MPRA Paper 84782, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Florian Habermacher & Paul Lehmann, 2020. "Commitment Versus Discretion in Climate and Energy Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(1), pages 39-67, May.
    11. Lapeyre, Renaud & Froger, Géraldine & Hrabanski, Marie, 2015. "Biodiversity offsets as market-based instruments for ecosystem services? From discourses to practices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 125-133.
    12. Shteryo Nozharov, 2018. "Transaction Costs In Collective Waste Recovery Systems In The Eu," Economic Archive, D. A. Tsenov Academy of Economics, Svishtov, Bulgaria, issue 1 Year 20, pages 18-30.
    13. Muhammad Shahid Mastoi & Hafiz Mudassir Munir & Shenxian Zhuang & Mannan Hassan & Muhammad Usman & Ahmad Alahmadi & Basem Alamri, 2022. "A Comprehensive Analysis of the Power Demand–Supply Situation, Electricity Usage Patterns, and the Recent Development of Renewable Energy in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-34, March.
    14. Wei, Weixian & Zhao, Yurong & Wang, Jianlin & Song, Malin, 2019. "The environmental benefits and economic impacts of Fit-in-Tariff in China," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 401-410.
    15. Bhardwaj, Chandan & Axsen, Jonn & McCollum, David, 2022. "Which “second-best” climate policies are best? Simulating cost-effective policy mixes for passenger vehicles," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    16. Kai Lessmann & Matthias Kalkuhl, 2020. "Climate Finance Intermediation: Interest Spread Effects in a Climate Policy Model," CESifo Working Paper Series 8380, CESifo.
    17. Dorband, Ira Irina & Jakob, Michael & Kalkuhl, Matthias & Steckel, Jan Christoph, 2019. "Poverty and distributional effects of carbon pricing in low- and middle-income countries – A global comparative analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 246-257.
    18. Koffi M. Adji & Aklesso Y. G. Egbendewe & Boris O. K. Lokonon, 2022. "Potential impacts of sustainable agricultural practices on smallholders' behavior in developing countries: Evidence from Togo," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 46(1), pages 73-87, February.
    19. Md Sayed Iftekhar & David Pannell & Jacob Hawkins, 2019. "Costs of Conservation Offset Activities: The State of Publicly Available Information in Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-13, September.
    20. Paul Lehmann & Patrik Söderholm, 2018. "Can Technology-Specific Deployment Policies Be Cost-Effective? The Case of Renewable Energy Support Schemes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 475-505, 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:taf:tcpoxx:v:16:y:2016:i:1:p:26-49. 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.