Year unknownRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsOpen access

The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme: should we throw the flagship out with the bathwater?

Frédéric Branger, Oskar Lecuyer, Philippe Quirion

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), presented as the " flagship " of European climate policy, is subject to many criticisms from different stakeholders: it does not reduce carbon emissions nor generate enough low-carbon innovation, it induces competitiveness losses and carbon leakage, its distributional effects are unfair and finally, it is susceptible to fraud. We review these criticisms and recognize that: abatement is real (though small), innovation is insufficient, competitiveness losses and carbon leakage did not seem to take place, distributional effects have indeed been unfair and fraud has been important. Some of these problems could have been avoided. They can still be corrected by reforming the ETS through the introduction of price limits and by developing complementary policies, both because the ETS reform may fail and because the ETS cannot address all the relevant market failures.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), presented as the " flagship " of European climate policy, is subject to many criticisms from different stakeholders: it does not reduce carbon emissions nor generate enough low-carbon innovation, it induces competitiveness losses and carbon leakage, its distributional effects are unfair and finally, it is susceptible to fraud. We review these criticisms and recognize that: abatement is real (though small), innovation is insufficient, competitiveness losses and carbon leakage did not seem to take place, distributional effects have indeed been unfair and fraud has been important. Some of these problems could have been avoided. They can still be corrected by reforming the ETS through the introduction of price limits and by developing complementary policies, both because the ETS reform may fail and because the ETS cannot address all the relevant market failures.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), presented as the " flagship " of European climate policy, is subject to many criticisms from different stakeholders: it does not reduce carbon emissions nor generate enough low-carbon innovation, it induces competitiveness losses and carbon leakage, its distributional effects are unfair and finally, it is susceptible to fraud. We review these criticisms and recognize that: abatement is real (though small), innovation is insufficient, competitiveness losses and carbon leakage did not seem to take place, distributional effects have indeed been unfair and fraud has been important. Some of these problems could have been avoided. They can still be corrected by reforming the ETS through the introduction of price limits and by developing complementary policies, both because the ETS reform may fail and because the ETS cannot address all the relevant market failures.

Key concepts: Carbon leakage, Emissions trading, European union, Leakage (economics), Greenhouse gas, Climate policy, Carbon market, Economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme: should we throw the flagship out with the bathwater? — Research Paper | ScholarLens