INTRODUCTION

Carbon emissions have been identified as one of the leading factors contributing
to global climate problems, such as extreme weather events like high
temperatures, droughts, and floods. Industrialization is a major contributor to
carbon emissions, and thus it is necessary to implement measures to control its
harmful effects. The Kyoto Protocol (KP) was adopted on 11th December 1997 in
Kyoto, Japan, and came into force on 16th February 2005. As a protocol to the
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the KP aims
to control global warming by restricting and controlling emissions of greenhouse
gases (GHGs) such as carbon dioxide, hydro-fluorocarbons, methane gas, and
sulphur-hexafluoride by setting emission reduction targets for member countries.

Another approach to tackling this issue is through carbon trading. Carbon

trading is a process that involves buying and selling permits and credits that allow
the holder to emit carbon dioxide. The European Union Emissions Trading System
(EU ETS) is currently the world's largest carbon trading system, but it has been
plagued by problems and corruption. Nevertheless, countries such as Brazil and
China continue to pursue carbon trading as a way to address rising emissions. The
'cap and trade' model is used in all current carbon trading schemes, where a
government or intergovernmental body sets an overall legal limit on emissions
(the cap) over a specific period of time and grants a fixed number of permits to
those releasing the emissions. Each permit is considered equivalent to one tonne
of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). In theory, permits are sold, usually by
auction, so that polluters are forced to put a price on their emissions from the
outset and are incentivized to reduce their emissions to the minimum.

However, every current and planned carbon 'cap and trade' scheme involves
offset credits in one form or another, which are a supplementary source of
permissions to pollute that can be bought from outside the cap, typically from
developing countries or industries. This allows emitters to exceed the emissions
cap by paying someone else to reduce their emissions instead. It is important to
note that offsets do not reduce emissions, but merely replace them. Carbon
offsetting has even filtered into the realm of private individuals, such as when
booking a flight and paying extra to offset one's carbon footprint.

Despite the implementation of carbon trading, carbon dioxide emissions in

industrialized countries are not declining at the necessary rate to avert
catastrophic climate change. Many scientists, economists, and NGOs believe that
carbon trading is a dangerous distraction from the need to end fossil fuel use and
move towards a low-carbon future. They argue that there is no time to wait for a
high price on carbon and shift to a low-carbon energy, agriculture, transport, and
industrial world. Direct regulation is seen as the most effective way to achieve
this.

Given the uncertainty surrounding carbon trading among scholars, we have

decided to undertake a study on the topic of carbon trading and analyze its
impact on carbon emissions, carbon emission efficiency, and ultimately global
climate change.

LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review provides an assessment of carbon trading based on an
evolutionary perspective. It examines the historical development of carbon
trading, the current state of the carbon market, and the potential future of
carbon trading.

The relationship between carbon emissions trading and environmental protection

has been a topic of interest for researchers, and many countries have established
their own carbon trading markets since the Kyoto Protocol came into force.
Carbon trading schemes have been analyzed in different countries, including the
European Union, the United States, China, and South Korea, and researchers have
found that developing countries, particularly China, face more pressure on carbon
emission reduction. For instance, Yizhang He and Wei Song used a panel data
model to analyze the relationship between carbon trading policies and carbon
emissions in the Chinese power sector.India, as a developing nation, has also
taken carbon emissions seriously and joined the race for constructing an apt
carbon trading market. Ashim Paul has provided an overview of carbon credits
and carbon trading in India, examining the regulatory framework for carbon
trading in India, the role of the private sector in carbon trading, and the
challenges faced by the Indian carbon market. Overall, researchers have shown a
growing interest in the impact and effectiveness of carbon trading in promoting
environmental protection and reducing carbon emissions in different countries.

In this literature review, the most information was available on carbon trading
markets in india and china with a tad information on global carbon trading
market.

Foundation of carbon markets

There are two competing theories regarding economic development and
environmental regulation. The traditional theory posits that environmental
regulation can hinder economic growth, whereas Porter's hypothesis suggests
that strict environmental regulation can actually improve enterprise efficiency
and spur technological innovation.

