IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dpr/wpaper/0492.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing GHG Emissions Trading Institutions in the Kyoto Protocol: an Experimental Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Hizen, Y.
  • Saijo, T.

Abstract

We re-evaluate two experiments by Hizen and Saijo (1999a,b) to examine the performance of bilateral trading and double auction institutiions in GHG emissions trading.

Suggested Citation

  • Hizen, Y. & Saijo, T., 2000. "Designing GHG Emissions Trading Institutions in the Kyoto Protocol: an Experimental Approach," ISER Discussion Paper 0492, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    • Handle: RePEc:dpr:wpaper:0492
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.osaka-u.ac.jp/library/dp/2000/dp0492.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cason, Timothy N, 1995. "An Experimental Investigation of the Seller Incentives in the EPA's Emission Trading Auction," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 905-922, September.
    2. R. Andrew Muller & Stuart Mestelman, 1998. "What have we learned from emissions trading experiments?," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4-5), pages 225-238.
    3. Cason, Timothy N. & Plott, Charles R., 1996. "EPA's New Emissions Trading Mechanism: A Laboratory Evaluation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 133-160, March.
    4. Allan M. Feldman, 1973. "Bilateral Trading Processes, Pairwise Optimally, and Pareto Optimality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 40(4), pages 463-473.
    5. Hizen, Y. & Saijo, T., 2000. "Price Desclosure, Marginal Abatement Cost Information and Market Power in a Bilateral GHG Emissions Trading Experiment," ISER Discussion Paper 0515, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    6. Robert N. Stavins, 1998. "What Can We Learn from the Grand Policy Experiment? Lessons from SO2 Allowance Trading," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 69-88, Summer.
    7. Cason, Timothy N & Gangadharan, Lata, 1998. "An Experimental Study of Electronic Bulletin Board Trading for Emission Permits," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 55-73, July.
    8. Joskow, Paul L & Schmalensee, Richard & Bailey, Elizabeth M, 1998. "The Market for Sulfur Dioxide Emissions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 669-685, September.
    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. Bohm, Peter, 2003. "Experimental evaluations of policy instruments," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 437-460, Elsevier.
    2. Jiasen Sun & Guo Li, 2020. "Designing a double auction mechanism for the re-allocation of emission permits," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 291(1), pages 847-874, August.
    3. Yoichi Hizen & Takao Kusakawa & Hidenori NiizawaAuthor-Name: & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2001. "Two Patterns of Price Dynamics were Observed in Greenhouse Gases Emissions Trading Experiment: An Application of Point Equilibrium," ISER Discussion Paper 0557, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    4. Carlén, Björn, 1999. "Large-Country Effects in International Emissions Trading: A Laboratoty Test," Research Papers in Economics 1999:15, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.

    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. Brookshire, David S & Burness, H Stuart, 2001. "The Informational Role of the EPA SO2 Permit Auction," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 43-60, July.
    2. Ben-David, Shaul & Brookshire, David S. & Burness, Stuart & McKee, Michael & Schmidt, Christian, 1999. "Heterogeneity, Irreversible Production Choices, and Efficiency in Emission Permit Markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 176-194, September.
    3. Dijkstra, Bouwe R. & Haan, Marco, 2001. "Sellers' Hedging Incentives at EPA's Emission Trading Auction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 286-294, May.
    4. Requate, Till & Camacho-Cuena, Eva & Kean Siang, Ch'ng & Waichman, Israel, 2019. "Tell the truth or not? The montero mechanism for emissions control at work," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 133-152.
    5. Holland, Stephen P. & Moore, Michael R., 2013. "Market design in cap and trade programs: Permit validity and compliance timing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 671-687.
    6. Bohm, Peter, 2003. "Experimental evaluations of policy instruments," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 437-460, Elsevier.
    7. Shaul Ben-David & David Brookshire & Stuart Burness & Michael McKee & Christian Schmidt, 2000. "Attitudes toward Risk and Compliance in Emission Permit Markets," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(4), pages 590-600.
    8. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    9. Harstad, Bård & Eskeland, Gunnar S., 2010. "Trading for the future: Signaling in permit markets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(9-10), pages 749-760, October.
    10. Cramton, Peter & Kerr, Suzi, 2002. "Tradeable carbon permit auctions: How and why to auction not grandfather," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 333-345, March.
    11. Stavins, Robert, 2003. "Market-Based Environmental Policies: What Can We Learn from U.S. Experience and Related Research?," Working Paper Series rwp03-031, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. Jason F. Shogren, 2002. "Micromotives in Global Environmental Policy," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 47-61, October.
    13. Olivier Rousse & Benoît Sévi, 2005. "Behavioral Heterogeneity in the US Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Allowance Trading Program," ERSA conference papers ersa05p550, European Regional Science Association.
    14. Duke, Charlotte & Gangadharan, Lata, 2005. "Regulation in Environmental Markets: What can we learn from Experiments to Reduce Salinity?," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 137857, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    15. Lisa R. Anderson & Sarah L. Stafford, 2000. "Choosing Winners and Losers in a Classroom Permit Trading Game," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 67(1), pages 212-219, July.
    16. Lisa R. Anderson & Sarah L. Stafford, 2000. "Choosing Winners and Losers in a Classroom Permit Trading Game," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 67(1), pages 212-219, July.
    17. Sonia Schwartz, 2009. "Comment distribuer les quotas de pollution ?. Une revue de la littérature," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 119(4), pages 535-568.
    18. Noussair, C.N. & van Soest, D.P., 2014. "Economic Experiments and Environmental Policy : A Review," Other publications TiSEM 5ccc4032-fc1e-453c-9a96-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Alessandra Casella, 1999. "Tradable deficit permits: efficient implementation of the Stability Pact in the European Monetary Union," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 14(29), pages 322-361.
    20. Hans‐Theo Normann & Roberto Ricciuti, 2009. "Laboratory Experiments For Economic Policy Making," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 407-432, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    EXPERIMENTS ; ENVIRONEMENT ; NATURAL RESOURCES;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • Q31 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q38 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy (includes OPEC Policy)

    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:dpr:wpaper:0492. 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: Librarian (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isosujp.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.