可交易性能标准中的价格限制

Banban Wang, W. Pizer, Clayton Munnings
{"title":"可交易性能标准中的价格限制","authors":"Banban Wang, W. Pizer, Clayton Munnings","doi":"10.3386/W28368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tradable performance standards are widely used sectoral regulatory policies. Examples include the US lead phasedown, fuel economy standards for automobiles, renewable portfolio standards, low carbon fuel standards, and—most recently—China’s new national carbon market. At the same time, theory and experience with traditional cap-and-trade programs suggests an important role for price limits in the form of floors, ceilings, and reserves. In this paper we develop a simple analytical model to derive the welfare comparison between tradable performance standards and a price-based alternative. This works out to be is a simple variant of the traditional Weitzman prices-versus-quantities result. We use this result to show that substantial gains could arise from shifting two programs, China’s new national carbon market (~60% gain) and the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (~20% gain), to a price mechanism. This will generally be true when the coefficient of variation in the price under a TPS is larger than 50%. We end with a discussion of implementation issues, including full and partial consignment auctions based on actual and expected output.","PeriodicalId":210701,"journal":{"name":"Decision-Making in Public Policy & the Social Good eJournal","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Price Limits in a Tradable Performance Standard\",\"authors\":\"Banban Wang, W. Pizer, Clayton Munnings\",\"doi\":\"10.3386/W28368\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Tradable performance standards are widely used sectoral regulatory policies. Examples include the US lead phasedown, fuel economy standards for automobiles, renewable portfolio standards, low carbon fuel standards, and—most recently—China’s new national carbon market. At the same time, theory and experience with traditional cap-and-trade programs suggests an important role for price limits in the form of floors, ceilings, and reserves. In this paper we develop a simple analytical model to derive the welfare comparison between tradable performance standards and a price-based alternative. This works out to be is a simple variant of the traditional Weitzman prices-versus-quantities result. We use this result to show that substantial gains could arise from shifting two programs, China’s new national carbon market (~60% gain) and the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (~20% gain), to a price mechanism. This will generally be true when the coefficient of variation in the price under a TPS is larger than 50%. We end with a discussion of implementation issues, including full and partial consignment auctions based on actual and expected output.\",\"PeriodicalId\":210701,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Decision-Making in Public Policy & the Social Good eJournal\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Decision-Making in Public Policy & the Social Good eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3386/W28368\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decision-Making in Public Policy & the Social Good eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3386/W28368","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

可交易绩效标准是广泛使用的行业监管政策。例子包括美国逐步减少铅、汽车燃油经济性标准、可再生能源组合标准、低碳燃料标准,以及最近中国新的全国碳市场。与此同时,传统总量管制与交易计划的理论和经验表明,价格限制以最低限额、最高限额和储备的形式发挥着重要作用。在本文中,我们开发了一个简单的分析模型来推导可交易绩效标准和基于价格的替代方案之间的福利比较。这被证明是传统韦茨曼价格对数量结果的一个简单变体。我们利用这一结果表明,将中国新的全国碳市场(收益约60%)和加州低碳燃料标准(收益约20%)这两个项目转变为价格机制可能会产生可观的收益。当TPS下的价格变动系数大于50%时,这通常是正确的。最后,我们讨论了实施问题,包括基于实际和预期产出的全部和部分寄售拍卖。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Price Limits in a Tradable Performance Standard
Tradable performance standards are widely used sectoral regulatory policies. Examples include the US lead phasedown, fuel economy standards for automobiles, renewable portfolio standards, low carbon fuel standards, and—most recently—China’s new national carbon market. At the same time, theory and experience with traditional cap-and-trade programs suggests an important role for price limits in the form of floors, ceilings, and reserves. In this paper we develop a simple analytical model to derive the welfare comparison between tradable performance standards and a price-based alternative. This works out to be is a simple variant of the traditional Weitzman prices-versus-quantities result. We use this result to show that substantial gains could arise from shifting two programs, China’s new national carbon market (~60% gain) and the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (~20% gain), to a price mechanism. This will generally be true when the coefficient of variation in the price under a TPS is larger than 50%. We end with a discussion of implementation issues, including full and partial consignment auctions based on actual and expected output.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信