The creation of the carbon market was driven by two main approaches: the cap
and trade mechanism, which involves setting a limit on greenhouse gas emissions
within a specified time period, and the carbon tax mechanism, which aims to
reduce excessive emissions worldwide.

Growth of carbon markets

It is now a global priority to address the issue of carbon emissions. Currently, 175
countries have committed to reducing carbon emissions. Carbon trading has seen
impressive growth in recent years. China has pledged to reduce carbon emissions
through carbon trading, and estimates suggest that carbon consumption per unit
GDP will decrease from 3.4% to 2.32%. This will result in a 0.09 billion tCO2e
reduction compared to 2016 levels. The European Union has also announced its
intention to continue collaborating with China on emission trading. In 2017, the
Canadian government partnered with China to establish a carbon market.
Similarly, Japan and Korea have introduced their carbon markets in compliance
with the Kyoto Protocol.
Challenges for the growth of carbon markets
Major challenges faced by carbon markets are:

a) Inadequate implementation of emissions trading system (ETS) - This

happened because the carbon market is still very young and most
countries are still in the first phase of implementation. It is becoming
very difficult for small developing countries to implement carbon
markets.
b) Limited private financing - Lending in this sector is constrained by
severe capital adequacy requirements and maturity mismatches. Public
funds are currently the major source of climate finance in Asia, with
state-owned banks offering an estimated $294 billion in 2011 and
government climate spending at $41 billion. In contrast, private
investment is the major source of finance for climate mitigation
globally. The current system in Asia is not able to divert private
investments into the carbon markets, highlighting a need for more
effective mechanisms to encourage private sector investment in climate
finance.
c) Lack of regulatory system - The international standards in carbon-
trading management systems require an integrated institutional setup
to regulate carbon trading. The EU's carbon-trading management
system has a two-level organization with central management and
environmental protection departments from member governments.
Work division and the distinction between rights and obligations are
specified, and coordination and cooperation are ensured for high
efficiency in operation and management. Due to the lack of a system,
many countries find it difficult to implement a carbon market.
d) Corruption, access to information, and local capacity - Asian countries
face challenges in attracting foreign investment due to corruption,
bureaucracy, poor law enforcement, and inadequate infrastructure.
These challenges also impact the ease of doing business and executing
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects. The lack of accessible
information about CDM potentials further hampers the viability of the
carbon market in these countries. As a result, investors and developers
are deterred from investing in the market. The limited awareness of
 CDM potentials among enterprises, the private sector, public entities,
and NGOs further exacerbates the situation.
The researches shows that the implementation of carbon trading is still in the
experimental stage because of low participation, government supervision, and
lack of research.

Carbon Trading Market In China

In 2012 China was consuming nearly as much coal as the rest of the world, so
China took the responsibility of reducing CO2 emissions. To address this issue,
China has implemented various policies, including the carbon trading policy,
which has been proven effective in reducing carbon emissions. Learning from the
European Union, China has launched its own pilot carbon trading market. In the
last few years, the carbon emission market has emerged to become a prominent
system for mitigating climate change across the globe. This recent trend has
focused the attention of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)
countries on this modern and global idea of mitigating climate change. A huge
drop in production and emission has caused an obstacle to the country’s
economic growth.

With the development of the carbon trading market in China, the implementation
of carbon trading had a key impact on the production and operation decisions of
Chinese enterprises. Evidence shows that the implementation of carbon emission
trading has improved the level of non-business income of enterprises
incorporated into the trading system. However, its impact on the investment
income of enterprises was not significant.Currently,carbon emission trading in
China has a certain financial promotion effect on enterprises, but it has not
reached the ideal state of the Porter hypothesis.

However, we believe that with the further development of carbon market in

China, enterprises will be able to obtain the corresponding benefits through the
carbon emission control in the future.

The study (by Weng Z, Cheng C, Xie Y, Ma H) investigated the

environmental effects of China’s carbon trading pilots on
PM2.5 concentrations. They constructed a quasi-natural experiment based
on the adoption status of the carbon trading policy. Their estimations
indicated that the carbon trading policy effectively reduced
PM2.5 concentrations by 2.7 μg/m3 after controlling for a series of years
and city-fixed effects. The parallel trend test, placebo check, PSM-DID
estimate, and other robustness tests support their findings.

