Consequences of global warming and climate change issues have become more apparent over the last several decades. Heat waves, floods, tornados and storms are not just natural disasters occurring elsewhere, but they are now serious environmental catastrophes threatening New Zealand (NZ) and nearby countries as a result of continously escalating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Thus, the Kyoto Protocol was prepared for countries to work collaborately to provide a solution through encourging countries to commit themselves to reducing their individual share of the total GHG emissions. To date, NZ has gone through several phases of modification – introducing and revising two distinctive climate change policies (a Carbon Tax and an Emissions Trading Scheme [ETS]) as a tool to reduce GHG in NZ. These attempts to address climate change, coupled with the question raised by McDonald (Irish Times, 2009) doubting the actual effect of a tax on behaviour-change, provide an extensive basis for a case study in a NZ context involving an evaluation of the effectiveness of these regimes on incentivising behaviour-change to reduce and stablise the level of GHG emissions. In an attempt to answer the research question and conduct a case study in a NZ context, a triangulation approach incorporating both quantitative and qualitative research methods was undertaken. Statistical data analysis was conducted as a quantitative method to analyse and compare numerical changes 'with‘ and 'without‘ the existence of climate change policies. To enhance the results obtained from the quantitative research, qualitative information was also collected by interviewing politicians directly related to the introduction, implementation and the review process of the climate change policies in a semi-structured manner. The results of this study reinforced the need for regulations and policies to reduce and maintain the level of GHG emissions. Statistical data analysis proved that the existence of climate change policies results in lower level of GHG emissions. The interviewees also perceived that some sort of policy is definitely required to regulate the level of emissions, although whether the current, National-led Government‘s modfied-ETS is the 'right' approach is still uncertain. However, the majority of interviewees agreed that the type of tool does not matter, as long as it is correctly-designed to reflect the necessary policies to influence the decision making process of individuals and businesses, and ultimately change their behaviour as a result. However, in order to maintain NZ‘s relationship with other countries, it is preferable to retain its ETS regime until other countries decide to do otherwise.

<p>The European Union has initiated a scheme for trading with CO2 emission allowances as a measure to reduce greenhouse gas emission levels. Since January 2005 companies from certain energy demanding sectors, responsible for approximately 50 % of the total CO2 emissions in the EU, are participating in this scheme, the so called EU Emission Trading Scheme.</p><p>A trading scheme covering all sectors, i.e. all emissions in the EU would lead to the most cost efficient solution to reduce emissions by a certain amount. This means that the EU Emission Trading Scheme should be enlarged to cover also the transport sector, which is not participating today, but responsible for about 21 % of the total greenhouse gas emissions in the EU.</p><p>There are three ways to include the transport sector in the EU Emission Trading Scheme, i.e. to administrate the handling and trading of emission allowances in the transport sector. The first is a so called downstream approach, meaning that the actual emitter of the GHG, in this case a private person driving a car or a haulage contractor using trucks to transport goods, would be responsible for acquiring and trading emission allowances in accordance to the amount of greenhouse gases that he emits. The second way is a so called upstream approach, meaning that the owner of fuel depots would be responsible for acquiring and trading emission allowances corresponding to the amount of fossil fuel that he is selling, which is proportional to the amount of greenhouse gases that is emitted when using the fuel. The third solution is to lay the responsibility for acquiring and trading emission allowances on the companies that are ordering the transportation service, indirectly causing greenhouse gas emissions when their goods are being transported.</p><p>All three solutions have their advantages and disadvantages, but the benefits of using the upstream approach are the greatest. By allocating the responsibility for keeping and trading emission allowances at the fuel depots, an extensive part of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel use, not only in the transport sector, could be covered by the EU Emission Trading Scheme to the lowest administrational cost possible.</p>

