English
 
Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  How to avoid history repeating itself: the case for an EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) price floor revisited

Flachsland, C., Pahle, M., Burtraw, D., Edenhofer, O., Elkerbout, M., Fischer, C., Tietjen, O., Zetterberg, L. (2020): How to avoid history repeating itself: the case for an EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) price floor revisited. - Climate Policy, 20, 1, 133-142.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1682494

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
8638.pdf (Publisher version), 2MB
 
File Permalink:
-
Name:
8638.pdf
Description:
-
Visibility:
Private
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
-
License:
-

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Flachsland, Christian1, Author
Pahle, Michael2, Author              
Burtraw, D.1, Author
Edenhofer, Ottmar2, Author              
Elkerbout, M.1, Author
Fischer, C.1, Author
Tietjen, Oliver2, Author              
Zetterberg, L.1, Author
Affiliations:
1External Organizations, ou_persistent22              
2Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, ou_persistent13              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: -
 Abstract: Several years of very low allowance prices in the EU emissions trading scheme (ETS) have motivated calls to introduce a price floor to correct potential underlying distortions and design flaws, including (i) the political nature of allowance supply and related credibility issues, (ii) potential myopia of market participants and firms, and (iii) waterbed and rebound effects resulting from policy interactions. In the wake of the recent EU ETS reform, allowance prices have sharply increased. This raises the question of whether the case for introducing a price floor in the EU ETS remains valid. We argue that such a price floor, also adopted in several other greenhouse gas cap-and-trade systems worldwide, remains an important improvement in the design of the system, as long as the above-mentioned distortions and design flaws persist. An EU ETS price floor can safeguard against these issues and provides more explicit guidance on the minimum allowance price policymakers consider acceptable. Either as a complement or substitute to the current Market Stability Reserve (MSR), a price floor would thus make the EU ETS less prone to future revision in case of unexpectedly low prices. We identify and confront four prominent arguments against the introduction of an EU ETS price floor.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2020
 Publication Status: Finally published
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: Peer
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2019.1682494
PIKDOMAIN: RD3 - Transformation Pathways
PIKDOMAIN: Director / Executive Staff / Science & Society
Organisational keyword: Director Edenhofer
Organisational keyword: RD3 - Transformation Pathways
eDoc: 8638
Working Group: Climate & Energy Policies
PIKDOMAIN: RD5 - Climate Economics and Policy - MCC Berlin
Organisational keyword: RD5 - Climate Economics and Policy - MCC Berlin
Working Group: Welfare and Policy Design
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Climate Policy
Source Genre: Journal, SCI, Scopus
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: -
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 20 (1) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 133 - 142 Identifier: Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Other: 1752-7457
ISSN: 1469-3062
CoNE: https://publications.pik-potsdam.de/cone/journals/resource/climate-policy
Publisher: Taylor & Francis