Financials threaten to undermine the functioning of emissions markets

Kaldor, N. Hypothesis and Financial Stability. Rev. Econ. Stud. 7, 1–27 (1939).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Keynes, J. M. Treatise on Cash (Macmillan, 1930).

Ekeland, I., Lautier, D. & Villeneuve, B. Hedging stress and hypothesis in commodity markets. Econ. Idea 68, 83–123 (2019).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Brunnermeier, M. Ok., Sockin, M. & Xiong, W. China’s mannequin of managing the monetary system. Rev. Econ. Stud. 89, 3115–3153 (2022).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Goldstein, I. & Yang, L. Commodity financialization and data transmission. J. Finance 77, 2613–2667 (2022).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Martin, I. W. R. & Papadimitriou, D. Sentiment and hypothesis in a market with heterogeneous beliefs. Am. Econ. Rev. 112, 2465–2517 (2022).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Pirrong, C. Market Oversight for Cap-and-Commerce: Effectively Regulating the Carbon Derivatives Market Coverage Temporary 09–04 (The Brookings Establishment, Power Safety Initiative, 2009). An summary of what commodity derivatives are, why they’re used, how they’re traded, the abuses they’re topic to (manipulation, extreme hypothesis) and the way to constrain these abuses with a deal with carbon markets.

Monast, J. Local weather change and monetary markets: regulating the commerce facet of cap and commerce. Environ. Regulation Rep. 40, 51–65 (2010).

Google Scholar 

Fattouh, B., Kilian, L. & Mahadeva, L. The position of hypothesis in oil markets: what have we realized to this point? Power J. 34, 7–33 (2013).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Cheng, I.-H. & Xiong, W. Financialization of commodity markets. Annu. Rev. Financ. Econ. 6, 419–41 (2014). A literature evaluate on how monetary traders have an effect on threat sharing and data discovery in commodity markets, discussing the implications of financialization and methods for enhancing evaluation of those mechanisms.

Article 

Google Scholar 

Kilian, L. & Murphy, D. P. The position of inventories and speculative buying and selling within the world marketplace for crude oil. J. Appl. Econ. 29, 454–78 (2014).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Basak, S. & Pavlova, A. A mannequin of financialization of commodities. J Finance 71, 1511–1556 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Knittel, C. R. & Pindyck, R. S. The straightforward economics of commodity worth hypothesis. Am. Econ. J. Macroecon. 8, 85–110 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Boyd, N. E., Harris, J. H. & Li, B. An replace on hypothesis and financialization in commodity markets. J. Commod. Mark. 10, 91–104 (2018). A literature evaluate on financialization of commodity markets and the varied roles of hypothesis, additionally utilizing the Working T-index.

Article 

Google Scholar 

Sheppard, D. Hedge funds and Wall St banks money in on carbon market’s revival. Monetary Instances (7 September 2018).

Sheppard, D. Carbon buying and selling: the ‘one-way’ guess for hedge funds. Monetary Instances (23 August 2020).

Buli, N., Abnett, Ok. & Twidale, S. EU carbon worth hits report 50 euros per tonne on path to local weather goal. Reuters (4 Could 2021).

Costs on the earth’s greatest carbon market are hovering. The Economist (27 February 2021).

Attending to Web Zero: The Very important Position of World Carbon Markets (Institute of Worldwide Finance, 2021).

Placing Carbon Markets to Work on the Path to Web Zero (McKinsey & Firm, 2021).

Jeszke, R. & Lizak, S. Reflections on the mechanisms to guard towards formation of worth bubble within the EU ETS market. Environ. Defend. Nat. Resour. 32, 8–17 (2021).

Google Scholar 

Bouleau, N. Limits to development and stochastics. Actual World Econ. Rev. 60, 92–106 (2012).

Google Scholar 

Berta, N., Gautherat, E. & Gun, O. Transactions within the European carbon market: a bubble of compliance in a whirlpool of hypothesis. Cambridge J. Econ. 41, 575–593 (2017).

Google Scholar 

Smith, T. Financialisation of Nature SRE Dialogue Paper 08/2021 (Vienna College of Economics and Enterprise, 2021).

