Capital Allocation and International Equilibrium with Pollution Permits
- 1 EconomiX, University of Paris Ouest-Nanterre, Nanterre, France
- 2 EconomiX, University of Paris Ouest-Nanterre, Nanterre, France
Abstract
Since the Kyoto Agreement, the idea of setting up pollution rights as an instrument of environmental policy for the reduction of greenhouse gases has progressed significantly. But the crucial problem of allocating these permits in a manner acceptable to all countries is still unsolved. There is a general consensus that this should be done according to some proportional allocation rule, but opinions vary greatly about what would be the appropriate proportionality parameter. In this paper, we analyze the economic consequences of different allocation rules in a general equilibrium framework. We first show the existence and unicity of an international equilibrium under the assumption of perfect mobility of capital and we characterize this equilibrium according to the dotations of permits. Then, we compare the economic consequences of three types of allocation rules when the permit market is designed to reduce total pollution. We show that a rule which applies some form of grandfathering simply reduces production and emissions proportionally and efficiently. In contrast, an allocation rule proportional to population is beneficial for developing countries. Finally per capita allocation rules induce size effect and can reverse these results.
- B. R. Copeland and M. C. Taylor, “North-South Trade and the Environment,” Quaterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 109, No. 3, 1994, pp. 755-787. doi:10.2307/2118421
- B. R. Copeland and M. C. Taylor, “Trade and Transboundary Pollution,” American Economic Review, Vol. 85, No. 4, 1995, pp. 716-737.
- G. Chichinilsky, “North-South Trade and the Global Environment,” American Economic Review, Vol. 84, No. 4, 1994, pp. 851-874.
- B. R. Copeland and M. C. Taylor, “International Trade and the Environment: A Framework for Analysis,” NBER Working Paper 8540, 2001.
- B. R. Copeland and M. C. Taylor, “Free Trade and Global Warming: A Trade Theory View of the Kyoto Protocol,” NBER Working Paper 7657, 2000.
- J. H. Dales, “Pollution, Property and Prices,” Toronto University Press, Toronto, 1968.
- T. Tietenberg, “The Tradable Permits Approach to Protecting the Commons: What Have We Learned?” In: E. Ostrom, et al., The Drama of the Commons, National Research Council, Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 2002, pp. 197-232.
- R. Noll, “Implementing Marketable Emission Permits,” American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, Vol. 72, No. 2, 1982, pp. 120-124.
- R. W. Hahn, “Economic Prescriptions for Environmental Problems: How the Patient Followed the Doctor’s Orders,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 3, No. 2, 1989, pp. 95-114.
- N. Kete, “The US Acid Rain Control Allowance Trading System, Climate Change—Designing a Tradable Permit System,” Paris OECD, 1992.
- R. W. Hahn and R. Stavins, “Trading in Greenhouse Permits: A Critical Examination of Design and Implementation Issues,” Faculty Research Working Paper R93-15, Harvard University, Cambridge, 1993.
- G. Chichinilsky and G. Heal, “Securitizing the Biosphere,” W.P. Earth Institute, Columbia University, Columbia, 1997.
- G. Chichinilsky, G. Heal and D. Starrett, “International Emission Permits: Equity and Efficiency,” Annual Congress of ASSA, San Francisco, 1996.
- P. A. Jouvet, Ph. Michel and G. Rotillon, “Optimal Growth with Pollution: How to Use Pollution Permits?” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Vol. 29, No. 9, 2005, pp. 1597-1609. doi:10.1016/j.jedc.2004.09.004
- P. A. Jouvet, Ph. Michel and G. Rotillon, “Competitive Markets for Pollution Permits: Impact on Factor Income and International Equilibrium,” Environmental Modeling Assessement, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2010, pp. 1-11. doi:10.1007/s10666-009-9195-5