IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mtu/wpaper/11_15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Trading Efficiency in Water Quality Trading Markets: An Assessment of Trade-Offs

Author

Listed:
  • Hugh McDonald

    (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research)

  • Suzi Kerr

    (Motu Economic and Public Policy Research)

Abstract

Declining water quality as a result of increased nutrient leaching is a serious and growing concern, both internationally and in New Zealand. Water pollution issues have traditionally been addressed with command-and-control type regulation, but market-based nutrient trading schemes are becoming more widespread. In New Zealand, a cap-and-trade system has been implemented in Lake Taupo and another has been designed for Lake Rotorua. Despite the importance placed on avoiding transaction costs in water quality trading markets, there has been little discussion in the literature of practical policies to decrease these transaction costs, or any real assessment of when it is and is not optimal to decrease transaction costs. This paper begins to address these issues. We find that strong efforts to control time-of-trade transaction costs are most likely to be worthwhile in schemes with heterogeneous participants and large expected values and volumes of trading. The trading inefficiency that results from search and bargaining, and trade registration costs can be minimised at some cost. Regulators can reduce trade approval costs if they establish baseline leaching levels for all participants and design standardised leaching monitoring systems as part of the set-up of the system, and monitor all sources equally regardless of whether participants trade instead of estimating and approving changes in traders’ leaching at the time of each trade (as occurs in a baseline-and-credit system). Finally we find that while regulators may be tempted to restrict trading or increase measuring and monitoring requirements to increase the environmental certainty of a scheme’s outcome, environmental risk may be better addressed through a less certain but more stringent environmental target.

Suggested Citation

  • Hugh McDonald & Suzi Kerr, 2011. "Trading Efficiency in Water Quality Trading Markets: An Assessment of Trade-Offs," Working Papers 11_15, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:mtu:wpaper:11_15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://motu-www.motu.org.nz/wpapers/11_15.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Suzi Kerr & Joanna Hendy & Shuguang Liu & Alexander S. P. Pfaff, 2004. "Tropical Forest Protection, Uncertainty, and the Environmental Integrity of Carbon Mitigation Policies," Working Papers 04_03, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    2. Meredith Fowlie & Jeffrey M. Perloff, 2013. "Distributing Pollution Rights in Cap-and-Trade Programs: Are Outcomes Independent of Allocation?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1640-1652, December.
    3. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    4. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516, Elsevier.
    5. Zhang, Junlian, 2007. "Barriers to water markets in the Heihe River basin in northwest China," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 32-40, January.
    6. Richard T. Woodward, 2003. "Lessons about Effluent Trading from a Single Trade," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 25(1), pages 235-245.
    7. R. Prabodanie & John Raffensperger & Mark Milke, 2010. "A Pollution Offset System for Trading Non-Point Source Water Pollution Permits," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(4), pages 499-515, April.
    8. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    9. Krutilla, Kerry & Krause, Rachel, 2011. "Transaction Costs and Environmental Policy: An Assessment Framework and Literature Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(3–4), pages 261-354, April.
    10. Suzi Kerr & Kelly Lock, 2008. "Nutrient Trading in Lake Rotorua: Cost Sharing and Allowance Allocation," Working Papers 09_09, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    11. Newell, Richard G & Stavins, Robert N, 2003. "Cost Heterogeneity and the Potential Savings from Market-Based Policies," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 43-59, January.
    12. Stavins Robert N., 1995. "Transaction Costs and Tradeable Permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 133-148, September.
    13. Hanna L. Breetz & Karen Fisher-Vanden & Hannah Jacobs & Claire Schary, 2005. "Trust and Communication: Mechanisms for Increasing Farmers’ Participation in Water Quality Trading," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(2).
    14. Shimshack, Jay P. & Ward, Michael B., 2008. "Enforcement and over-compliance," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 90-105, January.
    15. Lata Gangadharan, 2000. "Transaction Costs in Pollution Markets: An Empirical Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(4), pages 601-614.
    16. Greenhalgh, Suzie & Selman, Mindy, 2008. "Water quality trading programs: A comparison between the Northern and Southern Hemispheres," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6028, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    17. Meredith Fowlie & Stephen P. Holland & Erin T. Mansur, 2012. "What Do Emissions Markets Deliver and to Whom? Evidence from Southern California's NOx Trading Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(2), pages 965-993, April.
    18. Kelly Lock & Suzi Kerr, 2008. "Nutrient Trading in Lake Rotorua: Overview of a Prototype System," Working Papers 08_02, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    19. Kelly Lock & Suzi Kerr, 2008. "Nutrient Trading in Lake Rotorua: Choosing the Scope of a Nutrient Trading System," Working Papers 08_05, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    20. Stephenson, Kurt & Bosch, Darrell J., 2003. "Nonpoint Source And Carbon Sequestration Credit Trading: What Can The Two Learn From Each Other?," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22229, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    21. Solomon, Barry D., 1999. "New directions in emissions trading: the potential contribution of new institutional economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 371-387, September.
    22. Martin L. Weitzman, 1974. "Prices vs. Quantities," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(4), pages 477-491.
    23. Tom Tietenberg, 1995. "Tradeable permits for pollution control when emission location matters: What have we learned?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(2), pages 95-113, March.
    24. Nguyen, Nga & Shortle, James S., 2006. "Transactions Costs and Point-Nonpoint Source Water Pollution Trading," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21096, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    25. Meredith Fowlie & Jeffrey M. Perloff, 2013. "Distributing Pollution Rights in Cap-and-Trade Programs: Are Outcomes Independent of Allocation?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1640-1652, December.
    26. Juan-Pablo Montero, 1999. "Voluntary Compliance with Market-Based Environmental Policy: Evidence from the U.S. Acid Rain Program," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(5), pages 998-1033, October.
    27. King, Dennis M., 2005. "Crunch Time for Water Quality Trading," Choices: The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resource Issues, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 20(1), pages 1-5.
    28. Suzi Kerr & Kit Rutherford, 2008. "Nutrient Trading in Lake Rotorua: Determining Net Nutrient Inputs," Working Papers 08_03, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    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. Madeline Duhon & Suzi Kerr, 2015. "Nitrogen Trading in Lake Taupo: An Analysis and Evaluation of an Innovative Water Management Policy," Working Papers 15_07, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    2. Estelle Cantillon & Aurélie Slechten, 2023. "Market Design for the Environment," NBER Chapters, in: New Directions in Market Design, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Suzi Kerr, 2013. "Managing Risks and Tradeoffs Using Water Markets," Working Papers 13_13, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.

