IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p4210-d182988.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Asymmetric Nash Bargaining Model for Carbon Emission Quota Allocation among Industries: Evidence from Guangdong Province, China

Author

Listed:
  • Fei Ye

    (School of Business Administration, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China)

  • Lixu Li

    (School of Business Administration, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China)

  • Zhiqiang Wang

    (School of Business Administration, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China)

  • Yina Li

    (School of Business Administration, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510640, China)

Abstract

As the most cost-effective mechanism, an emissions trading scheme (ETS) plays an important role in mitigating global warming, whilst any such scheme requires the initial allocation of quotas. Current allocation methods, however, pay little attention to the interests of abatement entities, which will hinder the long-term sustainable goals. To mobilize the enthusiasm of different abatement entities, this study proposes a multiplayer asymmetric Nash bargaining model, ensuring that all entities can obtain more quotas after negotiation. To demonstrate the advantages of the proposed method, this study selects Guangdong where the principal allocation method is the grandfathering approach as an illustrative case and develops three preference cases including balanced weighting, economic-oriented weighting, and emission-oriented weighting. The empirical results show that the proposed method not only reflects the “polluter pays principle”, but also helps to save emission reduction costs. In further analysis, this study considers both free allocation ratio and ETS coverage, providing inspirations for policy makers to develop new ETS regulations. In general, the proposed method not only assists policy makers of Guangdong in improving the current ETS deficiencies but also can be generalized into other regions.