Germain, M., van Steenberghe, V. & Magnus, A. Optimum coverage with tradable and bankable air pollution permits: taking the market microstructure under consideration. J. Public Econ. Idea 6, 737–757 (2004).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Colla, P., Germain, M. & van Steenberghe, V. Environmental coverage and hypothesis on markets for emission permits. Economica 79, 152–182 (2012).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Borghesi, S. & Flori, A. EU ETS aspects within the web: construction and evolution of the EU ETS community. Power Econ. 75, 602–635 (2018).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Cantillon, E. & Slechten, A. Data aggregation in emissions markets with abatement. Ann. Econ. Stat. 132, 53–79 (2018).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Cludius, J. & Betz, R. The position of banks in EU emissions buying and selling. Power J. 41, 275–299 (2020). An empirical investigation of the position of banks within the EU ETS, documenting how they act as intermediaries and hedging counterparties for compliance entities.

Article 

Google Scholar 

Friedrich, M., Mauer, E.-M., Pahle, M. & Tietjen, O. From Fundamentals to Monetary Belongings: The Evolution of Understanding Worth Formation within the EU ET (Leibniz Data Centre for Economics, 2020). A synthesis of the empirical literature on worth formation within the EU ETS, highlighting three key dimensions (demand-side fundamentals, regulatory intervention, and monetary buying and selling) and the necessity to make clear how they work together.

Position of Derivatives in Carbon Markets Report (Worldwide Swaps and Derivatives Affiliation, 2021).

Carbon Buying and selling within the European Union: An Financial Evaluation of Market Functioning in 2021 (Oxera Consulting, 2022).

Angel, J. J. & McCabe, D. M. The ethics of hypothesis. J. Bus. Ethics 90, 277–286 (2009).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Hart, O. D. & Kreps, D. M. Worth destabilizing hypothesis. J. Polit. Econ. 94, 927–952 (1986).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Newbery, D. M. G. When do futures destabilize spot costs? Int. Econ. Rev. 28, 291–297 (1987).

Article 

Google Scholar 

De Lengthy, J. B., Shleifer, A., Summers, L. H. & Waldmann, R. J. Noise dealer threat in monetary markets. J. Polit. Econ. 98, 703–738 (1990).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Sockin, M. & Xiong, W. Informational frictions and commodity markets. J. Finance LXX, 2063–2098 (2015).

Article 

Google Scholar 

de Perthuis, C. & Trotignon, R. Governance of CO₂ markets: classes from the EU ETS. Power Coverage 75, 100–106 (2014).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Grosjean, G., Acworth, W., Flachsland, C. & Marschinski, R. After financial coverage, local weather coverage: is delegation the important thing to EU ETS reform? Clim. Coverage 16, 1–25 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Koch, N., Grosjean, G., Fuss, S. & Edenhofer, O. Politics issues: regulatory occasions as catalysts for worth formation below cap-and-trade. J. Environ. Econ. Handle. 78, 121–139 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Salant, S. W. What ails the European Union’s emissions buying and selling system? J. Environ. Econ. Handle. 80, 6–19 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Closing Report: Emission Allowances and Related Derivatives (European Securities and Markets Authority, 2022). A report on the functioning of the EU ETS and its totally different market segments (auctions, allowances buying and selling, derivatives buying and selling), offering quantitative analyses and suggestions for enhancing market knowledge provision and monitoring.

Abrell, J., Cludius, J., Lehmann, S., Schleich, J. & Betz, R. Company emissions-trading behaviour through the first decade of the EU ETS. Environ. Resour. Econ. 83, 47–83 (2022). An empirical evaluation of the determinants of buying and selling conduct within the EU ETS based mostly on related dealer traits.

Article 

Google Scholar 

Rannou, Y. & Barneto, P. Futures buying and selling with data asymmetry and OTC predominance: one other take a look at the amount/volatility relations within the European carbon markets. Power Econ. 53, 159–174 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Emission Buying and selling and Regulation of Monetary Markets (German Setting Company, 2022).

Martin, R., Muûls, M. & Wagner, U. J. The impression of the European Union emissions buying and selling scheme on regulated companies: what’s the proof after ten years? Rev. Environ. Econ. Coverage 10, 129–148 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Zaklan, A. Coase and cap-and-trade: proof on the independence property from the European carbon market. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Coverage (within the press).

Buying and selling Actions and Methods within the European Carbon Market (German Setting Company, 2022). A report offering a quantitative evaluation of bodily allowance buying and selling conduct within the EU ETS with a deal with the power and monetary sectors.

Schopp, A. & Neuhoff, Ok. The Position of Hedging in Carbon Markets Dialogue Paper 1271 (DIW Berlin, 2013).

