What Do Emissions Markets Deliver and to Whom? Evidence from Southern California's NOx Trading Program
Stephen Holland () and
Erin Mansur ()
American Economic Review, 2012, vol. 102, issue 2, pages 965-93
An advantage of cap-and-trade programs over more prescriptive environmental regulation is that compliance flexibility and cost effectiveness can make more stringent emissions reductions politically feasible. However, when markets (versus regulators) determine where emissions occur, it becomes more difficult to assure that mandated emissions reductions are equitably achieved. We investigate these issues in the context of Southern California's RECLAIM program by matching facilities in RECLAIM with similar California facilities also in nonattainment areas. Our results indicate that average emissions fell 20 percent at RECLAIM facilities relative to our counterfactual. Furthermore, observed changes in emissions do not vary significantly with neighborhood demographic characteristics. (JEL H23, L51, Q53, Q58)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations View citations in EconPapers (8) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.aeaweb.org/aer/data/april2012/20090662_data.zip dataset accompanying article (application/zip)
Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
Working Paper: What Do Emissions Markets Deliver and to Whom? Evidence from Southern California's NOx Trading Program (2009)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: /RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:102:y:2012:i:2:p:965-93
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
American Economic Review is currently edited by Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg
More articles in American Economic Review from American Economic Association
Contact information at EDIRC.
Series data maintained by Jane Voros ().