Suggested Citation

  • Fei Ye & Lixu Li & Zhiqiang Wang & Yina Li, 2018. "An Asymmetric Nash Bargaining Model for Carbon Emission Quota Allocation among Industries: Evidence from Guangdong Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4210-:d:182988
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4210/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4210/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Salant, Stephen W., 2016. "What ails the European Union׳s emissions trading system?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 6-19.
    2. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    3. Chang, Kai & Zhang, Chao & Chang, Hao, 2016. "Emissions reduction allocation and economic welfare estimation through interregional emissions trading in China: Evidence from efficiency and equity," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1125-1135.
    4. Ausubel, Lawrence M. & Cramton, Peter, 2010. "Virtual power plant auctions," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 201-208, December.
    5. Ji, Jingna & Zhang, Zhiyong & Yang, Lei, 2017. "Comparisons of initial carbon allowance allocation rules in an O2O retail supply chain with the cap-and-trade regulation," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 68-84.
    6. Zhang, Yue-Jun & Wang, Ao-Dong & Da, Ya-Bin, 2014. "Regional allocation of carbon emission quotas in China: Evidence from the Shapley value method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 454-464.
    7. Yu, Jongmin & Mallory, Mindy L., 2015. "An optimal hybrid emission control system in a multiple compliance period model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 16-28.
    8. Oliver Sartor & Clement Palli�re & Stephen Lecourt, 2014. "Benchmark-based allocations in EU ETS Phase 3: an early assessment," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 507-524, July.
    9. Nash, John, 1950. "The Bargaining Problem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 18(2), pages 155-162, April.
    10. Wu, Rui & Dai, Hancheng & Geng, Yong & Xie, Yang & Masui, Toshihiko & Tian, Xu, 2016. "Achieving China’s INDC through carbon cap-and-trade: Insights from Shanghai," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1114-1122.
    11. Siqin Xiong & Yushen Tian & Junping Ji & Xiaoming Ma, 2017. "Allocation of Energy Consumption among Provinces in China: A Weighted ZSG-DEA Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-12, November.
    12. Lv, Wei & Li, Hongyi & Tang, Jiafu, 2017. "Bargaining model of labor disputes considering social mediation and bounded rationalityAuthor-Name: Liu, Dehai," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(3), pages 1064-1071.
    13. Chang, Kai & Chang, Hao, 2016. "Cutting CO2 intensity targets of interprovincial emissions trading in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 211-221.
    14. Liu, Yu & Tan, Xiu-Jie & Yu, Yang & Qi, Shao-Zhou, 2017. "Assessment of impacts of Hubei Pilot emission trading schemes in China – A CGE-analysis using TermCO2 model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 762-769.
    15. Baochen Yang & Chuanze Liu & Yunpeng Su & Xin Jing, 2017. "The Allocation of Carbon Intensity Reduction Target by 2020 among Industrial Sectors in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, January.
    16. Lee, Cheng F. & Lin, Sue J. & Lewis, Charles, 2008. "Analysis of the impacts of combining carbon taxation and emission trading on different industry sectors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 722-729, February.
    17. Hasegawa, Makoto & Salant, Stephen, 2014. "Cap-and-trade programs under delayed compliance: Consequences of interim injections of permits," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 24-34.
    18. Xuecheng Wang & Xu Tang & Baosheng Zhang & Benjamin C. McLellan & Yang Lv, 2018. "Provincial Carbon Emissions Reduction Allocation Plan in China Based on Consumption Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-23, April.
    19. Hasegawa, Makoto & Salant, Stephen, 2012. "Cap-and-Trade Programs under Delayed Compliance," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-32, Resources for the Future.
    20. Liu, Tiantian & Wang, Qunwei & Su, Bin, 2016. "A review of carbon labeling: Standards, implementation, and impact," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 68-79.
    21. Yue-Jun Zhang & Jun-Fang Hao, 2017. "Carbon emission quota allocation among China’s industrial sectors based on the equity and efficiency principles," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 117-140, August.
    22. Xiong, Ling & Shen, Bo & Qi, Shaozhou & Price, Lynn & Ye, Bin, 2017. "The allowance mechanism of China’s carbon trading pilots: A comparative analysis with schemes in EU and California," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(P2), pages 1849-1859.
    23. Cui, Lian-Biao & Fan, Ying & Zhu, Lei & Bi, Qing-Hua, 2014. "How will the emissions trading scheme save cost for achieving China’s 2020 carbon intensity reduction target?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1043-1052.
    24. Da Zhang & Marco Springmann & Valerie J. Karplus, 2016. "Equity and emissions trading in China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 131-146, January.
    25. Ning Jiang & Linda Zhang & Yugang Yu, 2015. "Optimizing Cooperative Advertizing, Profit Sharing, and Inventory Policies in a VMI Supply Chain: A Nash Bargaining Model and Hybrid Algorithm," Post-Print hal-01563010, HAL.
    26. Li, Wei & Jia, Zhijie, 2016. "The impact of emission trading scheme and the ratio of free quota: A dynamic recursive CGE model in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 1-14.
    27. Daskalakis, George & Markellos, Raphael N., 2009. "Are electricity risk premia affected by emission allowance prices? Evidence from the EEX, Nord Pool and Powernext," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(7), pages 2594-2604, July.
    28. Beat Hintermann, 2017. "Market Power in Emission Permit Markets: Theory and Evidence from the EU ETS," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 66(1), pages 89-112, January.
    29. Jaeseok Lee & Jongmin Yu, 2017. "Market Analysis during the First Year of Korea Emission Trading Scheme," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-13, November.
    30. Lennox, James A. & van Nieuwkoop, Renger, 2010. "Output-based allocations and revenue recycling: Implications for the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(12), pages 7861-7872, December.
    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. Mingjun Jiang & Dongyan Chen & Hui Yu, 2021. "Research on Reward and Punishment Contract Model and Coordination of Green Supply Chain Based on Fairness Preference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Ran Wang & Hui Ci & Ting Zhang & Yuxin Tang & Jinyuan Wei & Hui Yang & Gefei Feng & Zhaojin Yan, 2023. "Spatial-Temporal Evolution Characteristics of Industrial Carbon Emissions in China’s Most Developed Provinces from 1998–2013: The Case of Guangdong," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-21, February.
    3. Hong, Zitao & Peng, Zhen & Zhang, Liumei, 2022. "Game analysis on the choice of emission trading among industrial enterprises driven by data," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PE).