Quemin, S. & Trotignon, R. Emissions buying and selling with rolling horizons. J. Econ. Dyn. Management 125, 104099 (2021).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Tietjen, O., Lessmann, Ok. & Pahle, M. Hedging and temporal allow issuances in cap-and-trade applications: the market stability reserve below threat aversion. Resour. Power Econ. 63, 101214 (2021).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Rannou, Y., Boutabba, M. A. & Barneto, P. Are inexperienced bond and carbon markets in Europe enhances or substitutes? Insights from the exercise of energy companies. Power Econ. 104, 105651 (2021).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Report from the Fee to the European Parliament and the Council on the Functioning of the European Carbon Market in 2020 Pursuant to Articles 10(5) and 21(2) of Directive 2003/87/EC (as amended by Directive 2009/29/EC and Directive (EU) 2018/410) (European Fee, 2021).

2022 State of the EU ETS Report (European Roundtable on Local weather Change and Sustainable Transition, 2022).

Hahn, R. W. & Stavins, R. N. The impact of allowance allocations on cap-and-trade system efficiency. J. Regulation Econ. 54, S267–S294 (2011).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Martin, R., Muûls, M. & Wagner, U. J. in Emissions Buying and selling as a Coverage Instrument: Analysis and Prospects (eds Gronwald, M. & Hintermann, B.) Ch. 9 (MIT Press, 2015).

Ellerman, A. D., Marcantonini, C. & Zaklan, A. The European Union emissions buying and selling system: ten years and counting. Rev. Environ. Econ. Coverage 10, 89–107 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council Amending Directive 2003/87/EC Establishing a System for Greenhouse Gasoline Emission Allowance Buying and selling Inside the Union, Resolution (EU) 2015/1814 In regards to the Institution and Operation of a Market Stability Reserve for the Union Greenhouse Gasoline Emission Buying and selling Scheme and Regulation (EU) 2015/757 (European Fee, 2021).

Burtraw, D. & McCormack, Ok. Consignment auctions of free emissions allowances. Power Coverage 107, 337–344 (2017).

Article 

Google Scholar 

MacKenzie, I. A. The evolution of air pollution auctions. Rev. Environ. Econ. Coverage 16, 1–24 (2022).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Venmans, F. The impact of allocation above emissions and worth uncertainty on abatement investments below the EU ETS. J. Clear. Prod. 126, 595–606 (2016).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Baudry, M., Faure, A. & Quemin, S. Emissions buying and selling with transaction prices. J. Environ. Econ. Handle. 108, 102468 (2021).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Cheng, I.-H. & Xiong, W. Why do hedgers commerce a lot? J. Authorized Stud. 43, 183–207 (2014).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Gerlagh, R., Heijmans, R. J. R. Ok. & Rosendahl, Ok. E. Endogenous emission caps at all times produce a inexperienced paradox. Econ. Coverage 36, 485–522 (2021).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Perino, G. Carbon market design and self-fulfilling prophecies. SSRN https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4243350 (2022).

Kollenberg, S. & Taschini, L. Dynamic provide adjustment and banking below uncertainty in an emissions buying and selling scheme: the market stability reserve. Eur. Econ. Rev. 118, 213–226 (2019).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Perino, G., Willner, M., Quemin, S. & Pahle, M. The European Union emissions buying and selling system market stability reserve: does it stabilize or destabilize the market? Rev. Environ. Econ. Coverage 16, 338–345 (2022). A literature evaluate and coverage temporary on present market design challenges and the Market Stability Reserve within the EU ETS.

Article 

Google Scholar 

Quemin, S. Elevating local weather ambition in emissions buying and selling programs: the case of the EU ETS and the 2021 evaluate. Resour. Power Econ. 68, 101300 (2022).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Afonin, A., Bredin, D., Cuthbertson, Ok., Muckley, C. & Nitzsche, D. Carbon portfolio administration. Int. J. Finance Econ. 23, 349–361 (2018).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Pardo, Á. Carbon and inflation. Financ. Res. Lett. 38, 101519 (2021).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Demiralay, S., Gencer, H. G. & Bayraci, S. Carbon credit score futures as an rising asset: hedging, diversification and draw back dangers. Power Econ. 113, 106196 (2022).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Jin, J., Han, L., Wu, L. & Zeng, H. The hedging impact of inexperienced bonds on carbon market threat. Int. Rev. Financ. Anal. 71, 101509 (2020).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Gerlagh, R. & Heijmans, R. J. R. Ok. Local weather-conscious customers and the purchase, financial institution, burn program. Nat. Clim. Change 9, 431–433 (2019).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Ye, J. & Xue, M. Influences of sentiment from information articles on EU carbon costs. Power Econ. 101, 105393 (2021).