This finding provides an insightful policy value for China and other
countries. By analyzing their research,it can be said that carbon trading
policy has proven efficient in reducing carbon emissions and air
pollution.

Carbon Trading In India

India has updated its NDC goals recently to reflect reducing emissions by 45%,
generating 50% of power from renewable energy sources and reaching net zero
emissions by 2070. To help India achieve its Nationally Determined Contribution
(NDC) goals, the Indian government is trying to create a market for carbon credits.

India's policy framework for carbon credit and trading is mainly based on the
National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC), which was launched in 2008.
The plan includes several programs and policies aimed at reducing greenhouse
gas emissions, such as the National Solar Mission and the National Mission for
Enhanced Energy Efficiency. In addition, the government has also launched the
Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) program to encourage companies to
invest in low-carbon projects and earn carbon credits.

According to a report on National Action Plan for operating CDM by the Planning
Commission of India, India's total CO2-equivalent emissions in 1990 were
10,01,352 Giga grams, which was nearly 3% of total global emissions at that time.
In order to take advantage of the carbon trading system India needs to work on
reducing its carbon emissions so as to save more carbon credits in order to
indulge in the carbon trading business more effectively. Many national and
international companies have already started investing into this business regime.
As for example, SRF Ltd, Shell Trading International, Suzlon Energy and Shriram
EPC, Shree Renuka Sugars etc. are all expected to derive benefits from saving
carbon credits. Many Indian companies have started to earn higher income from
carbon trading than through their own business. This has led to companies
looking for eco-friendly projects to earn carbon credits.

Following the report entitled “Future of CDM Projects” by Amulya Charan, chief
mentor of TATA Power reveals that till 2012, the total number of Indian CDM
projects registered with UNFCCC is 942 and out of which 141 projects have got
registered in the year 2012 and the number of CDM projects got registered during
2011, 2010, 2009, 2008 were 189, 138, 92, 84 respectively. The carbon credit
market in India has seen significant growth in recent years, with the number of
registered CDM projects reaching over 1,500. The majority of these projects are in
the energy and waste sectors, with the highest number of projects located in
Maharashtra, Gujarat, and Tamil Nadu. A recent report by the World Bank
conveys that India can be one of the biggest beneficiaries of carbon trading as it
controls almost 20-25 percent of the world carbon trade. India is also a major
buyer of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) from other countries, with several
Indian companies investing in CERs from wind and solar projects in other
countries. India's average annual CERs are presently expected to be
approximately 12.6% of the global CERs. It is expected that India's gross earnings
from carbon trading will be around Rs 22,500 crore to Rs 45,000 crore in the
coming 3-5 years.

As a developing country, India has a shining future in carbon trading. Corporate

participation has also seen to be increasing with carbon trading in India with
companies like TATA, Reliance, Ambuja, Birla, Bajaj and others taking part in
generating returns through Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

In conclusion, carbon credit and trading systems are becoming increasingly

important in India's efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The recent rise in
carbon credits and its trading activities is an indication of how this industry is
going to be highly successful in developing countries like India, China, etc. Carbon
trading has started to occupy its place in the financial market as one of the fastest
growing sectors. While there are still several challenges that need to be
addressed, there are also several opportunities for further growth in this area. As
a developing country, India has a high potential for GHG reduction and in carbon
trading. With the right policies and regulatory framework, India can continue to
play a leading role in the global fight against climate change.

Conclusion
Our thorough analysis of popular research papers on carbon trading reveals that
the formation of a carbon trading market has a noticeable impact on both carbon
emissions and a country's economic development.

The study draws on primary and secondary data sources, including interviews
with industry experts and government officials, as well as country-level and firm-
level data to support their analysis and conclusions. The researchers used
rigorous statistical methods and robust econometric models to estimate the
impact of carbon trading policies on emissions and efficiency, addressing potential
endogeneity issues.

But the study focuses largely on the supply side of the carbon market, without
considering the demand side and the factors that influence firms' decisions to
participate in the market.And it also does not provide a detailed discussion of the
political and institutional factors that may influence the effectiveness of carbon
trading policies.

