Advanced Search
DSpace@MIT

Are cap-and-trade programs more environmentally effective than conventional regulation?

Research and Teaching Output of the MIT Community

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Ellerman, A. Denny en_US
dc.contributor.other Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2009-04-03T17:05:47Z
dc.date.available 2009-04-03T17:05:47Z
dc.date.issued 2003 en_US
dc.identifier 2003-015 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/45008
dc.description.abstract This paper considers the evidence and possible reasons that cap-and-trade programs are more effective in meeting environmental objectives than conventional prescriptive regulation. The evidence is based mostly, but not entirely, on the SO2 provisions of the Acid Rain Program and it consists of quicker implementation, accelerated emission reductions, absence of exemptions, and the lack of "hot spots." The paper also notes the trend, evident in the Northeastern NOx Budget Program and the RECLAIM programs, for cap-and-trade regulation to supplant conventional prescriptive regulation even when regulators have ample legal authority to impose the latter. This trend and the better environmental performance of these programs are attributed to the advantages that cap-and-trade programs offer to both pragmatic regulators and regulated entities. en_US
dc.format.extent [18] p en_US
dc.publisher MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research en_US
dc.relation.ispartofseries MIT-CEEPR (Series) ; 03-015WP. en_US
dc.title Are cap-and-trade programs more environmentally effective than conventional regulation? en_US
dc.type Working Paper en_US
dc.identifier.oclc 58676453 en_US


Files in this item

Name Size Format Description
2003-015.pdf 292.9Kb PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

MIT-Mirage