Explore the vast range of titles available.

A key issue in a cost-benefit assessment of an expansion of an airport is its impact on emissions of greenhouse gases. Both taxes and tradable permits can be used to put a price tag on emissions, but practitioners disagree on how to handle permits. Therefore, the paper offers a section clarifying how to handle permits in cost-benefit analysis, with a more formal treatment in the Appendix. The paper also discusses the impact on the outcome of the evaluation of alternative assumptions regarding how greenhouse gases are internalised. Both optimal Pigouvian taxes and tradable permits are considered.

This paper investigates the impact of the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) on technological change, exploiting installations level inclusion criteria to estimate the System's causal impact on firms' patenting. We find that the EU ETS has increased low-carbon innovation among regulated firms by as much as 10%, while not crowding out patenting for other technologies. We also find evidence that the EU ETS has not affected patenting beyond the set of regulated companies. These results imply that the EU ETS accounts for nearly a 1% increase in European low-carbon patenting compared to a counterfactual scenario.

Addressing climate change is among the most challenging ethical issues facing contemporary business and society. Unsustainable business activities are causing significant distributional and procedural injustices in areas such as public health and vulnerability to extreme weather events, primarily because of a distinction between primary emitters and those already experiencing the impacts of climate change. Business, as a significant contributor to climate change and beneficiary of externalizing environmental costs, has an obligation to address its environmental impacts. In this paper, we explore the role of firms' climate change targets in shaping their emissions trends in the context of a large multi-country sample of companies. We contrast two intentions for setting emissions reductions targets: symbolic attempts to manage external stakeholder perceptions via \"greenwashing\" and substantive commitments to reducing environmental impacts. We argue that the attributes of firms' climate change targets (their extent, form, and time horizon) are diagnostic of firms' underlying intentions. Consistent with our hypotheses, while we find no overall effect of setting climate change targets on emissions, we show that targets characterized by a commitment to more ambitious emissions reductions, a longer target time frame, and absolute reductions in emissions are associated with significant reductions in firms' emissions. Our evidence suggests the need for vigilance among policy-makers and environmental campaigners regarding the underlying intentions that accompany environmental management practices and shows that these can to some extent be diagnosed analytically.

We study potential equilibria in California’s cap-and-trade market for greenhouse gases (GHGs) based on information available before the market started. We find large ex ante uncertainty in business-as-usual emissions and in the abatement that might result from non-market policies, much larger than the reduction that could plausibly occur in response to an allowance price within a politically acceptable range. This implies that the market price is very likely to be determined by an administrative price floor or ceiling. Similar factors seem likely to be present in other cap-and-trade markets for GHGs.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of fairness concern on the optimal pricing, carbon emission reduction (CER), green marketing efforts (GME) and utility of supply chain members in a two-echelon low-carbon supply chain composed of one manufacturer and one retailer. First, three basic models that consider the manufacturer’s different attitudes toward the retailer’s fairness concern are constructed. The optimal decisions of these models are obtained. Second, these optimal solutions are compared, and the effects of some key parameters including fairness concern on the optimal decisions and utility are examined for the three models. Furthermore, the manufacturer may misestimate the retailer’s fairness concern; therefore, an extended model is proposed. Design/methodology/approach The authors adopt the manufacturer-led Stackelberg game theoretic framework, where the manufacturer decides the wholesale price and CER level and, then, the retailer determines the retail price and GME. Findings The results show that fairness concern has a negative impact on the wholesale price, the level of CER and GME, and fairness concern are not always beneficial for maximizing utility, although it is related to whether the manufacturer pays attention to the retailer’s fairness concern. The manufacturer will gain more utility when considering the fairness concern of retailers than non-consideration. Overestimating or underestimating the fairness concern of the retailers does not lead to benefits for the manufacturer. Research limitations/implications This study has the following two limitations that need to be addressed in future research. First, the authors only consider the fairness concern of a single retailer but not peer-induced fairness among multiple competing retailers, which can be taken into account in future studies. Second, the demand function is linearly related to price, CER and GME. Because of the uncertainty of market information, the uncertainty demand function can be further considered. Originality/value This paper simultaneously considers the factors CER, GME and fairness concern. The utility function of the retailer is established according to taking the Nash bargaining solution as a fairness reference point, and four different models are constructed and compared.

