Abstract
The idea of market-based carbon emission trading and carbon taxes is gaining in popularity as a global climate change policy instrument. However, these mechanisms might not necessarily have a positive outcome unless their value reflects socioeconomic and environmental impacts and regulations. Moreover, the fact that they have various inherent exogenous and endogenous uncertainties raises serious concerns about their ability to reduce emissions in a cost-effective way. This paper aims to introduce a simple stochastic model that allows the robustness of economic mechanisms for emission reduction under multiple natural and human-related uncertainties to be analyzed. Unlike standard equilibrium state analysis, the model shows that the explicit introduction of uncertainties regarding emissions, abatement costs, and equilibrium states makes it almost impossible for existing market-based trading and carbon taxes to be environmentally safe and cost-effective. Here we propose a computerized multi-agent trading model. This can be viewed as a prototype to simulate an emission trading market that is regulated in a decentralized way. We argue that a market of this type is better equipped to deal with long-term emission reductions, their direct regulation, irreversibility, and “lock-in” equilibria.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baumol W, Oates W (1971) The use of standards and prices for protection of the environment. Swed J Econ 73:42–54
EEA (2006) Application of the emission trading directive by EU Member States. Technical Report No. 2/2006, European Environment Agency (EEA), Denmark, p 54. http://reports.eea.europa.eu/technical_report_2006_2/en/technicalreport_2_2006.pdf
Energy Business Review (2006) Volatility the only certainty in EU carbon market. http://www.energy-business-review.com/article_feature.asp?guid=FD09D7CA-3EFC-4229-BA86-1D968025DF5B
Ermoliev Y, Michalevich M, Nentjes A (2000) Markets for tradable emission and ambient permits: a dynamic approach. Environ Res Econ 15:39–56
Ermolieva T, Ermoliev Y (2005) Catastrophic risk management: flood and seismic risks case studies. In: Wallace SW, Ziemba WT (eds) Applications of stochastic programming. MPS-SIAM Series on Optimization, Philadelphia
Ermolieva T, Jonas M, Ermoliev Y, Makowski M (2007) The difference between deterministic and probabilistic detection of emission changes: toward the use of the probabilistic verification time concept. In: Proc. of the 2nd international workshop on uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories, IIASA-Systems Research Institute of the Polish academy of Sciences. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/FOR/unc_prep.html
Godal O, Ermoliev Y, Klassen G, Obersteiner M (2003) Carbon trading with imperfectly observable emissions. Environ Res Econ 25:151–169
Hudz H (2002) Verification times underlying the Kyoto protocol: consideration of risk. Interim Report IR-02-066, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-02-066.pdf
Hudz H, Jonas M, Ermolieva T, Bun R, Ermoliev Y, Nilsson S (2003) Verification times underlying the Kyoto protocol: consideration of risk. Background data for IR-02-066, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Research/FOR/vt_concept.html
Jonas M, Nilsson S (2007) Prior to economic treatment of emissions and their uncertainties under the Kyoto Protocol: scientific uncertainties that must be kept in mind. Water Air Soil Pollut Focus 7(4–5):495–511. doi:10.1007/s11267-006-9113-7
Jonas M, Nilsson S, Obersteiner M, Gluck M, Ermoliev Y (1999) Verification times underlying the Kyoto protocol: global benchmark calculations. Interim Report IR 99-062, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, p 43. http://www.iiasa.ac.at/Publications/Documents/IR-99-062.pdf
Lieberman D, Jonas M, Nahorski Z, Nilsson S (eds) (2007) Accounting for climate change. Uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories—verification, compliance, and trading. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 159, ISBN: 978-1-4020-5929-2 [Reprint: Water Air Soil Pollut.: Focus, 2007, 7(4–5), ISSN: 1567-7230]. http://www.springer.com/environment/global+change+-+climate+change/book/978-1-4020-5929-2
Marland G (2008) Uncertainties in accounting for CO2 from fossil fuels. J Ind Ecol 12(2):136–139. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2008.00014.x
Nahorski Z, Jeda W, Jonas M (2003) Coping with uncertainty in verification of the Kyoto obligations. In: Studzinski J, Drelichowski L, Hryniewicz O (eds) Zastosowania informatyki i analizy systemowej w zarządzaniu. Systems Research Institute PAS, Warsaw, pp 305–317
Nahorski Z, Horabik J, Jonas M (2007) Compliance and emissions trading under the Kyoto protocol: rules for uncertain inventories. In: Lieberman D, Jonas M, Nahorski Z, Nilson S (eds) Accounting for climate change: uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories—verification, compliance, and trading. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 119–138
Rockafellar T, Uryasev S (2000) Optimization of conditional-value-at-risk. J Risk 2/3:21–41
Rypdal K, Winiwarter W (2000) Uncertainties in greenhouse gas emission inventories evaluation, comparability and implications. Environ Sci Policy 4:107–116
Winiwarter W (2007) National greenhouse gas inventories: understanding uncertainties versus potential for improving reliability. In: Lieberman D, Jonas M, Nahorski Z, Nilson S (eds) Accounting for climate change: uncertainty in greenhouse gas inventories—verification, compliance, and trading. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 23–30
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ermolieva, T., Ermoliev, Y., Fischer, G. et al. Carbon emission trading and carbon taxes under uncertainties. Climatic Change 103, 277–289 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9910-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-010-9910-x