The Cost of Carbon: Capital Market Effects of the Proposed Emission Trading Scheme (<scp>ETS</scp>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In March 2008, the Australian Government announced its intention to introduce a national Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), now expected to start in 2015. This impending development provides an ideal setting to investigate the impact an ETS in Australia will have on the market valuation of Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) firms. This is the first empirical study into the pricing effects of the ETS in Australia. Primarily, we hypothesize that firm value will be negatively related to a firm's carbon intensity profile. That is, there will be a greater impact on firm value for high carbon emitters in the period prior (2007) to the introduction of the ETS, whether for reasons relating to the existence of unbooked liabilities associated with future compliance and/or abatement costs, or for reasons relating to reduced future earnings. Using a sample of 58 Australian listed firms (constrained by the current availability of emissions data) which comprise larger, more profitable and less risky listed Australian firms, we first undertake an event study focusing on five distinct information events argued to impact the probability of the proposed ETS being enacted. Here, we find direct evidence that the capital market is indeed pricing the proposed ETS. Second, using a modified version of the Ohlson ( ) valuation model, we undertake a valuation analysis designed not only to complement the event study results, but more importantly to provide insights into the capital market's assessment of the magnitude of the economic impact of the proposed ETS as reflected in market capitalization. Here, our results show that the market assesses the most carbon intensive sample firms a market value decrement relative to other sample firms of between 7% and 10% of market capitalization. Further, based on the carbon emission profile of the sample firms we imply a ‘future carbon permit price’ of between AUD$17 per tonne and AUD$26 per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted. This study is more precise than industry reports, which set a carbon price of between AUD$15 to AUD$74 per tonne.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".