The Driving Relationship of China Carbon Price Based on Different Market Volatility States

Main Article Content

Li Ni
Venus Khim-Sen Liew

Abstract

The China carbon market is a market-oriented designation for addressing climate issues. Price mechanism is the core of carbon market, studying on the price formation can promote the emission reduction targets. This paper conducts an autoregressive adjusted Markov model to divide the carbon price state, and designs a multiple regression model to test the driving mechanism. The results show the 2 order autoregressive Markov model of MS (2) - AR (2) model can classify the carbon price into high and low volatility states. Furthermore, in high volatility state, carbon price is only significantly positively correlated with macroeconomic factors of China Securities Index 300 (CSI300) and European carbon price of European emission allowance future contract (EUAF), while in low volatility state, carbon price is significantly positively influenced by energy market products JM future (JMF) and Oil, macroeconomic factor of CSI300, and European carbon price of EUAF. Furthermore, the impact strength is weaker than the whole sample regression results. The results provide reference for investors to judge carbon price and reveal price trends.

Article Details

How to Cite
The Driving Relationship of China Carbon Price Based on Different Market Volatility States. (2024). Asian Academy of Management Journal of Accounting and Finance, 20(2), 211-227. https://doi.org/10.21315/aamjaf2024.20.2.7
Section
Articles

References

Anke, C. P., Hobbie, H., Schreiber, S., & Möst, D. (2020). Coal phase-outs and carbon prices: Interactions between EU emission trading and national carbon mitigation policies. Energy Policy, 144, 111647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111647

Boersen, A., & Scholtens, B. (2014). The relationship between European electricity markets and emission allowance futures prices in phase II of the EU (European Union) emission trading scheme. Energy, 74, 585–594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2014.07.024

Byun, S. J., & Cho, H. (2013). Forecasting carbon futures volatility using GARCH models with energy volatilities. Energy Economics, 40, 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2013.06.017

Chevallier, J., & Sévi, B. (2011). On the realized volatility of the ECX CO 2 emissions 2008 futures contract: Distribution, dynamics and forecasting. Annals of Finance, 7, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10436-009-0142-x

Christiansen, A. C., Arvanitakis, A., Tangen, K., & Hasselknippe, H. (2005). Price determinants in the EU emissions trading scheme. Climate Policy, 5(1), 15–30. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2005.0505

Convery, F. J., & Redmond, L. (2007). Market and price developments in the European Union Emissions trading scheme. Review of Environmental Economics & Policy, 1(1), 88–111. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/rem010

Gao, Q., Zeng, H., Sun, G., & Li, J. (2023). Extreme risk spillover from uncertainty to carbon markets in China and the EU: A time varying copula approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 326, 116634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116634

Hamilton, J. D. (1989). A new approach to the economic analysis of nonstationary time series and the business cycle. Econometrica, 57(2), 357–384. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912559

Hammoudeh, S., Nguyen, D. K., & Sousa, R. M. (2014). What explain the short-term dynamics of the prices of CO2 emissions? Energy Economics, 46, 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2014.07.020

Jang, M., Yoon, S., Jung, S., & Min, B. (2024). Simulating and assessing carbon markets: Application to the Korean and the EU ETSs. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 195, 114346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2024.114346

Jie, D., Xu, X., & Guo, F. (2021). The future of coal supply in China based on non-fossil energy development and carbon price strategies. Energy, 220, 119644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.119644

Lilliestam, J., Patt, A., & Bersalli, G. (2021). The effect of carbon pricing on technological change for full energy decarbonization: A review of empirical ex-post evidence. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 12(1), e681. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.681

Lin, B., & Jia, Z. (2019). Impacts of carbon price level in carbon emission trading market. Applied Energy, 239, 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.194

Liu, Y. L., Zhang, J. J., & Fang, Y. (2023). The driving factors of China’s carbon prices: Evidence from using ICEEMDAN-HC method and quantile regression. Finance Research Letters, 54, 103756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2023.103756

Lutz, B. J., Pigorsch, U., & Rotfuß, W. (2013). Nonlinearity in cap-and-trade systems: The EUA price and its fundamentals. Energy Economics, 40, 222–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2013.05.022

Lyu, J., Cao, M., Wu, K., & Li, H. (2020). Price volatility in the carbon market in China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 255, 120171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120171

Maneejuk, P., Kaewtathip, N., & Yamaka, W. (2024). The influence of the Ukraine-Russia conflict on renewable and fossil energy price cycles. Energy Economics, 129, 107218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2023.107218

Oberndorfer, U. (2009). EU emission allowances and the stock market: Evidence from the electricity industry. Ecological Economics, 68(4), 1116–1126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.07.026

Ren, X., Dou, Y., Dong, K., & Yan, C. (2023). Spillover effects among crude oil, carbon, and stock markets: Evidence from nonparametric causality-in-quantiles tests. Applied Economics, 55(38), 4486–4509. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2022.2128297

Tsai, I. C. (2024). Fossil energy risk exposure of the UK electricity system: The moderating role of electricity generation mix and energy source. Energy Policy, 188, 114065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2024.114065

Wang, J., Dai, P. F., Chen, X. H., & Nguyen, D. K. (2024). Examining the linkage between economic policy uncertainty, coal price, and carbon pricing in China: Evidence from pilot carbon markets. Journal of Environmental Management, 352, 120003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.120003

Wang, T., Zhang, X., Ma, Y., & Wang, Y. (2023). Risk contagion and decision-making evolution of carbon market enterprises: Comparisons with China, the United States, and the European Union. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 99, 107036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2023.107036

Wen, F., Zhao, L., He, S., & Yang, G. (2020). Asymmetric relationship between carbon emission trading market and stock market: evidences from China. Energy Economics, 91, 104850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104850

Wen, F., Zhao, H., Zhao, L., & Yin, H. (2022). What drive carbon price dynamics in China? International Review of Financial Analysis, 79, 101999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2021.101999

Yang, C., Zhang, H., & Weng, F. (2024). Effects of COVID-19 vaccination programs on EU carbon price forecasts: Evidence from explainable machine learning. International Review of Financial Analysis, 91, 102953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2023.102953

Yun, P., Huang, X., Wu, Y., & Yang, X. (2023). Forecasting carbon dioxide emission price using a novel mode decomposition machine learning hybrid model of CEEMDAN‐LSTM. Energy Science & Engineering, 11(1), 79–96. https://doi.org/10.1002/ese3.1304

Zhang, C., Yun, P., & Wagan, Z. A. (2019). Study on the wandering weekday effect of the international carbon market based on trend moderation effect. Finance Research Letters, 28, 319–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2018.05.014

Zhao, Z., Lau, C. K. M., Soliman, A., & Farhani, S. (2023). Energy commodity and stock market interconnectedness: Evidence from carbon emission trading system. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 194, 122669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122669