What Do Emissions Markets Deliver and to Whom? Evidence from Southern California's Nox Trading Program

310 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.

The design of environmental markets: What have we learned from experience with cap and trade? (2017, background): “sources of electricity, and thereby caused electricity demand and production levels at some RECLAIM generating facilities to increase dramatically, causing emissions to exceed permit allocations, thereby bringing about a dramatic spike in allowance prices to more than $60,000/ton (Fowlie et al., 201”
Lessons Learned from Three Decades of Experience with Cap-and-Trade (2015, unknown): “…that emissions at RECLAIM facilities were some 20 percent lower than at facilities that were regulated with parallel, command-and-control regulations, that hotspots did not appear, and that substantial cost savings were achieved (Burtraw and Szambelan 2010; Fowlie, Holland, and Mansur 2012).”
The Long-Run Dynamics of Electricity Demand: Evidence from Municipal Aggregation (2020, methodology): “We view our application as a useful demonstration of matching for applied researchers, in the vein of Fowlie et al. (2012).”
Analysis of the bias of Matching and Difference-in-Difference under alternative earnings and selection processes (2015, background): “…in point is programs allocated according to an eligibility rule such as participation in an emissions trading scheme based on past emission levels (Fowlie, Holland, and Mansur, 2012), participation in fair trade certification based on past product quality (Balineau, 2012), classification in an…”