In addition,most investigations have been conducted in populous Asian countries

such as China and India, little research has been done on the impact of carbon
trading in other countries. Furthermore, there are limited estimates on how long
it would take for us to reach net zero carbon emissions if carbon trading markets,
with a defined regulatory framework and market infrastructure, are adopted
globally.
Specifically, we will be focusing on filling in these gaps that currently exist in the
study of carbon trading.

DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS

Carbon emissions of countries that does not have a carbon trading system in
place
YEAR Russia Australia South Africa
1990 1789010041 313990001.2 253949999.8
1991 1761910011 315119999.6 248609996.5
1992 1656359991 318749995.2 245109991.3
1993 1505799952 323410000.8 252780001.7
1994 1310590023 330539996.8 258410004.1
1995 1260970007 340579997.3 270579999.5
1996 1226629985 351219997.7 280399993.3
1997 1114960022 358260001.2 295319995.1
1998 1113420013 379030004.6 302799994.7
1999 1149429987 384129991.4 284740000.7
2000 1189639976 389859996.7 290969992
2001 798490031. 375030001.3 326900004.6
2
2002 796650003. 382749992.5 337680004.6
3
2003 841240001. 381980009.8 359479998.2
8
2004 832209974. 395189999.4 386389990.6
3
2005 843170042. 399479998.7 384030004.8
1
2006 885949992. 404870005.5 386179998.4
3
2007 889170040. 415119998.3 403469996.8
2
2008 886150051. 418320006.4 433130012.7
3
2009 777559999. 424669994.6 410590011.3
4
2010 848800025. 416909994.9 431689998.8
1
2011 1011430006 356939999.7 415549988.9
2012 988270007. 357539993.8 433079994.2
 9
2013 945190014. 350839999.3 443209986.5
7
2014 924439970 342199998.9 454220001.3
2015 905049963 348360001.1 431100001.2
2016 1012489976 387189989.1 431689992
2017 1035589976 391360004.9 442199988.2
2018 1102509988 389260005.3 440910002.2
2019 1145079978 388730006.7 446200008.9
2000000000

1800000000

1600000000

1400000000
CARBON EMISSIONS

1200000000
(TONNES)

1000000000

800000000

600000000

400000000

200000000

0
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025

YEAR

Russia Australia South Africa

The above graph is of the countries which does not have a carbon trading system
in place.As we can see from the above graph;carbon emissions of the countries
Russia,Australia and South Africa are on the ever rise.It shows that these
countries are in dire need of a functional and effective carbon trading system in
place.

Carbon emissions of countries that does have a carbon trading system in place
YEAR USA Italy Germany
1990 4425929996 370750008.6 904370003.7
1991 4388909962 369540003.8 881609979.7
1992 4461040021 367750005.8 841880001.4
1993 4576619955 362399995.9 836129980.1
1994 4648099936 357769997.6 824950003.9
1995 4698449915 381899990.1 823719980.3
1996 4854829997 377639999.5 853379987.4
1997 5124650003 380990002.7 821670008.6
1998 5171889870 391850001.4 814229994.4
1999 5190389913 398490004.4 782579994.2
2000 5357279861 401769994.7 779170012.3
2001 5346810090 401860004.5 829579986.9
2002 5191539997 408769993.8 815199992.4
2003 5257509953 427490000.8 818539986.4
2004 5336720137 437700011.2 802750011.2
2005 5351869906 439119998 784059993.7
2006 5251390026 431950000.7 796090010.7
2007 5334569992 424660008.5 765470017.4
2008 5156530089 410729996.2 771360002.9
2009 4754530156 362339990.6 716470006
2010 4990200050 370560008.5 754729985.7
2011 4754619901 362019996.1 717270020.5
2012 4537010007 342080001.8 730919999.2
2013 4672939991 312170006 746939991
2014 4687989929 292819999.3 706770008.1
2015 4571450041 303190001.9 713080004.3
2016 4662699967 320520004.5 717670005.4
2017 4587560029 316370002.7 702720002.7
2018 4743580006 312070000.1 678229985.7
2019 4585990014 304409998.9 627919976.8
 6000000000

5000000000
CARBON EMISSIONS

4000000000
(TONNES)

3000000000

2000000000

1000000000

0
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
YEAR

USA Italy Germany

The above graph is of the countries which have a carbon trading system in place.

