IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vls/finstu/v16y2012i2p164-173.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Aspects Regarding The Profitability Of The Negotiable Pollution Permits (Ii)

Author

Listed:
  • Piciu, Gabriela Cornelia

    (Centre for Financial and Monetary Research “Victor Slăvescu”, Romanian Academy)

Abstract

After 2000, the problems regarding the trading of the emissions quotas was only recently of interest for study and research because of the adverse effects which environmental pollution has on the humans, economy, society and nature. Recently, the bulk of environmental protection specialists tried to find an answer to the question: “why did the emissions quota trading became a key component in the reform of the environmental policy”? In order to answer this question, and to provide a consistent basis for the successful evaluation of the environmental reforms, we need to define some notions regarding the optimal allocations of the responsibility checking. The underlying theory of cost profitability – the main basis for the current regulations – is developed and used as one of the main ways to measure and evaluate the existing systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Piciu, Gabriela Cornelia, 2012. "Aspects Regarding The Profitability Of The Negotiable Pollution Permits (Ii)," Studii Financiare (Financial Studies), Centre of Financial and Monetary Research "Victor Slavescu", vol. 16(2), pages 164-173.
    • Handle: RePEc:vls:finstu:v:16:y:2012:i:2:p:164-173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.icfm.ro/RePEc/vls/vls_pdf/vol16i2p164-173.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bohm, Peter & Carlen, Bjorn, 1999. "Emission quota trade among the few: laboratory evidence of joint implementation among committed countries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 43-66, January.
    2. Bjorn Carlen, 2003. "Market Power in International Carbon Emissions Trading: A Laboratory Test," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 1-26.
    3. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata & Duke, Charlotte, 2003. "A laboratory study of auctions for reducing non-point source pollution," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 446-471, November.
    4. Andrew Muller, R. & Mestelman, Stuart & Spraggon, John & Godby, Rob, 2002. "Can Double Auctions Control Monopoly and Monopsony Power in Emissions Trading Markets?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 70-92, July.
    5. M. Qizilbash, 2001. "Sustainable Development: Concepts and Rankings," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 134-161.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. 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.
    2. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    3. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata & Duke, Charlotte, 2003. "Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 469-491, October.
    4. Timothy Cason, 2003. "Buyer Liability and Voluntary Inspections in International Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading: A Laboratory Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(1), pages 101-127, May.
    5. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    7. Guido Bonatti & Enrico Ivaldi, 2016. "Un indicatore per la misurazione della partecipazione culturale e sociale nelle regioni italiane," ECONOMIA E DIRITTO DEL TERZIARIO, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(2), pages 283-302.
    8. Boxall, Peter C. & Weber, Marian & Perger, Orsolya & Cutlac, Marius & Samarawickrema, Antony, 2008. "Results from the Farm Behaviour Component of the Integrated Economic-Hydrologic Model for the Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices Program," Project Report Series 116268, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    9. Ehmke, Mariah D. & Warziniack, Travis & Schroeter, Christiane & Morgan, Kari, 2008. "Applying Experimental Economics to Obesity in the Family Household," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(2), pages 539-549, August.
    10. André, Francisco J. & de Castro, Luis M., 2015. "Incentives for Price Manipulation in Emission Permit Markets with Stackelberg Competition," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 197636, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    11. Nasrin Aghamohammadi & Stacy Simai Reginald & Ahmad Shamiri & Ali Akbar Zinatizadeh & Li Ping Wong & Nik Meriam Binti Nik Sulaiman, 2016. "An Investigation of Sustainable Power Generation from Oil Palm Biomass: A Case Study in Sarawak," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-19, April.
    12. Giuseppe Attanasi & Samuele Centorrino & Elena Manzoni, 2020. "Zero-Intelligence vs. Human Agents: An Experimental Analysis of the Efficiency of Double Auctions and Over-the-Counter Markets of Varying Sizes," Working Papers 05/2020, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    13. Katerina Sherstyuk & Nori Tarui & Majah-Leah V. Ravago & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2016. "Intergenerational Games with Dynamic Externalities and Climate Change Experiments," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(2), pages 247-281.
    14. Suzi Kerr & Catherine Leining, 2003. "Joint Implementation in Climate Change Policy," Working Papers 03_04, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    15. Kristiana Hansen & Jonathan Kaplan & Stephan Kroll, 2014. "Valuing Options in Water Markets: A Laboratory Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(1), pages 59-80, January.
    16. Markus Groth, 2009. "The transferability and performance of payment-by-results biodiversity conservation procurement auctions: empirical evidence from northernmost Germany," Working Paper Series in Economics 119, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
    17. Remes, Piia, 2013. "Putting a Price on Carbon – Econometric Essays on the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme and its Impacts," Research Reports 62, VATT Institute for Economic Research.
    18. Schilizzi, Steven & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2009. "Predicting the performance of conservation tenders when information on bidders's costs is limited," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 48171, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    19. C. Duke & L. Gangadharan, 2005. "Salinity in Water Markets : An ExperimentalInvestigation of the Sunraysia Salinity Levy, Victoria," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 950, The University of Melbourne.
    20. Nick Hanley & Simanti Banerjee & Gareth D. Lennox & Paul R. Armsworth, 2012. "How should we incentivize private landowners to ‘produce’ more biodiversity?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 93-113, Spring.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    emissions quotas; profitability; internalization of the externalities;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • 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

    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:vls:finstu:v:16:y:2012:i:2:p:164-173. 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: Daniel Mateescu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cfiarro.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.