Abstract

This paper examines bidders' bidding behavior and carbon emission rights allocations under the English auction with "going, going, gone" ending rule and the sequential ascending auction, respectively. Given the definitions of demand correspondence and efficient allocation, we obtain that: (1) under the English auction with "going, going, gone" ending rule, the straightforward bidding strategy is dominant in the sense that it makes bidders avoid the risk of loss, and the bidding strategy leads to an efficient assignment, (2) under the sequential ascending auction, truth-telling is the most preferred bidding strategy to bidders, and it is an efficient allocation strategy, (3) from the respective of bidders, the Revenue Equivalence Theorem still holds in our models. Thus, this paper provides two efficient auction formats for carbon emission rights allocation.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.