Carbon Trading system was adopted in 2009 in USA. And Italy and Germany
adopted carbon trading system in January ,2005 as part of the the European
Union Emissions Trading System(EUETS).

The graph shows change in the carbon emission of USA from 2009.Carbon
emissions have started decreasing since 2009.

Same is with Italy and Germany,their carbon emissions were on the rise till 2005
but since the adopted the policies of EUETS;their carbon emissions have been
controlled and dropped consistently.

REPORT

The European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is a cap and trade
scheme that limits the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted by
participating installations. Companies can buy or sell emission allowances, and
installations must monitor and report their CO2 emissions. If an installation
exceeds its allowances, it must purchase additional ones, while installations that
reduce their emissions can sell their leftover credits. The scheme has been divided
into trading periods, with the current phase running from 2021 to 2030. EU
countries consider the EU ETS crucial in achieving their climate goals and guiding
investors and industry toward fossil fuel transition. The scheme has been
successful in reducing carbon emissions without impacting profits or employment
for regulated firms. EU countries view the emissions trading scheme as necessary
for meeting climate goals. A strong carbon market guides investors and industry
in their transition from fossil fuels. A 2023 study on the effects of the EU ETS
identified a reduction in carbon emissions in the order of -10% between 2005 and
2012 with no impacts on profits or employment for regulated firms. The price of
EU allowances exceeded 100€/tCO2 ($118) in February 2023.

The first phase of the EU ETS was established independently of international

climate change treaties like the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol, but later
incorporated Kyoto flexible mechanism certificates as compliance tools. These
mechanisms include Joint Implementation projects, Clean Development
Mechanisms, and International Emissions Trading. Under the EU ETS, national
emission caps are agreed upon and allowances are allocated to industrial
operators. Operators can trade or reassign their allowances privately, over the
counter, or on climate exchanges. Each change of ownership is validated by the
National Emissions Trading Registry, European Commission, and UNFCCC during
Phase II. The EU’s decision to accept Kyoto-CERs as equivalent to EU-EUAs allows
for trading between the two on a one-to-one basis. During Phase II, operators
must surrender their allowances for inspection by the EU before they can be
retired by the UNFCCC.

Phase 1

In the first phase (2005–2007), the EU ETS included some 12,000 installations,
representing approximately 40% of EU CO2 emissions, covering energy activities
(combustion installations with a rated thermal input exceeding 20 MW, mineral
oil refineries, coke ovens), production and processing of ferrous metals, mineral
industry (cement clinker, glass, and ceramic bricks) and pulp, paper and board
activities. The change in Germany’s emissions has been 2.5% from the year 2005
to 2007. The change in Italy’s carbon emissions has been 0.2% from the year 2005
to 2007.

Phase 2

The second phase (2008–12) expanded the scope of the scheme significantly. In
2007, three non-EU members, Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein joined the
scheme.[56] The EU's "Linking Directive" introduced the CDM and JI credits.
Although this was a theoretical possibility in phase I, the over-allocation of
permits combined with the inability to bank them for use in the second phase
meant it was not taken up.

Phase 3

During Phase III (2013-2020) of the EU ETS, the European Commission made
several changes to the system, including implementing an overall EU cap with
allocated allowances for member countries, tighter restrictions on the use of
offsets, limiting the banking of allowances between phases, transitioning from
allowances to auctioning, and expanding the number of sectors and gases
included. The NER 300 program was also established to fund the deployment of
low-carbon energy demonstration projects. Croatia joined the ETS at the start of
Phase III, bringing the total number of countries to 31. In January 2013, EU
allowances for the year traded on the ICE Futures Europe exchange for 6.22-6.40
euros. 1.7 billion excess allowances were carried over from Phase II to Phase III.

Phase 4

Phase IV commenced on 1 January 2021 and will finish on 31 December 2030.[88]

The European Commission plans a full review of the Directive by 2026. Since
2018, prices have continuously increased, reaching €57/tCO2 (67 $) in July 2021.
[89] This results in additional costs of about €0.04/kWh for coal and €0.02/kWh
for gas combustion for electricity.

