Options to overcome the barriers to pricing European agricultural emissions

被引:36
|
作者
Grosjean, Godefroy [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Fuss, Sabine [2 ]
Koch, Nicolas [2 ]
Bodirsky, Benjamin L. [1 ,5 ]
De Cara, Stephane [6 ]
Acworth, William [7 ]
机构
[1] Potsdam Inst Climate Impact Res PIK, Potsdam, Germany
[2] Mercator Res Inst Global Commons & Climate Change, Berlin, Germany
[3] Tech Univ Berlin, Econ Climate Change, Berlin, Germany
[4] Int Ctr Trop Agr, Reg Off Asia, Hanoi, Vietnam
[5] CSIRO, St Lucia, Qld, Australia
[6] Univ Paris Saclay, INRA, AgroParisTech, Econ Publ, Thiverval Grignon, France
[7] Adelphi, Berlin, Germany
关键词
European agriculture; mitigation; market-based instruments; emissions pricing; barriers to implementation; common agricultural policy; GREENHOUSE-GAS MITIGATION; ABATEMENT COST CURVES; TRANSACTION COSTS; CLIMATE-CHANGE; MANDATING AGRICULTURE; POLICY CONSIDERATIONS; US AGRICULTURE; TRADING SCHEME; EU-ETS; COMPETITIVENESS;
D O I
10.1080/14693062.2016.1258630
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Although agriculture could contribute substantially to European emission reductions, its mitigation potential lies untapped and dormant. Market-based instruments could be pivotal in incentivizing cost-effective abatement. However, sector specificities in transaction costs, leakage risks and distributional impacts impede its implementation. The significance of such barriers critically hinges on the dimensions of policy design. This article synthesizes the work on emissions pricing in agriculture together with the literature on the design of market-based instruments. To structure the discussion, an options space is suggested to map policy options, focusing on three key dimensions of policy design. More specifically, it examines the role of policy coverage, instruments and transfers to farmers in overcoming the barriers. First, the results show that a significant proportion of agricultural emissions and mitigation potential could be covered by a policy targeting large farms and few emission sources, thereby reducing transaction costs. Second, whether an instrument is voluntary or mandatory influences distributional outcomes and leakage. Voluntary instruments can mitigate distributional concerns and leakage risks but can lead to subsidy lock-in and carbon price distortion. Third, the impact on transfers resulting from the interaction of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) with emissions pricing will play a key role in shaping political feasibility and has so far been underappreciated. POLICY RELEVANCE Following the 2015 Paris Agreement, European climate policy is at a crossroads. Achieving cost-effectively the 2030 and 2050 European targets requires all sectors to reduce their emissions. Yet, the cornerstone of European climate policy, the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), covers only about half of European emissions. Major sectors have been so far largely exempted from carbon pricing, in particular transport and agriculture. While transport has been increasingly under the spotlight as a possible candidate for an EU ETS sectoral expansion, policy discussions on pricing agricultural emissions have been virtually absent. This article attempts to fill this gap by investigating options for market-based instruments to reduce agricultural emissions while taking barriers to implementation into account.
引用
收藏
页码:151 / 169
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Pricing European options under a diffusion model with psychological barriers and leverage effect
    Song, Shiyu
    Wang, Guanying
    Wang, Yongjin
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 2020, 26 (12): : 1184 - 1206
  • [2] PRICING CHAINED OPTIONS WITH CURVED BARRIERS
    Jun, Doobae
    Ku, Hyejin
    MATHEMATICAL FINANCE, 2013, 23 (04) : 763 - 776
  • [3] Study on the European options pricing
    Suo, Xinli
    Guo, Chunxian
    Zhang, Yan
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECOND INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON MODELLING AND SIMULATION (ICMS2009), VOL 3, 2009, : 334 - 337
  • [4] Study of Agricultural Product Options Pricing
    Hong, Qiu
    2017 3RD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON APPLIED MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY (ICAMMT 2017), 2017, 242
  • [5] Pricing vulnerable options with stochastic default barriers
    Wang, Xingchun
    FINANCE RESEARCH LETTERS, 2016, 19 : 305 - 313
  • [6] REPLICATION SCHEME FOR THE PRICING OF EUROPEAN OPTIONS
    Funahashi, Hideharu
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL AND APPLIED FINANCE, 2021, 24 (03)
  • [7] Pricing European options on deferred annuities
    Ziveyi, Jonathan
    Blackburn, Craig
    Sherris, Michael
    INSURANCE MATHEMATICS & ECONOMICS, 2013, 52 (02): : 300 - 311
  • [8] Numerical pricing of geometric asian options with barriers
    Aimi, Alessandra
    Diazzi, Lorenzo
    Guardasoni, Chiara
    MATHEMATICAL METHODS IN THE APPLIED SCIENCES, 2018, 41 (17) : 7510 - 7529
  • [9] The importance of jumps in pricing European options
    Campolongo, F.
    Cariboni, J.
    Schoutens, W.
    RELIABILITY ENGINEERING & SYSTEM SAFETY, 2006, 91 (10-11) : 1148 - 1154
  • [10] Pricing European and American Installment Options
    Goard, Joanna
    AbaOud, Mohammed
    MATHEMATICS, 2022, 10 (19)