首页> 外文OA文献 >On Emissions Trading and Market Structure: Cap-and-Trade versus Intensity Standards
【2h】

On Emissions Trading and Market Structure: Cap-and-Trade versus Intensity Standards

机译:关于排放权交易和市场结构:总量控制与排放强度标准

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

This paper examines the interdependence between imperfect competition and emissions trading. We particularly analyze the long run equilibrium in a two-sector (‘clean' and ‘dirty') model with Cournot competition among firms who face a fixed cost of production. The clean sector is defined as the sector with the highest long run cost margin on emissions. We compare the welfare implications of a cap-and-trade scheme with an emissions trading scheme based on relative intensity standards. It is shown that a firm's long run equilibrium output in the clean or dirty sector does not depend on the emissions trading format, but only depends on the fixed cost of producing in the respective sector. Intensity standards can result in clean firms selling allowances to dirty firms, or dirty firms selling to clean firms. The former outcome yields higher welfare. It is demonstrated that cap-and-trade outperforms the intensity-based trading scheme in terms of long run welfare with free entry and exit. With intensity standards the size of the clean sector is too large.
机译:本文探讨了不完全竞争与排放交易之间的相互依存关系。我们特别分析了两个部门(“干净”和“肮脏”)模型中的长期均衡,其中面临固定生产成本的公司之间存在古诺竞争。清洁部门定义为长期排放成本边际最高的部门。我们将上限和交易计划与基于相对强度标准的排放交易计划的福利含义进行了比较。结果表明,企业在清洁或肮脏部门的长期均衡产出不取决于排放交易形式,而仅取决于各个部门的固定生产成本。强度标准可能会导致清洁企业向清洁企业出售配额,或者使清洁企业向清洁企业出售配额。前一个结果产生更高的福利。事实证明,就长期福利和自由进入和退出而言,总量管制和交易优于基于强度的交易方案。根据强度标准,清洁部门的规模太大。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号