IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/331427.html

The Environmental and Economic Effects of European Emissions Trading in Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Kemfert, Claudia
  • Kohlhaas, Michael
  • Truong, Truong
  • Protsenko, Artem

Abstract

In 2005, the EU introduced an emissions trading system in order to pursue its Kyoto obligations. This instrument gives emitters the flexibility to undertake reduction measures in the most cost-efficient way and mobilizes market forces for the protection of the earth’s climate. In this paper, we analyse the effects of emissions trading in Europe, especially the value of the flexibility gained by trading compared to fixed quotas. The analysis will be undertaken with a modified version of the GTAP-E model using the latest GTAP data base. It is based on the national allocation plans as submitted to and in most cases approved by the EU.

Suggested Citation

  • Kemfert, Claudia & Kohlhaas, Michael & Truong, Truong & Protsenko, Artem, 2005. "The Environmental and Economic Effects of European Emissions Trading in Germany," Conference papers 331427, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:331427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/331427/files/2131.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Judith M. Dean, 2002. "Does trade liberalization harm the environment? A new test," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 819-842, November.
    2. Christian Bellak, 2004. "How Domestic and Foreign Firms Differ and Why Does it Matter?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 483-514, September.
    3. Hecht, Joy E., 1995. "Monitoring the environmental impacts of trade policy reform in Africa: lessons from Chad," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 155-167, June.
    4. Lucas, Robert E, Jr, 1990. "Why Doesn't Capital Flow from Rich to Poor Countries?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 92-96, May.
    5. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Rock, Michael T., 1996. "Pollution intensity of GDP and trade policy: Can the World Bank be wrong?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 471-479, March.
    7. Adam B. Jaffe et al., 1995. "Environmental Regulation and the Competitiveness of U.S. Manufacturing: What Does the Evidence Tell Us?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 132-163, March.
    8. Yuquing Xing & Charles Kolstad, 2002. "Do Lax Environmental Regulations Attract Foreign Investment?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 21(1), pages 1-22, January.
    9. Lionel Fontagné & Friedrich von Kirchbach & Mondher Mimouni, 2001. "A First Assessment of Environment-Related Trade Barriers," Working Papers 2001-10, CEPII research center.
    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. Nordström, Håkan & Vaughan, Scott, 1999. "Trade and the environment," WTO Special Studies, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division, volume 4, number 4.
    2. de Vries, F.P. & Withagen, C.A.A.M., 2005. "Innovation and environmental stringency : The case of sulfur dioxide abatement," Other publications TiSEM 9f3f79ab-2646-4f72-845c-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Monteagudo, Josefina & Rojas, Laura & Stabilito, Augusto & Watanuki, Masakazu, 2004. "The New Challenges of the Regional Trade Agenda for the Andean Countries," Conference papers 331234, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    4. Robert Kudłak, 2010. "Wpływ ochrony środowiska na konkurencyjność," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 1-2, pages 109-125.
    5. Haider Mahmood & Maham Furqan & Muhammad Shahid Hassan & Soumen Rej, 2023. "The Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) Hypothesis in China: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-32, April.
    6. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2004. "Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 431-455, August.
    7. Lorena D’Agostino, 2015. "How MNEs respond to environmental regulation: integrating the Porter hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 32(2), pages 245-269, August.
    8. Alassane Drabo, 2011. "Agricultural primary commodity export and environmental degradation: what consequences for population's health?," CERDI Working papers halshs-00586034, HAL.
    9. Giovanni Marin & Francesca Lotti, 2017. "Productivity effects of eco-innovations using data on eco-patents," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(1), pages 125-148.
    10. Altman, Morris, 2001. "When green isn't mean: economic theory and the heuristics of the impact of environmental regulations on competitiveness and opportunity cost," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 31-44, January.
    11. Winston Harrington & Richard D. Morgenstern & Peter Nelson, 2000. "On the accuracy of regulatory cost estimates," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 297-322.
    12. Roediger-Schluge, Thomas, 2001. "The Stringency of Environmental Regulation and the 'Porter Hypothesis'," Research Memorandum 002, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    13. Oberndorfer, Ulrich & Moslener, Ulf & Böhringer, Christoph & Ziegler, Andreas, 2008. "Clean and Productive? Evidence from the German Manufacturing Industry," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-091, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Shahbaz, Muhammad & Nasreen, Samia & Abbas, Faisal & Anis, Omri, 2015. "Does foreign direct investment impede environmental quality in high-, middle-, and low-income countries?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 275-287.
    15. Cañón de Francia, Joaquín & Garcés Ayerbe, Concepción, 2006. "Repercusión económica de la certificación medioambiental ISO 14001," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    16. Kerui Du & Qilin Huang & Presley K. Wesseh, 2025. "Domestic Pollution Havens: Linking Interregional Capital Flight and Water Pollution Regulation in China," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 88(1), pages 125-161, January.
    17. Antonietti,Roberto & Marzucchi,Alberto, 2013. "Green investment strategies and export performance: A firm-level investigation," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201302, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV).
    18. Catherine Liston-Heyes & Anthony Heyes, 1999. "Corporate Lobbying, Regulatory Conduct and the Porter Hypothesis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 209-218, March.
    19. Everett, Tim & Ishwaran, Mallika & Ansaloni, Gian Paolo & Rubin, Alex, 2010. "Economic growth and the environment," MPRA Paper 23585, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2001. "Productivité et réglementation environnementale: une analyse de l'hypothèse de Porter," Cahiers de recherche 0107, Université Laval - Département d'économique.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    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:ags:pugtwp:331427. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.