Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 142-162

  Fischer, Carolyn ^a   Newell, Richard G ^a,b  

^a RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Climate change; Externality; Learning; Policy; R D; Renewable energy; Spillover; Technology

Indexed keywords

CARBON DIOXIDE; CLIMATE CHANGE; DATA REDUCTION; GAS EMISSIONS; NUMERICAL METHODS; RENEWABLE ENERGY RESOURCES; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

EMISSIONS REDUCTION; KNOWLEDGE SPILLOVERS; PARAMETER VALUES; TECHNOLOGY POLICIES;

AIR POLLUTION;

CARBON DIOXIDE; CLIMATE CHANGE; ELECTRICITY INDUSTRY; EMISSION CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL TAX; INNOVATION; LEARNING; MITIGATION; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; TECHNOLOGY POLICY;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 38949211787     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: 10960449     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2007.11.001     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Argote L., and Epple D. Learning curves in manufacturing. Science 247 (1990) 920-924
2. Bernard A., Fischer C., and Fox A. Is there a rationale for output-based rebating of environmental levies?. Resource Energy Econ. 29 2 (2007) 83-101
3. Biglaiser G., and Horowitz J.K. Pollution regulation and incentives for pollution control research. J. Econ. Manage. Strategy 3 (1995) 663-684
4. Bottazzi L., and Peri G. Innovation and spillovers in regions: evidence from European patent data. Europ. Econ. Rev. 47 (2003) 687-710
5. Carraro C., Gerlagh R., and van der Zwann B. Endogenous technological change in environmental macroeconomics. Resource Energy Econ. 25 1 (2003) 1-10
6. Downing P.G., and White L.J. Innovation in pollution control. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 13 (1986) 18-29
7. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Annual Energy Review 2001, EIA, Washington, DC, 2002.
8. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Analysis of a 10-Percent Renewable Portfolio Standard, EIA, Washington, DC, 2003.
9. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Assumptions to the Annual Energy Outlook 2003, EIA, Washington, DC, 2003.
10. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Energy Market Impacts of Alternative Greenhouse Gas Intensity Reduction Goals, EIA, Washington, DC, 2006.
11. C. Fischer, How can renewable portfolio standards lower electricity prices?, RFF Discussion Paper 06-20, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 2006.
12. C. Fischer, R.G. Newell, Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation, RFF Discussion Paper 04-05 (revised), Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 2007.
13. Fischer C., Parry I.W.H., and Pizer W.A. Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 45 3 (2003) 523-545
14. In: Goulder L.H. (Ed). Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions (2002), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
15. 2 abatement in the presence of induced technological change. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 39 (2000) 1-38
16. Goulder L.H., Parry I.W.H., Williams R.C., and Burtraw D. The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting. J. Public Econ. 72 (1999) 329-360
17. Griliches Z. Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey. J. Econ. Lit. 28 (1990) 1661-1707
18. Griliches Z. The search for R&D spillovers. Scand. J. Econ. 94 (1992) 29-47
19. International Energy Agency (IEA), Experience Curves for Energy Technology Policy, IEA, Paris, 2000.
20. International Energy Agency (IEA), Renewables in Global Energy Supply, IEA Fact Sheet, IEA, Paris, November, 2002.
21. International Energy Agency (IEA), Renewables Information, IEA, Paris, 2003.
22. Jaffe A.B. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: evidence from firm's patents, profits and market value. Amer. Econ. Rev. 76 5 (1986) 984-1001
23. Jaffe A.B., Newell R.G., and Stavins R.N. Technological change and the environment. In: Mäler K.-G., and Vincent J.R. (Eds). Handbook of Environmental Economics vol. 1 (2003), Elsevier, Amsterdam 461-516
24. Jaffe A.B., Newell R.G., and Stavins R.N. A tale of two market failures: technology and environmental policy. Ecolog. Econ. 54 (2005) 164-174
25. Jones C.I., and Williams J.C. Measuring the social return to R&D. Quart. J. Econ. 13 114 (1998) 1119-1135
26. Jung C., Krutilla K., and Boyd R. Incentives for advanced pollution abatement technology at the industry level: an evaluation of policy alternatives. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 30 (1996) 95-111
27. Kennedy P.W., and Laplantem B. Environmental policy and time consistency: emissions taxes and emissions trading. In: Petrakis S., Sarzetakis E.S., and Xepapadeas A. (Eds). Environmental Regulation and Market Power: Competition, Time Consistency and International Trade (1999), Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA
28. Klaassen G., Miketa S., Larsen K., and Sundqvist T. The impact of R&D on innovation for wind energy in Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom. Ecolog. Econ. 54 (2005) 227-240
29. Lieberman M.B. The learning curve and pricing in the chemical processing industries. RAND J. Econ. 15 2 (1984) 213-228
30. Magat W.A. Pollution control and technological advance: a dynamic model of the firm. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 5 (1978) 1-25
31. Milliman S.R., and Prince R. Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 17 (1989) 247-265
32. W.D. Montgomery, A.E. Smith, Price, quantity and technology strategies for climate change policy, in: Human-Induced Climate Change: An Interdisciplinary Assessment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
33. M.I. Nadiri, Innovations and technological spillovers, NBER Working Paper No. 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, 1993.
34. National Commission on Energy Policy (NCEP), Ending the Energy Stalemate: A Bipartisan Strategy to Meet America's Energy Challenges, NCEP, Washington, DC, 2004.
35. National Science Foundation (NSF), Science and Engineering Indicators 2006, NSF, Washington, DC, 2006.
36. Newell R.G., Jaffe A.B., and Stavins R.N. The induced innovation hypothesis and energy-saving technological change. Quart. J. Econ. 114 (1999) 941-975
37. Newell R.G., and Pizer W.A. Regulating stock externalities under uncertainty. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 45 (2003) 416-432
38. K. Palmer, D. Burtraw, Electricity, Renewables, and Climate Change: Searching for a Cost-Effective Policy, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC, 2004.
39. Parry I.W.H., Pizer W.A., and Fischer C. How large are the welfare gains from technological innovation induced by environmental policies?. J. Regul. Econ. 23 3 (2003) 237-255
40. In: Petrakis S., and Xepapadeas A. (Eds). Environmental Regulation and Market Power: Competition, Time Consistency and International Trade (1999), Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA
41. Popp D. Induced innovation and energy prices. Amer. Econ. Rev. 92 1 (2002) 160-180
42. Popp D. ENTICE: endogenous technological change in the DICE model of global warming. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 48 (2004) 742-768
43. M.E. Porter, S. Stern, Measuring the "ideas" production function: evidence from international patent output, NBER Working Paper No. 7891, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, 2000.
44. Requate T., and Unold W. On the incentives created by policy instruments to adopt advanced abatement technology if firms are asymmetric. J. Inst. Theoretical Econ. 157 4 (2001) 536-554
45. Schneider S.H., and Goulder L.H. Achieving low-cost emissions targets. Nature 389 (1997) 13-14
46. Zerbe R.O. Theoretical efficiency in pollution control. Western Econ. J. 8 (1970) 364-376