IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/5589.html

Macroeconomic Impacts of the Clean Development Mechanism: The Role of Investment Barriers and Regulations

Author

Listed:
  • Anger, Niels
  • Böhringer, Christoph
  • Moslener, Ulf

Abstract

This paper quantifies the macroeconomic impacts of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol based on a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model of international trade and energy use. Employing project-based CDM supply data we assess the relative importance of transaction costs and investment risks as well as CDM regulations through supplementarity and additionality criteria. Our numerical results show that the macroeconomic impacts of transaction costs and investment risks are negligible: Given the large supply of cheap project-based emissions credits in developing countries, compliance to the Kyoto Protocol can be achieved at a very low cost. However, regulatory restrictions such as a supplementarity criterion can substantially curtail the potential efficiency gains from where-flexibility in climate policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Anger, Niels & Böhringer, Christoph & Moslener, Ulf, 2007. "Macroeconomic Impacts of the Clean Development Mechanism: The Role of Investment Barriers and Regulations," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-026, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:5589
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/24586/1/dp07026.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:aen:journl:2002v23-02-a03 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Christoph Böhringer & Carsten Vogt, 2003. "Economic and environmental impacts of the Kyoto Protocol," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 475-496, May.
    3. Frank Jotzo & Axel Michaelowa, 2002. "Estimating the CDM market under the Marrakech Accords," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 2(2-3), pages 179-196, September.
    4. Steffen Kallbekken, 2007. "Why the CDM will reduce carbon leakage," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 197-211, May.
    5. Michaelowa, Axel & Jotzo, Frank, 2005. "Transaction costs, institutional rigidities and the size of the clean development mechanism," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 511-523, March.
    6. Bohringer, Christoph & Vogt, Carsten, 2004. "The dismantling of a breakthrough: the Kyoto Protocol as symbolic policy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 597-617, September.
    7. Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh (ed.), 1999. "Handbook of Environmental and Resource Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 801.
    8. Dutschke, Michael & Michaelowa, Axel, 2006. "Development assistance and the CDM – how to interpret ‘financial additionality’," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 235-246, April.
    9. Bohringer, Christoph, 2000. "Cooling down hot air: a global CGE analysis of post-Kyoto carbon abatement strategies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(11), pages 779-789, September.
    10. Böhringer, Christoph & Jensen, Jesper & Rutherford, Thomas F., 1999. "Energy market projections and differentiated carbon abatement in the European Union," ZEW Discussion Papers 99-11, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic 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. Fatemeh Nazifi, 2010. "The price impacts of linking the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme to the Clean Development Mechanism," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 12(4), pages 164-186, December.
    2. Nazifi, Fatemeh, 2013. "Modelling the price spread between EUA and CER carbon prices," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 434-445.
    3. Yang, Ming & Nguyen, François & De T'Serclaes, Philippine & Buchner, Barbara, 2010. "Wind farm investment risks under uncertain CDM benefit in China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1436-1447, March.
    4. Anger, Niels, 2008. "Emissions trading beyond Europe: Linking schemes in a post-Kyoto world," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 2028-2049, July.
    5. Aronsson, Thomas & Backlund, Kenneth & Sahlén, Linda, 2010. "Technology transfers and the clean development mechanism in a North-South general equilibrium model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 292-309, August.

    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. Christoph Böhringer & Thomas Rutherford & Marco Springmann, 2015. "Clean-Development Investments: An Incentive-Compatible CGE Modelling Framework," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(4), pages 633-651, April.
    2. Niels ANGER & Jayant SATHAYE, 2008. "Reducing Deforestation and Trading Emissions: Carbon Market Impacts of post-Kyoto Climate Policies," EcoMod2008 23800003, EcoMod.
    3. repec:old:wpaper:354 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Stankeviciute, Loreta & Kitous, Alban & Criqui, Patrick, 2008. "The fundamentals of the future international emissions trading system," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 4272-4286, November.
    5. Kounetas, Konstantinos & Zervopoulos, Panagiotis D., 2019. "A cross-country evaluation of environmental performance: Is there a convergence-divergence pattern in technology gaps?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1136-1148.
    6. 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.
    7. Sathaye, Jayant A. & Anger, Niels, 2008. "Reducing Deforestation and Trading Emissions: Economic Implications for the post-Kyoto Carbon Market," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-016, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    8. Mendoza Beltran, Angelica & den Elzen, Michel G.J. & Hof, Andries F. & van Vuuren, Detlef P. & van Vliet, Jasper, 2011. "Exploring the bargaining space within international climate negotiations based on political, economic and environmental considerations," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7361-7371.
    9. Christoph Bohringer, 2002. "Industry-level emission trading between power producers in the EU," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(4), pages 523-533.
    10. Hultman, Nathan E. & Pulver, Simone & Guimarães, Leticia & Deshmukh, Ranjit & Kane, Jennifer, 2012. "Carbon market risks and rewards: Firm perceptions of CDM investment decisions in Brazil and India," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 90-102.
    11. Liu, Xuemei, 2010. "Extracting the resource rent from the CDM projects: Can the Chinese Government do better?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 1004-1009, February.
    12. Liu, Xuemei, 2008. "The monetary compensation mechanism: An alternative to the clean development mechanism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 289-297, June.
    13. Kallbekken, Steffen & Flottorp, Line S. & Rive, Nathan, 2007. "CDM baseline approaches and carbon leakage," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4154-4163, August.
    14. Emma Paulsson, 2009. "A review of the CDM literature: from fine-tuning to critical scrutiny?," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 63-80, February.
    15. Brechet, Thierry & Lussis, Benoit, 2006. "The contribution of the clean development mechanism to national climate policies," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 28(9), pages 981-994, December.
    16. Kounetas, Kostas & Zervopoulos, Panagiotis, 2017. "Annex I and non-Annex I countries’productive performance revisited using a generalized directional distance function under a metafrontier framework: Is there any convergence-divergence pattern for technology gaps?," MPRA Paper 80904, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Bohringer, Christoph & Vogt, Carsten, 2004. "The dismantling of a breakthrough: the Kyoto Protocol as symbolic policy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 597-617, September.
    18. Martin Kesternich, 2016. "Minimum participation rules in international environmental agreements: empirical evidence from a survey among delegates in international climate negotiations," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(12), pages 1047-1065, March.
    19. Edward Barbier, 2011. "The policy challenges for green economy and sustainable economic development," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 35(3), pages 233-245, August.
    20. Clemens Heuson & Wolfgang Peters & Reimund Schwarze & Anna-Katharina Topp, 2015. "Investment and Adaptation as Commitment Devices in Climate Politics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(4), pages 769-790, December.
    21. Springmann, Marco, 2012. "Carbon tariffs for financing clean development," Conference papers 332255, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis

    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:zbw:zewdip:5589. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.