IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mlb/wpaper/592.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Experimental Study of Electronic Bulletin Board Trading for Emission Permits

Author

Listed:
  • Cason, T.N.
  • Gangadharan, L.

Abstract

This paper reports a laboratory experiment that studies several specific features of the Regional Clean Air Incentives Market (RECLAIM), a tradable emission permit program intended to lower the cost of meeting federal air quality standards in the Los Angeles area. It assesses the impact of some permit trading rules and alternative regulatory policies on market performance. The experiment focuses on a new centralized system of trading called the Electronic Bulletin Board.

Suggested Citation

  • Cason, T.N. & Gangadharan, L., 1997. "An Experimental Study of Electronic Bulletin Board Trading for Emission Permits," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 592, The University of Melbourne.
  • Handle: RePEc:mlb:wpaper:592
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Tisdell, John G. & Grainger, Corinne, 2008. "An Experimental Economic Analysis of Carbon Trading Options for Australia," 2008 Conference, August 28-29, 2008, Nelson, New Zealand 96661, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    4. Piotr Nowak & Maciej Romaniuk, 2009. "Applying fuzzy parametersin pricing financial derivatives inspiredby the kyoto protocol," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Technology, Institute of Organization and Management, vol. 4, pages 77-91.
    5. Charlotte Duke & Lata Gangadharan, 2005. "Regulation in Environmental Markets: What Can We Learn from Experiments to Reduce Salinity?," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 38(4), pages 459-469, December.
    6. 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.
    7. Morten Søberg, 2000. "Imperfect competition, sequential auctions, and emissions trading: An experimental evaluation," Discussion Papers 280, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    8. 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.
    9. Robert Godby, 2002. "Market Power in Laboratory Emission Permit Markets," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(3), pages 279-318, November.
    10. 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.
    11. Noussair, C.N. & van Soest, D.P., 2014. "Economic Experiments and Environmental Policy : A Review," Discussion Paper 2014-001, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    12. Lata Gangadharan, 2004. "Analysis of prices in tradable emission markets: an empirical study of the regional clean air incentives market in Los Angeles," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(14), pages 1569-1582.
    13. Piotr Nowak & Maciej Romaniuk, 2009. "Applying fuzzy parameters in pricing financial derivatives inspired by Kyoto Protocol," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Technology, Institute of Organization and Management, vol. 4, pages 77-91.
    14. 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.
    15. Veronika Grimm & Lyuba Ilieva, 2013. "An experiment on emissions trading: the effect of different allocation mechanisms," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 308-338, December.
    16. Parry, Ian & Fischer, Carolyn & Jawahar, Puja & Aguilar , Francisco, 2005. "Corporate Codes of Conduct: Is Common Environmental Content Feasible?," Discussion Papers dp-05-09, Resources For the Future.
    17. Larson, Donald F. & Parks, Paul, 1999. "Risks, lessons learned, and secondary markets for greenhouse gas reductions," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2090, The World Bank.
    18. Elmar A. Janssen, 2014. "The Influence of Transparency on Investments in Climate Protecting - An Economic Experiment," Working Papers Dissertations 06, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    19. 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

    ENVIRONMENT ; EXPERIMENTS ; TRADE;

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • K32 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Energy, Environmental, Health, and Safety Law

    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:mlb:wpaper:592. 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: (Dandapani Lokanathan). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/demelau.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.