Under departures from the cost-of-carry theory, traded spot prices and conditional volatility disturbed from futures market have significant impacts on futures price of emissions allowances, and then we propose time-varying hedge ratios and hedging effectiveness estimation using ECM-GARCH model. Our empirical results show that conditional variance, conditional covariance, and their correlation between between spot and futures prices exhibit time-varying trends. Conditional volatility of spot prices, conditional volatility disturbed from futures market, and conditional correlation of market noises implied from spot and futures markets have significant effects on time-varying hedge ratios and hedging effectiveness. In the immature emissions allowances market, market participants optimize portfolio sizes between spot and futures assets using historical market information and then achieve higher risk reduction of assets portfolio revenues; accordingly, we can obtain better hedging effectiveness through time-varying hedge ratios with departures from the cost-of-carry theory. 1. Introduction Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission is an ever-increasingly hot topic in the 21st century for alarming phenomena of global warming and extreme climate deterioration. Most of the scientists and politicians believe that emissions trading scheme is a cost-effective market scheme in order to control GHG emissions. Since the launch of the European Union emissions trading scheme (EU ETS) in 2005, CO2 emissions allowances have become valuable commodities which can be traded in CO2 emissions allowances markets. Spot, futures, options, and other financial products of emissions allowances are important financial tools for market participants to increase assets portfolio revenues and achieve higher risk reduction. In recent years emissions allowances markets have become the most promising and are quickly growing markets in global commodities markets. Spot and futures prices of emissions allowances depend on expected market scarcity induced by demand and supply quantity in the emissions allowances market. An early study of emissions allowances by Benz and Truck [1, 2] found that a good many complex factors such as GHS emissions reduction plan and regulation policy, low-technology promotion and application, energy prices volatility, and energy efficiency and extreme temperature changes have significant impacts on market scarcity. Seifert et al. [3], Daskalakis et al. [4], and Conrad et al. [5] asserted that spot and futures prices of emissions allowances have higher time-varying trends,
References
[1]
E. Benz and S. Truck, “CO2 emission allowances trading in Europe—specifying a new class of assets,” Problems and Perspectives in Management, vol. 4, pp. 30–40, 2006.
[2]
E. Benz and S. Truck, “Modeling the price dynamics of CO2 emission allowances,” Energy Economics, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 4–15, 2009.
[3]
J. Seifert, M. Uhrig-Homburg, and M. Wagner, “Dynamic behavior of CO2 spot prices,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 180–194, 2008.
[4]
G. Daskalakis, D. Psychoyios, and R. N. Markellos, “Modeling CO2 emission allowance prices and derivatives: evidence from the European trading scheme,” Journal of Banking and Finance, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 1230–1241, 2009.
[5]
C. Conrad, D. Rittler, and W. Rotfu?, “Modeling and explaining the dynamics of European Union Allowance prices at high-frequency,” Energy Economics, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 316–326, 2012.
[6]
A. Montagnoli and F. P. de Vries, “Carbon trading thickness and market efficiency,” Energy Economics, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1331–1336, 2010.
[7]
Y.-J. Zhang and Y.-M. Wei, “Interpreting the mean reversion of international carbon futures price: empirical evidence from the EU ETS,” System Engineering Theory and Practice, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 214–220, 2011.
[8]
M. E. H. Arouri, F. Jawadi, and D. K. Nguyen, “Nonlinearities in carbon spot-futures price relationships during Phase II of the EU ETS,” Economic Modelling, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 884–892, 2012.
[9]
K. Chang, S. Wang, and H. Chang, “Convenience yields and options value on futures spread for carbon emission,” in Proceedings of the IEEE 2nd International Conference on Computing, Control and Industrial Engineering (CCIE '11), pp. 182–185, August 2011.
[10]
H. Working, “The theory of the price of storage,” American Economic Review, vol. 39, pp. 1254–1262, 1949.
[11]
M. Brennan, “The supply of storage,” American Economic Review, vol. 48, pp. 50–72, 1958.
[12]
W. Wilson, “Price discovery and hedging in the sunflower market,” The Journal of Futures Markets, vol. 9, pp. 377–391, 1989.
[13]
D. Lien and Y. K. Tse, “Fractional cointegration and futures hedging,” Journal of Futures Markets, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 457–474, 1999.
[14]
J. A. Lafuente and A. Novales, “Optimal hedging under departures from the cost-of-carry valuation: evidence from the Spanish stock index futures market,” Journal of Banking and Finance, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1053–1078, 2003.
[15]
L. L. Johnson, “The theory of hedging and speculation in commodity futures,” Review of Financial Studies, vol. 27, pp. 139–151, 1960.
[16]
D. Lien, Y. K. Tse, and A. K. C. Tsui, “Evaluating the hedging performance of the constant-correlation GARCH model,” Applied Financial Economics, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 791–798, 2002.
[17]
D. Lien and L. Yang, “Asymmetric effect of basis on dynamic futures hedging: empirical evidence from commodity markets,” Journal of Banking and Finance, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 187–198, 2008.
[18]
H. F. Peng and Y. G. Ye, “The evaluation and comparison research of dynamic optimal hedging ratios based on modified ECM-GARCH,” Chinese Journal of Management Science, vol. 15, pp. 29–35, 2007.
[19]
L. H. Ederington, “The hedging performance of the new futures markets,” Journal of Finance, vol. 34, pp. 157–170, 1960.
[20]
A. Andani, J. A. Lafuente, and A. Novales, “Liquidity and hedging effectiveness under futures mispricing: International evidence,” Journal of Futures Markets, vol. 29, no. 11, pp. 1050–1066, 2009.