Author
Listed:
- Leining, Catherine
- Allan, Coey
- Kerr, Suzi
Abstract
When it was launched in 2008, the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (NZ ETS) pioneered the design concept of implementing an emissions trading scheme (ETS) across all sectors of the economy (e.g. stationary energy, transport, industrial processes, forestry, waste and biological emissions from agriculture) and all six major greenhouse gases (GHGs). This reflected New Zealand’s relatively unique emission profile among industrialised countries (with heavy renewable generation, nearly half of emissions from agriculture, and a large land area suitable for forestry) and its interest in finding effective, efficient, and equitable solutions to the challenge of meeting its international emission reduction targets. Further innovations at the time – influenced in part by the government’s previous efforts to implement a carbon tax in the energy and industry sectors – were the selection of predominantly upstream points of obligation in the energy sector, with the potential for some major downstream energy users to opt in voluntarily, and the selection of a default processor-level obligation in the agriculture sector, with the option to shift to a farmer-level obligation. As of 2017, the entry of biological emissions from agriculture has been deferred indefinitely. Otherwise, the proof of concept on both broad sectoral coverage and upstream points of obligation has been demonstrated through practical experience. To help inform future ETS policy making in New Zealand and internationally, this paper provides a conceptual foundation for design decisions on ETS coverage and points of obligation, and explores the history of and rationale for the specific design choices that have been made in this regard in New Zealand.
Suggested Citation
Leining, Catherine & Allan, Coey & Kerr, Suzi, 2017.
"Evolution of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme: Sectoral Coverage and Point of Obligation,"
Motu Working Papers
290521, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
Handle:
RePEc:ags:motuwp:290521
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.290521
Download full text from publisher
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:ags:motuwp:290521. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/motuenz.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.