Notwithstanding great progress in scientific and economic understanding of climate change, it has proven difficult to forge international agreements because of free-riding, as seen in the defunct Kyoto Protocol. This study examines the club as a model for international climate policy. Based on economic theory and empirical modeling, it finds that without sanctions against non-participants there are no stable coalitions other than those with minimal abatement. By contrast, a regime with small trade penalties on non-participants, a Climate Club, can induce a large stable coalition with high levels of abatement.

This paper aims to address the problem of allocating the CO 2 emissions quota set by government goal in Chinese manufacturing industries to different Chinese regions. The CO 2 emission reduction is conducted in a three-stage phases. The first stage is to obtain the total amount CO 2 emission reduction from the Chinese government goal as our total CO 2 emission quota to reduce. The second stage is to allocate the reduction quota to different two-digit level manufacturing industries in China. The third stage is to further allocate the reduction quota for each industry into different provinces. A new inverse data envelopment analysis (InvDEA) model is developed to achieve our goal to allocate CO 2 emission quota under several assumptions. At last, we obtain the empirical results based on the real data from Chinese manufacturing industries.

We develop a model of oligopolistic firms that produce partially differentiated products and generate pollution as a byproduct. We analyze and compare two types of pollution regulation: Cap-and-Trade and Taxes. Firms can respond to regulation by any combination of pollution abatement, output reduction, emissions trading (under Cap-and-Trade), or payment of pollution taxes (under Taxes). We prove that well-chosen regulation can, besides reducing pollution, actually improve firms’ profits relative to laissez-faire (unregulated markets), and simultaneously improve consumer surplus and welfare. Thus, regulation Pareto-dominates laissez-faire under a wide range of plausible conditions. These results are driven by an unintended consequence of pollution regulation: Competing firms can use the regulation to tacitly (and credibly) collude to reduce production and improve their profits. We show that the degree of competition plays a critical role in determining the economic consequences of pollution regulation. Our results suggest that the regulator’s primary consideration should be the impact of regulation on consumers rather than producers. This paper was accepted by Vishal Gaur, operations management.

Banks face a dilemma in choosing between maximising profits and facilitating the sustainable use of resources within a carbon-constrained future. This study provides empirical evidence on this dilemma, investigating whether a bank loan announcement for a firm with high carbon risk conveys information to investors about the firm's carbon risk exposure collected through a bank's pre-loan screening and ongoing monitoring. We use a sample of 120 bank loan announcements for ASX-listed firms over the period 2009-2015. We measure high (low) carbon risk exposure based on whether firms meet (do not meet) the reporting threshold of the NGER scheme. We document positive and significant excess loan announcement returns for loan renewals for high carbon risk firms, but not for loan initiations. Further, we document a more significant loan announcement return for renewals with favourable term revisions. Finally, we find no evidence that the market differentiates between domestic and foreign lenders. Taken together, our results suggest that investors perceive that banks incorporate carbon risk considerations into their lending decisions. Our results highlight the value of banks as financial intermediaries given the information asymmetry surrounding firms' carbon risk exposure, and more generally the need to extend modern banking theory to consider issues such as the impact of banks' CSR reputation on lending decisions.

Does CEO tolerance to risk affect a firm’s long-run sustainability? Using CEO insider debt holding, we show that CEO’s risk-aversion encourages immoral yet rational decisions of emitting more greenhouse gas thereby adversely affecting the firm’s long-run sustainability. Our result is robust to several endogeneity tests including a quasi-natural experiment. Our finding also suggest that to mitigate potential adverse reactions from stakeholders, carbon emitting firms with risk-averse CEOs tend to spend more on CSR activities. Much of the heterogeneity in our results are attributed to companies with weaker governance, powerful CEOs, and operating in a competitive product market. Overall, contrary to conventional wisdom, CEO preference toward risk-aversion can often lead to unethical outcomes (environmental degradation) and especially appears to be a key determinant for firm-level carbon emissions.