    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. McDonald, Hugh J. & Kennedy, Marianna & Ngawhika, Simon & Kerr, Suzi, 2010. "Trading efficiency in water quality markets," 2010 Conference, August 26-27, 2010, Nelson, New Zealand 96949, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Antonio M. Bento & Emeric Henry & Scott E. Lowe, 2013. "The Determinants of Credit Allocations in a Market-based Trading System: Evidence from the RECLAIM Program," The Review of Regional Studies, Southern Regional Science Association, vol. 43(1), pages 51-80, Summer.
    3. Stephen P. Holland & Michael R. Moore, 2012. "When to Pollute, When to Abate? Intertemporal Permit Use in the Los Angeles NOx Market," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 275-299.
    4. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    5. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    6. Robert W. Hahn & Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 267-294.
    7. Suzi Kerr, 2013. "Managing Risks and Tradeoffs Using Water Markets," Working Papers 13_13, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    8. Baudry, Marc & Faure, Anouk & Quemin, Simon, 2021. "Emissions trading with transaction costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    9. Kailin Kroetz & James N. Sanchirico & Daniel K. Lew, 2015. "Efficiency Costs of Social Objectives in Tradable Permit Programs," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(3), pages 339-366.
    10. Edward B. Barbier, 2013. "Is a global crisis required to prevent climate change? A historical–institutional perspective," Chapters, in: Roger Fouquet (ed.), Handbook on Energy and Climate Change, chapter 28, pages 598-614, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    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. Simon Quemin & Christian Perthuis, 2019. "Transitional Restricted Linkage Between Emissions Trading Schemes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(1), pages 1-32, September.
    13. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2015. "The political economy of pollution markets: Historical lessons for modern energy and climate planners," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 943-953.
    14. Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 355-435, Elsevier.
    15. Rouhi-Rad, Mani & Brozovic, Nicholas & Mieno, Taro, 2015. "Implications of Search Frictions for Tradeable Permit Markets," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205798, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Can an Effective Global Climate Treaty be Based on Sound Science, Rational Economics, and Pragmatic Politics?," Working Paper Series rwp04-020, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    17. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2017. "Lessons Learned from Three Decades of Experience with Cap and Trade," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(1), pages 59-79.
    18. Simon Anastasiadis & Marie-Laure Nauleau & Suzi Kerr & Tim Cox & Kit Rutherford, 2011. "Does Complex Hydrology Require Complex Water Quality Policy? NManager Simulations for Lake Rotorua," Working Papers 11_14, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    19. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry, 2008. "Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 152-174, Summer.
    20. Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Problem of the Commons: Still Unsettled after 100 Years," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 81-108, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    water quality markets; transaction costs; nutrient trading markets; trading ratios;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • D23 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Organizational Behavior; Transaction Costs; Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:mtu:wpaper:11_15. 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: Maxine Watene (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/motuenz.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.