But more remarkably, the EU carbon price has reached another record as it went
up over 100 euros for the first time in February 2023,[90] which is a significant
increase from just a few years ago when it was around only 10 euros per ton of
carbon.

CARBON TRADING IN US
CO2 emissions from US accounts for 13.5 % of total co2 emissions of the world.
The largest source of greenhouse gas emissions from human activities in
the United States is from burning fossil fuels for electricity, heat, and
transportation. Among the various sectors of the U.S. economy,
electricity generation (power plants) accounts for the
largest share of historical emissions—31 percent of total
greenhouse gas emissions since 1990. Transportation has
historically been the second-largest sector, accounting for
26 percent of emissions since 1990. Transportation has
been the largest sector since 2017.

Under greenhousegas initiative, several states in US adopted a pact

beginning in 2009 to cap CO2 emission from power plants at current levels,
with a goal of achieving a 10% reduction in next 15 years.

After the development of carbon market in 2009, there has been a

significant decrease in C02 emissions by various sectors. It exports carbon
credits worth $325 million making the US the 4th largest exporter of carbon.
CO2 emissions have declined by 12% since 2009

The US carbon offset market, which was worth about $2 billion in 2021, will grow
to $10-40 billion in value by 2030, transacting 0.5-1.5 billion tonnes of carbon
dioxide equivalent, compared with 500 million tonnes currently. Reaching 100%
carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035. Achieving a net-zero emissions
economy by 2050.
NET ZERO CARBON EMISSIONS
There are many factors that could influence the speed at which the world
would reach net zero carbon emissions with the adoption of carbon trading
markets.

One of the key factors would be the scope and scale of the carbon trading
markets that are established. If these markets were truly global in scope
and covered all major sources of carbon emissions, they could potentially
have a significant impact on reducing emissions.

Another important factor would be the regulatory framework that is put in

place to govern the carbon trading markets. This framework would need to
be designed to incentivize companies and countries to reduce their
emissions, while also ensuring that the markets themselves are
transparent, efficient, and not subject to fraud or abuse.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has released a special report titled
"Net Zero by 2050: a Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector," which
highlights that the world has a narrow but viable pathway to achieving a
net-zero carbon emissions energy system by 2050. However, this
transformation requires an unprecedented change in the way energy is
produced, transported, and used. According to the report, existing climate
pledges by governments, even if they are fully achieved, will fall short of the
required level to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The report outlines
more than 400 milestones to guide the global transition to net-zero by
2050, including no investment in new fossil fuel supply projects and no
further final investment decisions for new unabated coal plants.
Furthermore, there should be no sales of new internal combustion engine
passenger cars by 2035, and by 2040, the global electricity sector should
have already reached net-zero emissions. The report also highlights the
need for immediate and massive deployment of all available clean and
efficient energy technologies to achieve the net-zero pathway, as well as
the importance of increasing and reprioritizing government spending on
research and development to achieve these targets.

Assuming that these markets were well-designed and widely adopted, it is

possible that they could help to accelerate the transition to net zero carbon
emissions. However, it is difficult to predict exactly how long this process
would take, as it would depend on a wide range of factors, including the
political will of governments, the pace of technological innovation, and the
level of public awareness and engagement on climate change issues.

REFERENCES
1. https://ourworldindata.org/emissions-by-sector - sector wise CO2
emissions of the countries

2. https://oec.world/en/profile/hs/carbon - carbon market of US

3. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/sustainability/our-insights/a-
blueprint-for-scaling-voluntary-carbon-markets-to-meet-the-climate-
challenge - what is carbon trading and how carbon credits are issued
4. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJCCSM-11-2019-
0066/full/html
5. https://nbs.ntu.edu.sg
6. songwei@bigc.edu.cn
7. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20211018-climate-change-what-is-
the-global-carbon-market
8. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2109912118
9. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0253460
10.https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12667-021-00438-8
11.file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/sustainability-14-10216%20(1).pdf
12.file:///C:/Users/hp/Downloads/adbi-wp987%20(1).pdf
13.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emissions_Trading_System