The European Union has initiated a scheme for trading with CO2 emission allowances as a measure to reduce greenhouse gas emission levels. Since January 2005 companies from certain energy demanding sectors, responsible for approximately 50 % of the total CO2 emissions in the EU, are participating in this scheme, the so called EU Emission Trading Scheme. A trading scheme covering all sectors, i.e. all emissions in the EU would lead to the most cost efficient solution to reduce emissions by a certain amount. This means that the EU Emission Trading Scheme should be enlarged to cover also the transport sector, which is not participating today, but responsible for about 21 % of the total greenhouse gas emissions in the EU. There are three ways to include the transport sector in the EU Emission Trading Scheme, i.e. to administrate the handling and trading of emission allowances in the transport sector. The first is a so called downstream approach, meaning that the actual emitter of the GHG, in this case a private person driving a car or a haulage contractor using trucks to transport goods, would be responsible for acquiring and trading emission allowances in accordance to the amount of greenhouse gases that he emits. The second way is a so called upstream approach, meaning that the owner of fuel depots would be responsible for acquiring and trading emission allowances corresponding to the amount of fossil fuel that he is selling, which is proportional to the amount of greenhouse gases that is emitted when using the fuel. The third solution is to lay the responsibility for acquiring and trading emission allowances on the companies that are ordering the transportation service, indirectly causing greenhouse gas emissions when their goods are being transported. All three solutions have their advantages and disadvantages, but the benefits of using the upstream approach are the greatest. By allocating the responsibility for keeping and trading emission allowances at the fuel depots, an extensive part of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel use, not only in the transport sector, could be covered by the EU Emission Trading Scheme to the lowest administrational cost possible.

Responsible investing has become a trend throughout financial markets. As World’s economies pledge to decrease the amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, environmental policies like carbon pricing (CP) are expected to be strengthened; the above is attributed to the effort of internalizing the environmental costs of the current economic system. In the same context where asset owners have been demanding to the private sector for greater coverage of Environmental Social Governance (ESG) issues, understanding exposure and risk to carbon taxation and emission trading schemes (ETS) could be a major driver for responsible investing. Nonetheless, it has been found that this environmental policy to price emissions, falls behind from a harmonized cost per emission across sectors and geographies. Defined and assessed through a quantitative scenario analysis on scope 1 emissions, all information on carbon pricing set the basis for the model. From an investing perspective, the results showed higher exposure for the electricity sector by 2030 and 2050; nonetheless, the riskiest sector to invest at, was shown as industry. The above is based on the current and expected carbon dependency, and the expected increase in coverage from carbon pricing mechanisms respectively. In addition, aviation, which is a sub-sector from offroad transportation, showed to be the main source for this sector´s exposure and risk. It is concluded that the research carried out is a first step from a complete analysis on CP, as scope 2 emissions need to be assessed. / Att investera ansvarsfullt är en trend som ökar stadigt genom finansmarknader i världen idag. Då flera ekonomier i världen utlovar att minska mängden utsläpp av växthusgaser i linje med vissa klimatscenarion, så förstärks miljöpolicys som koldioxidutsläppspriser i ett försök att internalisera externaliteter i dagens ekonomiska system. I kontexten av när ägare av tillgångar börjar kräva större täckning i miljö, socialt ansvar och ägarstyrning, kan exponering och risk i koldioxidutsläppsbeskattning och handel av utsläppsoptioner vara en drivande faktor i ansvarsfullt investerande. En utmaning i att prissätta utsläpp genom miljöpolicys ligger i hur separerade båda mekanismerna är från en harmoniserad kostnad per utsläpp genom olika sektorer och geografier. Definierad och utvärderad genom en kvantitativ scenarioanalys av Scope 1-utsläpp, verkade all information om koldioxidutläppspriser som grund till modellen. Från ett investeringsperspektiv visade resultaten en högre exponering för elkraftssektorn till 2030 och 2050. Emellertid påvisades även att industrisektorn har störst risk för investeringar. Detta är baserat på elkraftens nuvarande och förväntade koldioxidutsläppsberoende och den förväntade ökningen i täckning från koldioxidutsläppsprismekanismer i industrisektorn. Vidare påvisades flygindustrin, som är en sidosektor av offroad-transport, vara den huvudsakliga källan för denna sektors exponering och risk. Avslutningsvis fastställs det att denna undersökning endast är ett första steg i en komplett analys av koldioxidpriser, då Scope 2 utsläpp även bör undersökas.

