IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/anu/eenwps/0605.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal Intensity Targets for Greenhouse Emissions Trading Under Uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Frank Jotzo

    (Australian National University, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies)

  • John C. V. Pezzey

    (Australian National University,Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies)

Abstract

Uncertainty is an obstacle for commitments under cap and trade schemes. We assess how well intensity targets, where countries' permit allocations are indexed to future realised GDP, can cope with uncertainties in international greenhouse emissions trading. We present some empirical foundations for intensity targets and derive a simple rule for the optimal degree of indexation to GDP. Using an 18-region simulation model of a cooperative, global cap-and-trade treaty in 2020 under multiple uncertainties and endogenous commitments, we show that optimal intensity targets could reduce the cost of uncertainty and achieve significant increases in global abatement. The optimal degree of indexation to GDP would vary greatly between countries, including super-indexation in some advanced countries, and partial indexation for most developing countries. Standard intensity targets (with one-to-one indexation) would also improve the overall outcome, but to a lesser degree and not in all individual cases. Although target indexation is no magic wand for a future global climate treaty, gains from reduced cost uncertainty and the potential for more stringent environmental commitments might justify the increased complexity and other potential downsides of intensity targets.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank Jotzo & John C. V. Pezzey, 2006. "Optimal Intensity Targets for Greenhouse Emissions Trading Under Uncertainty," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0605, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    • Handle: RePEc:anu:eenwps:0605
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://een.anu.edu.au/download_files/een0605.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nordhaus, William D, 1991. "To Slow or Not to Slow: The Economics of the Greenhouse Effect," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 920-937, July.
    2. Martin L. Weitzman, 1974. "Prices vs. Quantities," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(4), pages 477-491.
    3. Frank Jotzo, 2006. "Quantifying uncertainties for emission targets," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0603, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    4. Holtz-Eakin, Douglas & Selden, Thomas M., 1995. "Stoking the fires? CO2 emissions and economic growth," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 85-101, May.
    5. C�dric Philibert & Jonathan Pershing, 2001. "Considering the options: climate targets for all countries," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(2), pages 211-227, June.
    6. John C. V. Pezzey & Frank Jotzo, 2006. "Mechanisms for Abating Global Emissions Under Uncertainty," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0604, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    7. D. Dudek & A. Golub, 2003. ""Intensity" targets: pathway or roadblock to preventing climate change while enhancing economic growth?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(sup2), pages 21-28, December.
    8. Stavins, Robert N., 1996. "Correlated Uncertainty and Policy Instrument Choice," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 218-232, March.
    9. Quirion, Philippe, 2005. "Does uncertainty justify intensity emission caps?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 343-353, November.
    10. Toman, Michael, 2003. "Economic Analysis and the Formulation of U.S. Climate Policy," Discussion Papers 10528, Resources for the Future.
    11. Kevin Baumert & Odile Blanchard & S. Llosa & James F. Perkaus, 2002. "Building on the Kyoto Protocol : options for protecting the climate," Post-Print halshs-00196316, HAL.
    12. Kolstad, Charles D., 2005. "The simple analytics of greenhouse gas emission intensity reduction targets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(17), pages 2231-2236, November.
    13. Pizer, William A., 2002. "Combining price and quantity controls to mitigate global climate change," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 409-434, September.
    14. Barros, Vincente & Grand, Mariana Conte, 2002. "Implications of a dynamic target of greenhouse gases emission reduction: the case of Argentina," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 547-569, July.
    15. Peter Bohm & Björn Carlén, 2002. "A Cost-effective Approach to Attracting Low-income Countries to International Emissions Trading: Theory and Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(2), pages 187-211, October.
    16. A. Denny Ellerman & Ian Sue Wing, 2003. "Absolute versus intensity-based emission caps," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(sup2), pages 7-20, December.
    17. Adam Rose & Brandt Stevens & Jae Edmonds & Marshall Wise, 1998. "International Equity and Differentiation in Global Warming Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 25-51, July.
    18. Benito M�ller & Georg M�ller-F�rstenberger, 2003. "Price-related sensitivities of greenhouse gas intensity targets," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(sup2), pages 59-74, December.
    19. Marcel M. Berk & Michel G.J. den Elzen, 2001. "Options for differentiation of future commitments in climate policy: how to realise timely participation to meet stringent climate goals?," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 1(4), pages 465-480, December.
    20. Philippe Quirion, 2004. "Prices versus Quantities in a Second-Best Setting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(3), pages 337-360, November.
