|
|
|
|
|
| Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard; Brandt, Urs Steiner. |
| Farmers in the EU do not trade greenhouse gases under the Kyoto agreement. This is an empirical puzzle. Should farmers participate in the EU Emission Trading System (ETS) for greenhouse gases (GHG)? Our overall answer is yes. First, farmers may harvest private net gains because of i) relatively low marginal reduction costs, especially within organic farming; ii) the avoidance of future losses in productivity as a victim of climate change; and iii) the possibility of receiving a favourable allocation system, such as grandfathering or a list of projects that release free allowances. Second, market consequences in terms of the effect on permit price and technology are overall positive, yielding a promising future for the inclusion of agriculture in the EU... |
| Tipo: Conference paper, poster, etc. |
Palavras-chave: Policy environments and social economy. |
| Ano: 2010 |
URL: http://orgprints.org/17499/2/17499.pdf |
| |
|
|
| Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard; Brandt, Urs Steiner. |
| Farmers in the EU do not trade greenhouse gases under the Kyoto agreement. This is an empirical puzzle because agriculture is a significant contributor of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the EU and may harvest private net gains from trade. Furthermore, the US has strongly advocated land-use practices as ‘the missing link’ in past climate negotiations. We argue that farmers have relatively low marginal reduction costs and that consequences in terms of the effect on permit price and technology are overall positive in the EU Emission Trading System (ETS). Thus, we propose a project-based system for including the farming practices in the EU ETS that reduces the uncertainty from measuring emission reduction in this sector. The system encourages GHG reduction either... |
| Tipo: Journal paper |
Palavras-chave: Air and water emissions. |
| Ano: 2011 |
URL: http://orgprints.org/18776/1/18776.pdf |
| |
|
|
|