Article 

Google Scholar 

On Ancillary Exercise – Market Measurement Calculation – Replace for the Yr 2020 (European Securities and Markets Authority, 2021).

Boyde, E. Bodily carbon credit score ETF wins reward regardless of some misgivings. Monetary Instances (8 November 2021).

Koch, N., Fuss, S., Grosjean, G. & Edenhofer, O. Causes of the EU ETS worth drop: recession, CDM, renewable insurance policies or a little bit of all the pieces? − New Proof. Power Coverage 73, 676–685 (2014).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Friedrich, M., Fries, S., Pahle, M. & Edenhofer, O. Guidelines vs. discretion in cap-and-trade applications: proof from the EU emission buying and selling system. SSRN https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3718517 (2020).

Working, H. Hypothesis on hedging markets. Meals Res. Inst. Stud. 1, 185–220 (1960).

Google Scholar 

Alquist, R. & Gervais, O. The position of monetary hypothesis in driving the value of crude oil. Power J. 34, 35–54 (2013).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Soares, D. B. & Borocco, E. Rational destabilization in commodity markets. J. Commod. Mark. 25, 100190 (2022).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Garcia, P., Leuthold, R. M. & Zapata, H. Lead-lag relationships between buying and selling quantity and worth variability: new proof. J. Futures Mark. 6, 1–10 (1986).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Lucia, J. J. & Pardo, Á. On measuring speculative and hedging actions in futures markets from quantity and open curiosity knowledge. Appl. Econ. 42, 1549–1557 (2010).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Lucia, J. J., Mansanet-Bataller, M. & Pardo, Á. Speculative and hedging actions within the European carbon market. Power Coverage 82, 342–351 (2015). An empirical evaluation of hedging and hypothesis within the EU ETS based mostly on day by day buying and selling knowledge (quantity, open curiosity).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Cifarelli, G. & Paesani, P. Navigating the oil bubble: a non-linear heterogeneous-agent dynamic mannequin of futures oil pricing. Power J. 42, 101–122 (2021).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Wadud, S., Durand, R. B. & Gronwald, M. Connectedness between the crude oil futures and fairness markets through the pre- and post-financialisation eras. SSRN https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3892626 (2021).

Chevallier, J., Le Pen, Y. & Sévi, B. Choices introduction and volatility within the EU ETS. Resour. Power Econ. 33, 855–880 (2011).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Stocking, A. Unintended penalties of worth controls: an utility to allowance markets. J. Environ. Econ. Handle. 63, 120–136 (2012).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Burtraw, D., Holt, C., Palmer, Ok. & Shobe, W. Worth-responsive allowance provide in emissions markets. J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 9, 851–884 (2022).

Google Scholar 

Kim, Y. H. & Yang, J. J. What makes circuit breakers enticing to monetary markets? A survey. Financ. Mark. Inst. Instrum. 13, 109–146 (2004).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Yeh, C.-H. & Yang, C.-Y. Analyzing the effectiveness of worth limits in a man-made inventory market. J. Econ. Dyn. Management 34, 2089–2108 (2010).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Place Limits for Derivatives (Higher Markets, 2011).

Shobe, W., Holt, C. & Huetteman, T. Parts of emission market design: an experimental evaluation of California’s marketplace for greenhouse gasoline allowances. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 107, 402–420 (2014).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Literature Evaluate on Place Limits (CFTC, 2016).

Chen, T., Gao, Z., He, J., Jiang, W. & Xiong, W. Day by day worth limits and damaging market conduct. J. Econom. 208, 249–264 (2019).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Sifat, I. M. & Mohamad, A. Circuit breakers as market stability levers: a survey of analysis, praxis, and challenges. Int. J. Finance Econ. 24, 1130–1169 (2019).

Article 

Google Scholar 

Kachi, A. & Frerk, M. Carbon Market Oversight Primer (Worldwide Carbon Motion Partnership, 2013).

Stefan, M. & Wellenreuther, C. London vs. Leipzig: worth discovery of carbon futures throughout part III of the ETS. Econ. Lett. 188, 108990 (2020).

Article 

Google Scholar