Short-Run Allocation of Emissions Allowances and Long-Term Goals for Climate Policy
We use economic analysis to evaluate grandfathering, auctioning, and benchmarking approaches for allocation of emissions allowances and then discuss practical experience from European and American schemes. In principle, auctions are superior from the viewpoints of efficiency, fairness, transparency, and simplicity. In practice, auctions have been opposed by important sectors of industry, which argue that carbon pricing without compensation would harm international competitiveness. In the European Union’s Emissions Trading System, this concern led to grandfathering that is updated at various intervals. Unfortunately, updating gives industry an incentive to change behavior to influence future allocation. Furthermore, the wealth transferred to incumbent firms can be significantly larger than the extra costs incurred, leading to windfall profits. Meanwhile, potential auction revenues are not available to reduce other taxes. By circumscribing free allocation, benchmarking can target competitiveness concerns, incur less wealth transfer, and provide a strategy consistent with transitioning to auctions in the long run.
KeywordsBenchmarking Emissions trading Allocation of allowances EU ETS
The authors would like to thank the Mistra foundation for financial support through the research program CLIPORE and two anonymous reviewers for thorough reading and accurate comments.
- Bovenberg, A.L., and L.H. Goulder. 2001. Neutralizing the adverse industry impacts of CO2 abatement policies: What does it cost? In Behavioral and distributional effects of environmental policy, ed. C. Carraro, and G. Metcalf, 45–89. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Burtraw, D., K. Palmer, and D. Kahn. 2005. Allocation of CO 2 emissions allowances in the regional greenhouse gas cap-and-trade program. Discussion paper 05–25. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
- Burtraw, D., K. Palmer, R. Bharvikar, and A. Paul. 2001. The effect of allowance allocation on the cost of carbon emission trading. RFF discussion paper 01–30. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
- Dinan, T.M., and D.L. Rogers. 2002. Distributional effects of carbon allowance trading: How Government decisions determine winners and losers. National Tax Journal 55: 199–221.Google Scholar
- EAAC. 2010. Allocating emissions allowances under a California cap-and-trade program (March), Economic and Allocation Advisory Committee, State of California Air Resources Board. http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/eaac/documents/eaac_reports/2010-03-22_EAAC_Allocation_Report_Final.pdf. Accessed 9 Jan 2012.
- Egenhofer, C., and A. Georgiev (rapporteurs). 2010. Benchmarking in the EU—Lessons from the EU emissions trading system for the global climate change agenda. Centre for European Policy Studies, Place du Congrès 1, B-1000 Brussels: ISBN:978-92-9079-959-7.Google Scholar
- Ellerman, D., B. Buchner, and C. Carraro (eds.). 2007. Allocation in the European emissions trading scheme: Rights rents and fairness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Ellerman, D., F. Convery, and C. de Perthuis. 2010. Pricing carbon: The European union emissions trading scheme. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- European Commission. 2003. Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Union and of the Council of 13 October 2009 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the community and amending council directive 96/61/EC.Google Scholar
- European Commission. 2008. MEMO/08/35, Brussels, 23 January 2008. Questions and answers on the commission’s proposal to revise the EU emissions trading system.Google Scholar
- European Commission. 2009. Directive 2009/29/EC of the European Union and of the council of 23 April 2009 amending directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme of the community.Google Scholar
- Fell, H. 2008. EU-ETS and Nordic electricity: A CVAR analysis. Elforsk report 08:57. Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
- Fischer, C. 2001. Rebating environmental policy revenues: Output based allocations and tradable performance standards. Discussion paper 01–22. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
- Fischer, C., and A.K. Fox. 2007. Output based allocation of emissions permits for mitigation tax and trade interactions. Land Economics 83: 575–599.Google Scholar
- Fischer, C., and A. K. Fox. 2010. On the scope for output-based rebating in climate policy: When revenue recycling isn’t enough (or Isn’t Possible). Discussion paper 10–69. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
- Goulder, L.H. (ed.). 2002. Environmental policy making in economies with prior tax distortions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Hahn, R.W., and Robert N. Stavins. 2010. The effect of allowance allocations on cap-and-trade system performance. Working papers 2010.80. Milan: Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.Google Scholar
- Harrison, D., P. Klevnas, D. Radov, and A. Foss. 2007. Complexities of allocation choices in a greenhouse gas emissions trading program. Boston: NERA Economic Consulting.Google Scholar
- Richardson, N., A.T. Fraas, and D. Burtraw. 2011. Greenhouse gas regulation under the clean air act: Structure, effects and implications of a knowable pathway. Environmental Law Reporter 41: 10098–10120.Google Scholar
- Wannier, G.E., J.A. Schwartz, N. Richardson, M.A. Livermore, M.B. Gerrard, and D. Burtraw. 2011. Prevailing academic view on compliance flexibility under section 111 of the clean air act. Discussion paper 11–29. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
- Wråke, M., Burtraw, D, Löfgren, Å., and L. Zetterberg. 2012. What have we learnt from the European Union’s Emissions Trading System? Ambio 41. doi: 10.1007/s13280-011-0237-2.
- Zapfel, P. 2007. A brief but lively chapter in EU climate policy: The commission’s perspective. In Allocation in the European Emissions Trading Scheme: Rights rents and fairness, ed. D. Ellerman, B. Buchner, and C. Carraro. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, Chapter 2.Google Scholar
- Zetterberg, L, 2011. Instruments for reaching climate objectives—focusing on the time aspects of bioenergy and allocation rules in the European Union’s Emissions Trading System. PhD thesis. University of Gothenburg, Sweden.Google Scholar