Rules vs. Discretion in Cap-and-Trade Programs: Evidence from the EU Emission Trading System
Marina Friedrich (),
Michael Pahle and
Ottmar Edenhofer ()
No 8637, CESifo Working Paper Series from CESifo
Long-term commitment is crucial for the dynamic efficiency of intertemporal cap-and-trade programs. Discretionary interventions in such programs could destabilize the market, and necessitate subsequent corrective interventions that instigate regulatory instability (Kydland and Prescott, 1977). In this work, we provide evidence for this claim from the EU’s cap-and-trade program (EU-ETS). We ground our analysis in the theoretical finance literature, and apply a mixed method approach (time-varying regression, bubble detection, crash-odds modelling). We find that the recent EU-ETS reform triggered market participants into speculation, which likely led to an overreaction that destabilized the market. We discuss how the smokescreen politics behind the reform, which manifested itself in complex rules, was crucial for this outcome. We conclude that rules only ensure long-term commitment when their impact on prices is predictable.
Keywords: rules vs. discretion; cap-and-trade; overreaction; allowance pricing (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q48 Q50 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ene, nep-env and nep-reg
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ces:ceswps:_8637
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in CESifo Working Paper Series from CESifo Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Klaus Wohlrabe ().