Environmental policy with endogenous technology from a game theoretic perspective: The case of the US pulp and paper industry

Environmental and Resource Economics

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 425-444

  Erbas, Bahar Celikkol ^a   Abler, David G ^b  

^a TOBB UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND TECHNOLOGY   (Turkey)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Environmental policy; Pollution abatement; Pollution prevention; R D; Technology

Indexed keywords

AIR POLLUTION; COMPUTER NETWORKS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FLOW INTERACTIONS; INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS; INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT; INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH; INDUSTRY; INNOVATION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MULTITASKING; PAPER; PAPER COATING; PAPER PRODUCTS; PLANNING; POLLUTION; PUBLIC POLICY; PULP; STANDARDS; STRATEGIC PLANNING; TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING; TECHNOLOGY; TOOLS; WEIGHT CONTROL;

(ALGORITHMIC) COMPLEXITY; (OTDR) TECHNOLOGY; (R ,S)-SYMMETRIC; BUSINESS MEDIA; COURNOT DUOPOLY; DIFFERENT TYPES; EMISSIONS (ASPHALT); EMISSIONS PERFORMANCE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES; INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS; POLICY INSTRUMENTS; POLLUTION ABATEMENT; POLLUTION PREVENTION (PP); PULP AND PAPER; SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS; SPRINGER (CO); STRATEGIC INTERACTIONS; TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT (TD);

PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY;

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; GAME THEORY; INDUSTRIAL COMPETITION; POLLUTION CONTROL; POLLUTION POLICY; PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRY; REGULATORY APPROACH; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT;

NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 45749113005     PISSN: 09246460     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-007-9163-y     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. American Forest and Paper Association (1993). Statistics of paper, paperboard and wood pulp. American Forest and Paper Association, Washington, DC
2. Arora S and Cason TN (1995). An experiment in voluntary environmental regulation: participation in EPA's 33/50 program. J Environm Econ Manage 28: 271-286
3. Biglaiser G and Horowitz KJ (1995). Pollution regulation and incentives for pollution-control research. J Econ Manage Strategy 3(4): 663-684
4. Bohm P and Russell CS (1985). Comparative analysis of alternative policy instruments. In: Kneese, AV and Sweeney, JL (eds) Handbook of natural resource and energy economics, vol I., pp. Elsevier, Amsterdam
5. Boyd J (1998). Searching for the profit in pollution prevention: case studies in the corporate evaluation of environmental opportunities. Office of Pollution Prevention, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
6. Cadot O and Sinclair-Desgagne B (1995). Environmental standards and industrial policy. J Environm Econ Manage 29: 228-237
7. Casey JP (1980, 1981) Pulp and paper chemistry and chemical technology, 3rd edn. vol I and Vol III. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, New York
8. Celikkol B (1998) Environmental regulation and induced research and development (R&D) in the U.S. paper industry. Ph.D. Dissertation, Agricultural Economics, Pennsylvania State University
9. D'Aspremont C and Jacquemin A (1988). Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in duopoly With spillovers. Am Econ Rev 78: 1133-1137
10. De Bondt R (1996). Spillovers and innovative activities. Int J Ind Organ 15: 1-28
11. Downing BP and White LJ (1986). Innovation in pollution control. J Environm Econ Manage 13: 18-29
12. Hackett CS (1995). Pollution-controlling innovation in oligopolistic industries: some comparison between patent races and research joint ventures. J Environ Econ Manage 29: 339-356
13. Hseu J and Boungiorno J (1995). Producer behavior and technology in the pulp and paper industries of the United States and Canada: a nonparametric analysis. Forest Sci 41(1): 140-156
14. Innes R and Bial JJ (2002). Inducing innovation in the environmental technology of oligopolistic firms. J Ind Econ 50(3): 265-288
15. Jung C, Krutilla K and Boyd R (1996). Incentives for advanced pollution abatement technology at the industry level: an evaluation of policy alternatives. J Environ Econ Manage 30: 95-111
16. Leahy D and Neary JP (1997). Public policy towards R&D in oligopolistic industries. Am Econ Rev 87(4): 642-662
17. Magat AW (1978). Pollution control and technological advance: a dynamic model of the firm. J Environ Econ Manage 5(1): 1-25
18. Magat AW (1979). The effects of environmental regulation on innovation. Law Contemp Probl 43(1): 4-25
19. Macdonald RG and Franklin JN (1969). Pulp and paper manufacture, vol I. McGraw-Hill, New York
20. Milliman RS and Prince R (1989). Firm's incentives to promote technological change in pollution control. J Environ Econ Manage 17: 247-265
21. Montero J-P (2002). Permits, standards and technology innovation. J Environ Econ Manage 44(1): 23-44
22. Orr B and Lee KJ (1990). A nonparametric analysis of variable cost minimization in the United States paper industry. Appl Econ 22: 839-852
23. Scott TJ (1996). Environmental research joint ventures among manufacturers. Rev Ind Organ 11: 655-679
24. Ulph A (1996). Environmental policy and international trade when governments and producers act strategically. J Environ Econ Manage 30: 265-281
25. US Census Bureau (1994) Pollution abatement costs and expenditures. MA200 (93)-1. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
26. US Census Bureau (2001) Concentration ratios in manufacturing. EC97M31S-CR. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
27. US Environmental Protection Agency (1993a) Pulp, paper, and paperboard industry-background information for proposed air emission standards. Manufacturing processes at kraft, sulfite, soda, and semi-chemical mills. EPA-453/R-93-050a. USEPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
28. US Environmental Protection Agency (1993b) Development document for proposed effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the pulp, paper, and paperboard point source category. EPA-821-R-93-019. USEPA, Washington, DC
29. US Environmental Protection Agency (1993c) Economic impact and regulatory flexibility analysis of the proposed effluent guidelines and NESHAP for the pulp, paper, and paperboard industry. EPA-821-R-93-021. USEPA, Washington, DC