Market evidences of the last three years show that the application of the Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) may endanger the European electricity intensive industries both directly and indirectly. The direct ETS burdens come from the costs of both abating emissions from old technologies and buying emission allowances on the market. The pass through of carbon cost in electricity price implies an indirect ETS charge. The combined action of these two carbon burdens may negatively affect European industries' competitiveness at international level. Some of these industries are threatening to relocate their production activities outside of Europe. This would lead to the so-called "carbon leakage" phenomenon. Taking stock of a French industrial proposal, I consider some special contractual policies whereby electricity intensive industries can buy electricity at average cost. The rest of the market is instead priced at marginal cost. Thanks to these contracts, generators reserve part of their power plants for these industries and apply to them a price depending on the average capacity, fuel and emission costs of these dedicated units. In addition, these contracts account for the average transmission charges. Industries can choose to be supplied either at a single regional average cost price or at zonal (assimilated to nodal) average cost prices (in which case transmission costs are equal to zero). The final objective consists in analyzing the effects provoked by the application of the single and the nodal average cost prices in the cases where generators dispose of fixed capacity or can invest in new technologies. The market for transmission services is of the "flow based market coupling" type and the allowance price is endogenous. The results show that power contracts indeed partially relieve the direct and the indirect carbon costs and mitigate the incentive of European electricity intensive industries to relocate their activities, but with quite diverse regional impacts in correspondence with different national power policies. Finally, the EU-ETS drives generators' investment choices towards clean and nuclear based technologies. Models are formulated as non-monotone complementarity problems with endogenous electricity, transmission and allowance prices. These are implemented in GAMS and solved by PATH. They are applied to a prototype power system calibrated on four countries of the Central Western Europe represented by France, Germany, Belgium and The Netherlands.

Växthuseffekten är idag ett välkänt fenomen. För inte så länge sedan skrev 195 länder på klimatavtalet i Paris, ett avtal som slår fast att länderna tillsammans ska arbeta mot målet att hålla den globala uppvärmningen under 2 grader Celsius. Redan före ingåendet av detta avtal fanns åtgärder som syftade till att minska den globala uppvärmningen. Införandet av utsläppsmarknaden är en sådan åtgärd. Denna marknad bygger på att man med hjälp av ekonomiska incitament påverkar företag att minska sina utsläpp. Om företag inte kan minska sina utsläpp står de inför stora kostnader. Hela idén med utsläppsmarknader hotas dock av det faktum att det inte finns någon vägledning kring hur företag ska redovisa utsläppsrätter i de finansiella rapporterna. Som ett resultat av avsaknaden av vägledning på området är det upp till företag själva att avgöra hur och om de ska redovisa utsläppsrätter. En ytterligare konsekvens av detta är det väldigt många företag som inte redovisar utsläppsrätter överhuvudtaget. Även bland de företag som valt att redovisa utsläppsrätter finns det en stor variation.I denna studie undersöks variationen ur ett annat perspektiv. Syftet med denna studie är att söka förklara varför företag tillämpar olika redovisningsmetoder gällande redovisning av utsläppsrätter utifrån ett anglosaxiskt och kontinentalt perspektiv. Den genomförda metoden i studien är en kvantitativ innehållsanalys med kvalitativa inslag som behandlade 32 anglosaxiska respektive 32 kontinentala börsnoterade företags årsredovisningar. Samtliga företag är deltagare på en utsläppsmarknad och följer IFRS.Studien visar att det finns skillnader mellan anglosaxiska och kontinentala företags redovisning av utsläppsrätter. Studien visar även att dessa kan förklaras utifrån de egenskaper som är typiska för respektive redovisningstradition. Anglosaxiska företag redovisar överlag mycket mindre om utsläppsrätter än vad kontinentala företag gör. Detta faktum kan troligen förklaras genom den starka position som revisionsprofessionen har i den anglosaxiska redovisningstraditionen. Bland de anglosaxiska