An independent Peer review of the study “Ex-post Investigation of Cost Pass-Through in the EU ETS: an analysis of six sectors”

5 July 2016 - Special issues

This I4CE report provides a peer review of the study “Ex-post Investigation of Cost Pass-Though in the EU ETS: an analysis of six sectors” produced by CE-Delft and Oeko Institut and published by the EU Commission in November 2015.

In the discussion on the potential risk of carbon leakage related to the EU ETS and the effect of safeguard measures, the scope for passing through carbon costs in final product prices is deemed a key issue. This study of CE-Delft and Oeko Institut (2015) investigates whether and to what extent ETS-related carbon costs have indeed been passed through into product prices by EU industry across iron and steel, refineries, cement, organic basic chemicals, fertilizer, and glass.

The peer-review of the CE-Delft and Oeko Institut study is produced by I4CE on the basis of the three academic peer reviews mandated by I4CE.

The I4CE Peer review, focused on two only sectors: refineries and basic organic chemicals. concludes that the results of the study cannot be used as direct policy recommendations due to the following three main limitations.

The robustness of the econometric results is not clearly grounded: the claims of the study are only supported at a low confidence level (the chosen confidence interval was 10% while sound econometric practice would require at least 5%).
Moreover, detailed analysis shows that the hypothesis of a cost pass-through is significant (at 10%) only for some products and for some EU countries. The results are heterogeneous and not representative of a conclusion at the EU level for either sector.
The quantitative estimates on the cost pass-through rates are obtained through a simple accounting relationship between input costs and output prices. Economic practice would rather use an explicit price formation model allowing for such factors as trade intensity, market structure and concentration, heterogeneity of competitors, etc… Some of these factors are marginally analyzed in the study without providing clear conclusions. Indeed, without any in-depth statistical analysis, the study cannot establish a statistical significant relationship between market shares and cost pass-through rates. Other explanatory variables such as the role of EUA price volatility and the macroeconomic environment should also have been considered. Altogether the simple relationship used by the study cannot provide a valid estimate of the cost pass through.

An independent Peer review of the study “Ex-post Investigation of Cost Pass-Through in the EU ETS: an analysis of six sectors” Download

To learn more

06/13/2025 Foreword of the week
The unlocked potential of carbon revenues to help fill the climate finance gap

Climate negotiations are taking place next week in Bonn, with finance once again high on the agenda. COP 29 ended last year with a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) –revised climate finance target to replace the USD 100 billion goal. The NCQG decision put forward a commitment by developed countries to lead in providing USD 300 billion per year by 2035 for developing countries, as well as a proposal to work on a roadmap to scale up climate finance for developing countries to reach a level closer to the estimated needs –the ‘Baku to Belem Roadmap to 1.3T’ (USD 1.3 trillion). The latter must be delivered at the end of the year at COP 30, and strong efforts are being put in the task by the Brazilian Presidency.
06/11/2025
Global carbon accounts 2025

This 2025 edition of the Global Carbon Accounts presents a landscape of carbon pricing instruments through the lens of their current and potential contribution to scale up climate and development finance. Several jurisdictions are already using carbon revenues to support a range of policy objectives, including decarbonization efforts and support for economic actors most affected by the transition. Yet there is still potential for them to further contribute to fill the gap.
03/21/2025 Blog post
In the absence of a carbon tax in Canada, measures to fill the gap are essential

On his first day in office, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced the elimination of the consumer carbon tax, in response to political pressures rather than evidence-based concerns about its effectiveness or impact on affordability. The tax had played a crucial role in reducing the country’s GHG emissions, and along with other carbon pricing policies, was expected to contribute nearly half of Canada’s emissions reductions by 2030. Additionally, the majority of revenues collected were redistributed to citizens, protecting vulnerable households. Thus, without alternative policies to compensate, eliminating the tax could slow emissions reductions and increase inflationary pressure, particularly for low- and middle-income families who benefited financially from the Canada Carbon Rebate funded by the tax.

An independent Peer review of the study “Ex-post Investigation of Cost Pass-Through in the EU ETS: an analysis of six sectors”

The unlocked potential of carbon revenues to help fill the climate finance gap

Global carbon accounts 2025

In the absence of a carbon tax in Canada, measures to fill the gap are essential