    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. Frank Jotzo, 2010. "Comparing the Copenhagen Emissions Targets," CCEP Working Papers 0110, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    2. Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Indexed regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 221-233, November.
    3. Bang, Guri & Froyn, Camilla Bretteville & Hovi, Jon & Menz, Fredric C., 2007. "The United States and international climate cooperation: International "pull" versus domestic "push"," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1282-1291, February.
    4. Fischer, Carolyn & Springborn, Michael, 2011. "Emissions targets and the real business cycle: Intensity targets versus caps or taxes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 352-366.
    5. Frank Jotzo & John C. V. Pezzey, 2006. "A better Kyoto: options for flexible commitments," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0610, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    6. Pezzey, John C.V., 2006. "Neither the rock nor the hard place: using payment thresholds to balance the politics and the economics of emissions control," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139892, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    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. Frank Jotzo & John C. V. Pezzey, 2005. "Optimal intensity targets for emissions trading under uncertainty (now replaced by EEN0605)," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0504, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    2. Frank Jotzo & John Pezzey, 2007. "Optimal intensity targets for greenhouse gas emissions trading under uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(2), pages 259-284, October.
    3. Joseph E. Aldy & William A. Pizer, 2009. "Issues in Designing U.S. Climate Change Policy," The Energy Journal, , vol. 30(3), pages 179-210, July.
    4. Wang, Banban & Pizer, William A. & Munnings, Clayton, 2022. "Price limits in a tradable performance standard," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    5. Hossa Almutairi & Samir Elhedhli, 2014. "Carbon tax based on the emission factor: a bilevel programming approach," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 795-815, April.
    6. Pezzey, John C.V. & Jotzo, Frank, 2010. "Tax-Versus-Trading and Free Emission Shares as Issues for Climate Policy Design," Research Reports 95049, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    7. Branger, Frédéric & Quirion, Philippe, 2014. "Price versus Quantities versus Indexed Quantities," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 187277, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    8. Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Indexed regulation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 221-233, November.
    9. Thomas D. Jeitschko & Pallavi Pal, 2021. "Curbing Price Fluctuations in Cap-and-Trade Auctions," CESifo Working Paper Series 9266, CESifo.
    10. John C. V. Pezzey & Frank Jotzo, 2006. "Mechanisms for Abating Global Emissions Under Uncertainty," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0604, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    11. Marschinski, Robert & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2010. "Revisiting the case for intensity targets: Better incentives and less uncertainty for developing countries," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5048-5058, September.
    12. Shreekar Pradhan & J. Scott Holladay & Mohammed Mohsin & Shreekar Pradhan, 2015. "Environmental Policy Instruments and Uncertainties Under Free Trade and Capital Mobility," EcoMod2015 8102, EcoMod.
    13. Marschinski, Robert & Lecocq, Franck, 2006. "Do intensity targets control uncertainty better than quotas ? Conditions, calibrations, and caveats," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4033, The World Bank.
    14. Pezzey, John C.V. & Jotzo, Frank, 2012. "Tax-versus-trading and efficient revenue recycling as issues for greenhouse gas abatement," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 230-236.
    15. Burtraw, Dallas & Palmer, Karen & Kahn, Danny, 2010. "A symmetric safety valve," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 4921-4932, September.
    16. Jinhua Zhao, 2022. "Aggregate emission intensity targets: Applications to the Paris Agreement," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(4), pages 1875-1897, October.
    17. Bang, Guri & Froyn, Camilla Bretteville & Hovi, Jon & Menz, Fredric C., 2007. "The United States and international climate cooperation: International "pull" versus domestic "push"," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 1282-1291, February.
    18. Rohling, Moritz & Ohndorf, Markus, 2012. "Prices vs. Quantities with fiscal cushioning," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 169-187.
    19. Joseph E. Aldy & Alan J. Krupnick & Richard G. Newell & Ian W. H. Parry & William A. Pizer, 2010. "Designing Climate Mitigation Policy," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 48(4), pages 903-934, December.
    20. Meunier, Guy & Montero, Juan-Pablo & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, 2017. "Using output-based allocations to manage volatility and leakage in pollution markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(S1), pages 57-65.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    climate policy; emissions trading; uncertainty; flexible targets; intensity targets; optimality; simulation modelling;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q00 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - General

    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:anu:eenwps:0605. 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: Jack Pezzey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://een.anu.edu.au/ .

    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.