företag som väl valt att upplysa visar studien att deras redovisningsval styrs av syftet med deras finansiella rapporter. Vidare visar studien att kontinentala företag använder varierande värderingsmetoder vilket kan kopplas till skattelagstiftningens påverkan på redovisningspraxis i dessa länder. En annan skillnad är att kontinentala företag i högre grad erkänner hela förpliktelsen i balansräkningen vilket har sin förklaring i att de anses redovisa mer försiktigt.Studien belyser hur företags redovisningsval påverkas av redovisningstraditionerna i ett land och bekräftar att de fortfarande existerar. Dessa slutsatser kan bidra med ett nytt perspektiv i det pågående arbetet att ta fram vägledning gällande redovisning av utsläppsrätter. Vi anser att vägledning är nödvändig för att utsläppsmarknaden ska leva upp till sitt syfte, vilket den inte gör idag. / Today, the effect of greenhouse gases is a well-known phenomenon. Not so long ago 195 countries signed the Paris agreement, a document which states that the countries will work together to achieve the goal of keeping the global warming below 2 degrees Celsius. Even before the entrance of this agreement measures were taken to reduce global warming. The introduction of an emission trading scheme is one such measure. The scheme tries to create economic incentives for companies to reduce their emissions of greenhouse gases. If no efforts are made in order to reduce their emissions, the companies will face extensive costs. However, the whole idea of an emission trading scheme is threatened by the fact that there is no guidance on how companies should report emission allowances in their financial reports. As a result of the lack of guidance companies will have to decide on their own if and how they should account for emission allowances. A further consequence of this is that many companies do not account for emission allowances at all. It is also a big variation among the companies that have chosen to account for emission allowances.In this study we investigate the variety through a different perspective. The purpose of this study is to explain why companies use different accounting methods when they account for emission allowances from an Anglo-Saxon and Continental view. The applied method of this study is a quantitative content analysis with qualitative elements on 32 Anglo-Saxon and 32 Continental companies´ annual reports. All of the companies are participants on an emission trading scheme and comply with IFRS.The study shows that there is a difference between Anglo-Saxon and Continental accounting for emission allowances. The study also shows that this difference can be explained by the characteristics that are typical for each accounting tradition. In general, Anglo-Saxon companies disclose less about their emission allowances than the Continental companies do. This fact can probably be explained by the audit profession’s strong position in the Anglo-Saxon accounting tradition. The study also shows that the Anglo-Saxon companies that have chosen to disclose are guided by the objective of their financial statements. Furthermore, the study shows that Continental companies use several different valuation methods, which can be explained by the strong connection between tax and accounting practice in the Continental countries. Another difference is that Continental companies more frequently gross the liability in the balance sheet, which is explained by the fact that Continental companies are considered more prudent. This study highlights how corporate accounting choices are influenced by the countries’ accounting traditions and confirm that these traditions still exist. These conclusions can provide a new perspective in the current effort to develop guidance regarding the accounting of emission allowances. We believe that guidance is necessary if the emission trading scheme shall fulfil its purpose, which it currently does not.

The thesis focuses on comparison of emission trading of the European Union (European Union Emission Trading Scheme) which trades with carbon dioxide allowances and emission trading of the United States of America (Acid Rain Program) which trade with sulphur dioxide allowances. Despite of using same mechanisms and principles, these systems brought diverse results -- mostly because of different implementation of key parameters. The thesis which concerns with both of these systems is trying to find the major reasons of unsuccessful implementation of the European Union trading and the most important reasons leading to successful performance of the U.S. program.

