TY - JOUR
T1 - Government Supervision and Control Mechanisms for the Carbon Market in China
T2 - A Principal-Agent Perspective
AU - Xu, Xin
AU - Deng, Jinsong
AU - Chen, Geoffrey C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of SOAS University of London.
PY - 2025/10
Y1 - 2025/10
N2 - Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 36 policymakers, experts and scholars, this paper employs a principal-agent framework to analyse China's carbon market governance. The findings reveal that institutional misalignment between central and local priorities undermines market efficacy. While mechanisms like the Target Responsibility System (TRS) and environmental inspections aim to enforce compliance, fragmented incentives and passive central supervision exacerbate policy incoherence. Owing to competing mandates, local governments prioritize short-term GDP growth over the development of the carbon market, thereby relegating emissions trading to a peripheral status. State-owned enterprises (SOEs) dominate market participation, fulfilling compliance through political alignment but distorting price signals and marginalizing private actors. China's hybrid governance model, which combines top-down controls with decentralized experimentation, generates systemic contradictions where weak enforcement, ritualistic compliance and data opacity persist as the dominance of SOEs colludes with local developmentalism to weaken carbon pricing. Overall, carbon market governance mechanisms have paradoxically incentivized regulated entities to prioritize developmental goals over improving carbon market infrastructure.
AB - Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 36 policymakers, experts and scholars, this paper employs a principal-agent framework to analyse China's carbon market governance. The findings reveal that institutional misalignment between central and local priorities undermines market efficacy. While mechanisms like the Target Responsibility System (TRS) and environmental inspections aim to enforce compliance, fragmented incentives and passive central supervision exacerbate policy incoherence. Owing to competing mandates, local governments prioritize short-term GDP growth over the development of the carbon market, thereby relegating emissions trading to a peripheral status. State-owned enterprises (SOEs) dominate market participation, fulfilling compliance through political alignment but distorting price signals and marginalizing private actors. China's hybrid governance model, which combines top-down controls with decentralized experimentation, generates systemic contradictions where weak enforcement, ritualistic compliance and data opacity persist as the dominance of SOEs colludes with local developmentalism to weaken carbon pricing. Overall, carbon market governance mechanisms have paradoxically incentivized regulated entities to prioritize developmental goals over improving carbon market infrastructure.
KW - Emission trading scheme
KW - Environmental governance
KW - Institution
KW - Policies
KW - central-local relations
KW - environmental governance
KW - state control
KW - principal-agent relationship
KW - carbon market
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105019224151
U2 - 10.1017/S0305741025101367
DO - 10.1017/S0305741025101367
M3 - Article
SN - 1468-2648
JO - The China Quarterly
JF - The China Quarterly
ER -