IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/dpr/wpaper/0557.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Two Patterns of Price Dynamics were Observed in Greenhouse Gases Emissions Trading Experiment: An Application of Point Equilibrium

Author

Listed:
  • Yoichi Hizen
  • Takao Kusakawa
  • Hidenori NiizawaAuthor-Name:
  • Tatsuyoshi Saijo

Abstract

This paper compares efficiencies of double auction and bilateral trading in GHG emission trading experiments with the addition of two rules, abatement irreversibility of GHG emissions and non-compliance penalty, to Hizen and Saijo (1998). Using a new concept of equilibrium, we found that (i) Results were grouped into two cases. In one case, excessive reductions occurred at the early stage of the experiment and efficiency was relatively low. In the other case, excessive reduction did not occur at the early stage of experiment and efficiency was relatively high. (ii) In both cases, efficiency of double auction was higher than that of bilateral trading. (iii) Emissions trading lowered emissions reduction costs. (iv) Excessive emissions reduction occurred in almost all the sessions.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:dpr:wpaper:0557
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.iser.osaka-u.ac.jp/library/dp/2001/dp0557.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Bohm, Peter & Carlen, Bjorn, 1999. "Emission quota trade among the few: laboratory evidence of joint implementation among committed countries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 43-66, January.
    3. 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.
    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. Eva Camacho-Cuena & Till Requate & Israel Waichman, 2012. "Investment Incentives Under Emission Trading: An Experimental Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(2), pages 229-249, October.
    2. Kusakawa, Takao & 草川, 孝夫 & クサカワ, タカオ & Saijo, Tatsuyoshi & 西條, 辰義 & サイジョウ, タツヨシ, 2002. "Emissions Trading Experiments: Investment Uncertainty and Liability," Discussion Paper 87, Center for Intergenerational Studies, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.

    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. 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. Lata Gangadharan & Rachel Croson & Alex Farrell, 2013. "Investment decisions and emissions reductions: results from experiments in emissions trading," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 8, pages 233-264, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Carlén, Björn, 1999. "Large-Country Effects in International Emissions Trading: A Laboratoty Test," Research Papers in Economics 1999:15, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
    4. Paul Healy & John Ledyard & Charles Noussair & Harley Thronson & Peter Ulrich & Giulio Varsi, 2007. "Contracting inside an organization: An experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 143-167, June.
    5. Beat Hintermann, 2011. "Market Power, Permit Allocation and Efficiency in Emission Permit Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 327-349, July.
    6. Stranlund, John K. & Murphy, James J. & Spraggon, John M., 2011. "An experimental analysis of compliance in dynamic emissions markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 414-429.
    7. Katerina Sherstyuk & Nori Tarui & Majah-Leah V. Ravago & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2016. "Intergenerational Games with Dynamic Externalities and Climate Change Experiments," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(2), pages 247-281.
    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. John K. Stranlund & James J. Murphy & John M. Spraggon, 2013. "Imperfect enforcement of emissions trading and industry welfare: a laboratory investigation," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 9, pages 265-288, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Larson, Donald F. & Breustedt, Gunnar, 2007. "Will markets direct investments under the Kyoto Protocol ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4131, The World Bank.
    11. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata & Duke, Charlotte, 2003. "Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 469-491, October.
    12. Klaassen, Ger & Nentjes, Andries & Smith, Mark, 2005. "Testing the theory of emissions trading: Experimental evidence on alternative mechanisms for global carbon trading," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 47-58, April.
    13. 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.
    14. Stranlund, John K. & Murphy, James J. & Spraggon, John M., 2014. "Price controls and banking in emissions trading: An experimental evaluation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 71-86.
    15. Jason F. Shogren, 2002. "Micromotives in Global Environmental Policy," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 47-61, October.
    16. Koji Kotani & Kenta Tanaka & Shunsuke Managi, 2019. "Which performs better under trader settings, double auction or uniform price auction?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 247-267, March.
    17. Eva Camacho-Cuena & Till Requate & Israel Waichman, 2012. "Investment Incentives Under Emission Trading: An Experimental Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(2), pages 229-249, October.
    18. Timilsina, Raja Rajendra & Kotani, Koji, 2017. "Evaluating the potential of marketable permits in a framed field experiment: Forest conservation in Nepal," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 25-37.
    19. 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.
    20. Burtraw, Dallas & Holt, Charles & Palmer, Karen & Shobe, William M., 2020. "Quantities with Prices: Price-Responsive Allowance Supply in Environmental Markets," RFF Working Paper Series 20-17, Resources for the Future.

    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:dpr:wpaper:0557. 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.