Im Jahr 2005 wurde als Reaktion auf die Unterzeichnung des Kyoto-Protokolls und der damit verbundenen Verpflichtung zur Reduktion von Treibhausgasemissionen der europäische Emissionshandel eingeführt. Versuche der Standardsetter für IFRS und US GAAP zu einer einheitlichen Bilanzierungsregel für Emissionsrechte scheiterten. Seitdem stehen den beteiligten Unternehmen speziell bei Ansatz und Bewertung von Emissionsrechten sowie der Verbindlichkeit für verursachte Emissionen Wahlrechte zur Verfügung. Da unterschiedliche Bilanzierungsansätze zu verschiedenen Resultaten beispielsweise in der Gewinn- und Verlustrechnung führen können, schränkt die Regelungslücke die Vergleichbarkeit zwischen Unternehmen mit unterschiedlichen Bilanzierungsansätzen ein. Dabei wird zudem deutlich, wie wichtig die Offenlegung des gewählten Bilanzierungsansatzes ist. Diese Arbeit beschreibt mit Hilfe einer ausführlichen Literaturrecherche den Diskurs in der Forschung und fasst die theoretisch möglichen Ansätze zusammen. Dem schließt sich eine Analyse aller im STOXX Europe 600 gelisteten Unternehmen an. Untersucht wird, inwieweit die Unternehmen am Emissionshandel beteiligt sind, welchen Ansatz zur Bilanzierung von Emissionsrechten sie wählen und in welcher Vollständigkeit sie den gewählten Ansatz im Geschäftsbericht offenlegen. Insgesamt 70 Unternehmen im STOXX Europe 600 geben eine Beteiligung am europäischen Emissionshandel an, 68 davon erhalten Emissionsrechte kostenfrei von einer staatlichen Stelle zugeteilt. Davon wiederum können 31 Unternehmen sicher einem Bilanzierungsansatz zugeordnet werden; bei den übrigen Unternehmen werden nicht alle relevanten Bilanzierungsentscheidungen offengelegt. Die große Mehrheit dieser 31 Unternehmen wendet den Netto-Ansatz an, bei welchem die zugeteilten Emissionsrechte zu Anschaffungskosten (üblicherweise Null) angesetzt werden. Nur zwei Unternehmen bilanzieren Emissionsrechte nach der 2005 zurückgenommenen, aber weiterhin gültigen Interpretation IFRIC 3. Insgesamt gibt es bezüglich der Bilanzierung von Emissionsrechten in europäischen Unternehmen in Theorie und Praxis Unterschiede, welche die Vergleichbarkeit einschränken. Dies wird durch die häufig unvollständige Offenlegung der Bilanzierungsentscheidung verstärkt. Diese Kritikpunkte sollten aus Sicht der Standardsetter IASB und FASB ausreichend Anlass geben, eine einheitliche Regelung zur Bilanzierung von Emissionsrechten zu entwickeln.

Cette thèse couvre deux sujets : le dessin des permis à polluer et la gestion des déchets. Le premier chapitre analyse la mise en œuvre des permis à polluer. Le chapitre se concentre sur les impacts de la distribution liés à la sévérité de l’allocation gratuite basée sur la production courante quand deux secteurs sont couverts par le marché des permis et le plafond reste constant. Un nouveau type d’augmentation des profits dans les secteurs qui ne sont pas exposés à la concurrence internationale a été démontré théoriquement. Le deuxième chapitre traite la question de la différenciation de l’allocation des permis dans les différentes régions, liée à la possibilité des entreprises à délocaliser. Les conditions dans lesquelles le bien-être décroît avec la délocalisation sont déterminées. Dans ce cas, des distributions gratuites de permis peuvent être utilisées pour éviter la délocalisation des entreprises. Le troisième chapitre compare l’efficacité des programmes de la responsabilité élargie du producteur (REP) avec l’efficacité d’une ex-ante taxe. La taxe permet plus de flexibilité ex-ante quant aux conditions du marché, mais la REP permet plus d’adaptation ex-post aux réalisations des coûts. Ainsi, l’efficacité relative de la REP augmente avec l’incertitude des coûts et la compétitivité du marché. / This thesis covers two subjects. One is the design of pollution permits and the other is the waste management. The first chapter analyses the implementation of pollution permits. It focuses on the distributional impacts linked with the stringency of output-based allocation,when two sectors are covered by the market for permits and the total cap is held constant. Theoretically demonstrated is a new type of profit increase in sectors that are not exposed to international competition. The second chapter addresses the issue of differentiating permit allocation across areas, this being linked to the possibility of firms to relocate. The conditions under which welfare decreases with relocation are determined. In such a case, free allowances may be used to prevent firms from relocating. The third chapter compares the efficiency of extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs and the efficiency of an ex-ante tax. The tax allows more ex-ante flexibility regarding market conditions, but the EPR allows more ex-post adaption to cost realizations. As a result, the relative efficiency of the EPR increases with uncertainty of the costs and competitiveness of the market.

