Interregional burden-sharing of greenhouse gas mitigation in the United States
Emissions trading is an attractive candidate for implementing greenhouse gas mitigation, because it can promote both efficiency and equity. This paper analyzes the interregional impacts of alternative allocations of carbon dioxide emission permits within the U.S. The analysis is performed with the aid of a nonlinear programming model for ten EPA Regions and for six alternative permit distribution formulas. The reason that various alternatives need to be considered is that there is no universal consensus on the best definition of equity. Advance knowledge of absolute and relative regional economic impacts provides policy-makers with a stronger basis for making the choice. The analysis yields several useful results. First, the simulations indicate that no matter how permits are allocated, this policy instrument can substantially reduce the cost of greenhouse gas mitigation for the U.S. in comparison to a system of fixed quotas for each of its regions. Interestingly, the welfare impacts of several of the allocation formulas differ only slightly despite the large differences in their philosophical underpinnings. Also, the results for some equity criteria differ greatly from their application in the international domain. For example, the Egalitarian (per capita) criterion results in the relatively greatest cost burden being incurred by one of the regions of the U.S. with the lowest per capita income.
|Date of creation:||Jul 2003|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Adam Rose & Brandt Stevens, 2001. "An Economic Analysis of Flexible Permit Trading in the Kyoto Protocol," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 219-242, April.
- Fukuda, Shin-ichi & Hoshi, Takeo & Ito, Takatoshi & Rose, Andrew, 2006. "International Finance," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 455-458, December.
- Rose, Adam & Stevens, Brandt, 1993. "The efficiency and equity of marketable permits for CO2 emissions," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 117-146, March.
- ZhongXiang Zhang, 2000.
"Estimating the size of the potential market for the Kyoto flexibility mechanisms,"
Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv),
Springer, vol. 136(3), pages 491-521, 09.
- Zhang, Zhong Xiang, 1999. "Estimating the size of the potential market for the Kyoto flexibility mechanisms," CCSO Working Papers 199920, University of Groningen, CCSO Centre for Economic Research.
- Zhang, ZhongXiang, 2000.
"An assessment of the EU proposal for ceilings on the use of Kyoto flexibility mechanisms,"
13151, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Zhang, ZhongXiang, 2001. "An assessment of the EU proposal for ceilings on the use of Kyoto flexibility mechanisms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 53-69, April.
- Zhang, ZhongXiang, 1999. "The design and implementation of an international greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme," MPRA Paper 13046, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Adam Rose & Brandt Stevens & Jae Edmonds & Marshall Wise, 1998. "International Equity and Differentiation in Global Warming Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 25-51, July.
- Toman, Michael & Shogren, Jason, 2000. "Climate Change Policy," Discussion Papers dp-00-22, Resources For the Future.
- Adam Rose & Gbadebo Oladosu, 2002. "Greenhouse Gas Reduction Policy in the United States: Identifying Winners and Losers in an Expanded Permit Trading System," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 1-18.
- Stevens, Brandt & Rose, Adam, 2002. "A Dynamic Analysis of the Marketable Permits Approach to Global Warming Policy: A Comparison of Spatial and Temporal Flexibility," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 45-69, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:12893. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.