Privatizing Climate Change Policy: Is there a Public Benefit?
- 949 Downloads
The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) and the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) are two private voluntary initiatives aimed at reducing carbon emissions and improving carbon management by firms. I sample power plants from firms participating in each of these programs, and match these to plants belonging to non-participating firms, to control for differences between participating and non-participating plants. Using a difference-in-differences model to control for unobservable differences between participants and non-participants, and to control for the trajectory of emissions prior to program participation, I find that the CCX is associated with a decrease in total carbon dioxide emissions for participating plants when non-publicly traded firms are included in the sample. Effects are produced largely by decreases in output. CCX participation is associated with increases in carbon dioxide intensity. The CDP is not associated with a decrease of carbon dioxide emissions or electricity generation, and program participation is associated with an increase in carbon dioxide intensity. I explore these results within the context of voluntary environmental programs to address carbon emissions.
KeywordsVoluntary environmental programs Climate change policy Chicago climate exchange Carbon disclosure project Difference-in-differences model Propensity score matching Greenwash
JEL ClassificationQ50 Q54 Q58 D80 C23
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Ananathanarayanan A (1998) Is there a green link? A panel data value event study of the relationship between capital markets and toxic releases. Department of Economics Rutgers University, New BrunswickGoogle Scholar
- Berry W, Fording RC (1997) Measuring state tax capacity and effort. Soc Sci Q 78(1): 158–166Google Scholar
- Dasgupta S, Hettige H, Wheeler D (1997) What improves environmental performance: evidence from mexican industry. World Bank, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- DSIRE (2009) Rules, regulations, and policies for renewable energy. Retrieved 17 Sept 2009Google Scholar
- Feldman SJ, Soyka P, Ameer P (1996) Does improving a firm’s environmental management system and environmental performance result in a higher stock price? ICF Kaiser International, Inc., Fairfax, VAGoogle Scholar
- Hall B, Kerr ML (1991) Green index: a state-by-state guide to the nation’s environmental health. Island Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Heckman J, Robb R (1986) Alternative methods for solving the problem of selection bias in evaluating the impact of treatments on outcomes. In: Wainer H (ed) Drawing inferences from self-selected samples. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah, New Jersey, pp 63–107Google Scholar
- Jung H, Pirog M (2011) Non-experimental impact evaluations. In: Besharov DJ, Cottingham PH (eds) The workforce investment act: Implenetation Experiences and evaluation findings. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. Kalamazoo, Michigan, WE, pp 407–430Google Scholar
- Khanna M (2001) Non-mandatory approaches to environmental protection. J Econ Surv 15(3): 291–325Google Scholar
- Kim E-H, Lyon TP (2011b) When does institutional investor activism increase shareholder value?: the carbon disclosure project. BE J Econ Anal Policy 11(1)Google Scholar
- LaLonde RJ (1986) Evaluating the econometric evaluations of training programs with experimental data. Am Econ Rev 76(4): 604Google Scholar
- Leuven E, Sianesi B (2012) PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. http://EConpapers.repec.org/RePEc:boc:bocode:s432001
- Morgenstern R, Pizer W (eds) (2007) Reality check: the nature and performance of voluntary environmental programs in the United States, Europe, and Japan. Resources For the Future, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Morgenstern R, Pizer W, Shih J-S (2007) Evaluating voluntary US climate programs: the case of climate wise. In: Pizer W, Morgenstern R (eds) Reality check: the nature and performance of voluntary environmental programs in the United States, Europe, and Japan. RFF, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- PricewaterhouseCoopers (2008) Carbon disclosure project report 2008: global 500. Carbon Disclosure Project, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Richards K (2000) Framing environmental policy instrument choice. Duke Environ Law Policy Forum 10: 221–231Google Scholar
- Ringquist EJ (1993) Environmental protection at the state level. M.E. Sharpe, ArmonkGoogle Scholar
- Smith J, Zhang Y. (2009) The variety of balancing tests. Paper presented at the Association for Public Administration and Management, WashingtonGoogle Scholar