Im Jahr 2005 wurde als Reaktion auf die Unterzeichnung des Kyoto-Protokolls und der damit verbundenen Verpflichtung zur Reduktion von Treibhausgasemissionen der europäische Emissionshandel eingeführt. Versuche der Standardsetter für IFRS und US GAAP zu einer einheitlichen Bilanzierungsregel für Emissionsrechte scheiterten. Seitdem stehen den beteiligten Unternehmen speziell bei Ansatz und Bewertung von Emissionsrechten sowie der Verbindlichkeit für verursachte Emissionen Wahlrechte zur Verfügung. Da unterschiedliche Bilanzierungsansätze zu verschiedenen Resultaten beispielsweise in der Gewinn- und Verlustrechnung führen können, schränkt die Regelungslücke die Vergleichbarkeit zwischen Unternehmen mit unterschiedlichen Bilanzierungsansätzen ein. Dabei wird zudem deutlich, wie wichtig die Offenlegung des gewählten Bilanzierungsansatzes ist. Diese Arbeit beschreibt mit Hilfe einer ausführlichen Literaturrecherche den Diskurs in der Forschung und fasst die theoretisch möglichen Ansätze zusammen. Dem schließt sich eine Analyse aller im STOXX Europe 600 gelisteten Unternehmen an. Untersucht wird, inwieweit die Unternehmen am Emissionshandel beteiligt sind, welchen Ansatz zur Bilanzierung von Emissionsrechten sie wählen und in welcher Vollständigkeit sie den gewählten Ansatz im Geschäftsbericht offenlegen. Insgesamt 70 Unternehmen im STOXX Europe 600 geben eine Beteiligung am europäischen Emissionshandel an, 68 davon erhalten Emissionsrechte kostenfrei von einer staatlichen Stelle zugeteilt. Davon wiederum können 31 Unternehmen sicher einem Bilanzierungsansatz zugeordnet werden; bei den übrigen Unternehmen werden nicht alle relevanten Bilanzierungsentscheidungen offengelegt. Die große Mehrheit dieser 31 Unternehmen wendet den Netto-Ansatz an, bei welchem die zugeteilten Emissionsrechte zu Anschaffungskosten (üblicherweise Null) angesetzt werden. Nur zwei Unternehmen bilanzieren Emissionsrechte nach der 2005 zurückgenommenen, aber weiterhin gültigen Interpretation IFRIC 3. Insgesamt gibt es bezüglich der Bilanzierung von Emissionsrechten in europäischen Unternehmen in Theorie und Praxis Unterschiede, welche die Vergleichbarkeit einschränken. Dies wird durch die häufig unvollständige Offenlegung der Bilanzierungsentscheidung verstärkt. Diese Kritikpunkte sollten aus Sicht der Standardsetter IASB und FASB ausreichend Anlass geben, eine einheitliche Regelung zur Bilanzierung von Emissionsrechten zu entwickeln.