Permit Trading and Credit Trading - A Comparative Static Analysis with Perfect and Imperfect Competition
This paper compares emissions trading based on an absolute cap, denoted permit trading, with a scheme based on relative standards, denoted credit trading, under both perfect and imperfect competition. I show that credit trading is an inefficient instrument and that the two schemes have a different impact on the regulated industry. Credit trading leads to higher total output, higher marginal abatement costs and a higher number of firms in the market than permit trading. Furthermore, under both schemes the total number of firms can both decrease and increase as a result of regulation. I find that under perfect competition, permit trading gives highest welfare, while under imperfect competition, credit trading mostly leads to higher welfare. With foreign competition however, credit trading is more likely to be chosen since this gives a better competitive position for firms.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
| Length: | |
| Date of creation: | 2004 |
| Handle: | RePEc:ags:rvaewp:24214 |
| Contact details of provider: | Web page: http://www.foi.life.ku.dk/ Email: More information through EDIRC
|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Boom, Jan-Tjeerd, 2001. "International emissions trading under the Kyoto Protocol: : credit trading," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(8), pages 605-613, June.
This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:rvaewp:24214. 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: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.