Addressing leakage in the EU ETS: Border adjustment or output-based allocation?

160 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

On the empirical content of carbon leakage criteria in the EU emissions trading scheme (2014, methodology): “Given the scale of the EU ETS, it is worthwhile to perform a back-of-the-envelope calculation of the resulting increase in auction revenue.”
Why does emissions trading under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) not affect firms’ competitiveness? Empirical findings from the literature (2018, background): “This is because a zeroeffectmay come as a surprise given that special interest groups were highly concerned about employment losses and other negative competitiveness effects (Hanoteau, 2014; Monjon & Quirion, 2011).”
Would Border Carbon Adjustments Prevent Carbon Leakage and Heavy Industry Competitiveness Losses? Insights From a Meta-Analysis of Recent Economic Studies (2014, unknown): “Armington elasticities, which are used to model international trade, are considered as a crucial parameter in leakage ratio estimates (Monjon and Quirion, 2011a; Alexeeva-Talebi et al., 2012a; Balistreri and Rutherford, 2012).”
Robust policies to mitigate carbon leakage (2017, background): “…e.g. Horn and Mavroidis, 2011; Tamiotti, 2011; Böhringer et al., 2012b).1 One signal for its limited political feasibility is that – so far – border measures have only been proposed but not implemented.2 According to Monjon and Quirion (2011b), a uniform carbon tariff is ⁎ Corresponding author.”