Tradable instruments to fight climate change

A disappointing outcome

Dados Bibliográficos

ID12929664
AutoresPhilippe Quirion (0000-0003-4066-2984, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, autor correspondente)
Ano2021
Volume12
Fascículo3
Data de publicação2021-03-03
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1757-7780 • E-ISSN: 1757-7799
EditoraWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/wcc.705
OpenAlexW3133528359
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas3
Referências citadas35

Various tradable instruments have been implemented for climate change mitigation: emission trading systems, tradable energy‐efficiency obligations, and tradable renewable energy quotas. Their track record has been disappointing so far; almost every emission trading has suffered from over‐allocation which has undermined its effectiveness; tradable energy‐efficiency obligations seem to have mostly co‐financed investments that would have taken place anyway; tradable renewable energy quotas suffer from several shortcomings compared to alternative support systems, that is, feed‐in tariffs and premiums. I discuss the reasons for these failures (especially too superficial a reading by policy makers of the work of researchers) and ways to improve the situation (including encouraging systematic syntheses of academic work). This article is categorized under: Climate Economics > Economics of Mitigation

Business · Climate change · Climate change mitigation · Economics · Efficient energy use · Emissions trading · Environmental economics · Microeconomics · Natural resource economics · Outcome (game theory · Public economics · Renewable energy · Work (physics · Climate Change Policy and Economics · Energy, Environment, and Transportation Policies · Engineering · Environmental Impact and Sustainability