    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. Lin, Boqiang & Jia, Zhijie, 2019. "Impacts of carbon price level in carbon emission trading market," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(C), pages 157-170.
    2. Wang, Xu & Zhu, Lei & Fan, Ying, 2018. "Transaction costs, market structure and efficient coverage of emissions trading scheme: A microlevel study from the pilots in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C), pages 657-671.
    3. Lin, Boqiang & Jia, Zhijie, 2018. "Impact of quota decline scheme of emission trading in China: A dynamic recursive CGE model," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 190-203.
    4. Chang, Kai & Ge, Fangping & Zhang, Chao & Wang, Weihong, 2018. "The dynamic linkage effect between energy and emissions allowances price for regional emissions trading scheme pilots in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 415-425.
    5. Baochen Yang & Chuanze Liu & Yunpeng Su & Xin Jing, 2017. "The Allocation of Carbon Intensity Reduction Target by 2020 among Industrial Sectors in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-19, January.
    6. Shaofu Du & Jun Qian & Tianzhuo Liu & Li Hu, 2020. "Emission allowance allocation mechanism design: a low-carbon operations perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 291(1), pages 247-280, August.
    7. Li, Guangyao & Yang, Jin & Chen, Dingjiang & Hu, Shanying, 2017. "Impacts of the coming emission trading scheme on China’s coal-to-materials industry in 2020," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 837-849.
    8. Lin, Boqiang & Jia, Zhijie, 2017. "The impact of Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) and the choice of coverage industry in ETS: A case study in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 1512-1527.
    9. Julien Lefevre, 2018. "Modeling the Socioeconomic Impacts of the Adoption of a Carbon Pricing Instrument – Literature review," CIRED Working Papers hal-03128619, HAL.
    10. Zhu, Bangzhu & Jiang, Mingxing & He, Kaijian & Chevallier, Julien & Xie, Rui, 2018. "Allocating CO2 allowances to emitters in China: A multi-objective decision approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 441-451.
    11. Dai, Hancheng & Xie, Yang & Liu, Jingyu & Masui, Toshihiko, 2018. "Aligning renewable energy targets with carbon emissions trading to achieve China's INDCs: A general equilibrium assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 4121-4131.
    12. Jianguo Zhou & Yushuo Li & Xuejing Huo & Xiaolei Xu, 2019. "How to Allocate Carbon Emission Permits Among China’s Industrial Sectors Under the Constraint of Carbon Intensity?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, February.
    13. Jiangyue Joy Ying & Benjamin K. Sovacool, 2021. "A fair trade? Expert perceptions of equity, innovation, and public awareness in China’s future Emissions Trading Scheme," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1-23, February.
    14. Woo, C.K. & Shiu, A. & Liu, Y. & Luo, X. & Zarnikau, J., 2018. "Consumption effects of an electricity decarbonization policy: Hong Kong," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 887-902.
    15. Chang, Kai & Zhang, Chao & Chang, Hao, 2016. "Emissions reduction allocation and economic welfare estimation through interregional emissions trading in China: Evidence from efficiency and equity," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1125-1135.
    16. Zhang, Lirong & Li, Yakun & Jia, Zhijie, 2018. "Impact of carbon allowance allocation on power industry in China’s carbon trading market: Computable general equilibrium based analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 814-827.
    17. Liu, Yu & Tan, Xiu-Jie & Yu, Yang & Qi, Shao-Zhou, 2017. "Assessment of impacts of Hubei Pilot emission trading schemes in China – A CGE-analysis using TermCO2 model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 762-769.
    18. Quemin, Simon & Trotignon, Raphaël, 2021. "Emissions trading with rolling horizons," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    19. Chia-Lin Chang & Michael McAleer, 2019. "Modeling Latent Carbon Emission Prices for Japan: Theory and Practice," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.
    20. Tang, Ling & Wu, Jiaqian & Yu, Lean & Bao, Qin, 2017. "Carbon allowance auction design of China's emissions trading scheme: A multi-agent-based approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 30-40.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4210-:d:182988. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.