IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/chieco/v62y2020ics1043951x20301085.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Global warming and technical change: Multiple steady-states and policy options

Author

Listed:
  • Bondarev, Anton
  • Greiner, Alfred

Abstract

We develop an economic growth model that incorporates anthropogenic climate change and a publicly funded research sector that creates new technologies and simultaneously expands the productivities of existing technologies. Greenhouse gas emissions are affected by R&D activities both negatively, through the increase of output from productivity growth, and positively as new technologies are less polluting. We find that there may exist two different steady-states of the economy, depending on the amount of research spending: one with less new technologies being developed and the other with more technologies. Thus, a lock-in effect can arise that, however, can be overcome by raising R&D spending sufficiently such that the steady-state becomes unique. We derive the combinations of fiscal policy instruments for which that can be achieved and we study the implications for the economy and with respect to emissions. In particular, the double dividend hypothesis may hold under some specific conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Bondarev, Anton & Greiner, Alfred, 2020. "Global warming and technical change: Multiple steady-states and policy options," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:chieco:v:62:y:2020:i:c:s1043951x20301085
    DOI: 10.1016/j.chieco.2020.101511
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1043951X20301085
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.chieco.2020.101511?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mercure, J.-F. & Pollitt, H. & Chewpreecha, U. & Salas, P. & Foley, A.M. & Holden, P.B. & Edwards, N.R., 2014. "The dynamics of technology diffusion and the impacts of climate policy instruments in the decarbonisation of the global electricity sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 686-700.
    2. Balint, T. & Lamperti, F. & Mandel, A. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2017. "Complexity and the Economics of Climate Change: A Survey and a Look Forward," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 252-265.
    3. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Leonardo Bursztyn & David Hemous, 2012. "The Environment and Directed Technical Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 131-166, February.
    4. Naqvi, Asjad & Stockhammer, Engelbert, 2018. "Directed Technological Change in a Post-Keynesian Ecological Macromodel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 168-188.
    5. Philippe Aghion & Antoine Dechezleprêtre & David Hémous & Ralf Martin & John Van Reenen, 2016. "Carbon Taxes, Path Dependency, and Directed Technical Change: Evidence from the Auto Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(1), pages 1-51.
    6. Popp, David, 2004. "ENTICE: endogenous technological change in the DICE model of global warming," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 742-768, July.
    7. Alfred Greiner & Bettina Fincke, 2015. "Public Debt, Sustainability and Economic Growth," Springer Books, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-319-09348-2, November.
    8. Anton Bondarev, 2012. "The long-run dynamics of product and process innovations for a multi-product monopolist," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 775-799, November.
    9. Jesús Crespo Cuaresma & Tapio Palokangas & Alexander Tarasyev (ed.), 2010. "Dynamic Systems, Economic Growth, and the Environment," Dynamic Modeling and Econometrics in Economics and Finance, Springer, number 978-3-642-02132-9, July-Dece.
    10. Kalkuhl, Matthias & Edenhofer, Ottmar & Lessmann, Kai, 2012. "Learning or lock-in: Optimal technology policies to support mitigation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23.
    11. Thierry Bréchet & Carmen Camacho & Vladimir Veliov, 2014. "Model predictive control, the economy, and the issue of global warming," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 220(1), pages 25-48, September.
    12. Bondarev, Anton & Greiner, Alfred, 2020. "Global warming and technical change: Multiple steady-states and policy options," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    13. Lucas Bretschger & Christos Karydas, 2018. "Optimum Growth and Carbon Policies with Lags in the Climate System," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(4), pages 781-806, August.
    14. Raymond Gradus & Sjak Smulders, 1993. "The trade-off between environmental care and long-term growth—Pollution in three prototype growth models," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 25-51, February.
    15. Greiner, Alfred & Semmler, Willi, 2005. "Economic growth and global warming: A model of multiple equilibria and thresholds," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 430-447, August.
    16. Unruh, Gregory C., 2000. "Understanding carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(12), pages 817-830, October.
    17. Anton Bondarev & Alfred Greiner, 2018. "Technology lock-in with horizontal and vertical innovations through limited R&D spending," 4OR, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 51-65, March.
    18. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/14g286e42n8bl9is6h16b18kes is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Lucas Bretschger & Aimilia Pattakou, 2019. "Correction to: As Bad as it Gets: How Climate Damage Functions Affect Growth and the Social Cost of Carbon," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(1), pages 27-27, January.
    20. William D. Nordhaus & Andrew Moffat, 2017. "A Survey of Global Impacts of Climate Change: Replication, Survey Methods, and a Statistical Analysis," NBER Working Papers 23646, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Lucas Bretschger & Aimilia Pattakou, 2019. "As Bad as it Gets: How Climate Damage Functions Affect Growth and the Social Cost of Carbon," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(1), pages 5-26, January.
    22. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1nlv566svi86iqtetenms15tc4 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Hardt, Lukas & O'Neill, Daniel W., 2017. "Ecological Macroeconomic Models: Assessing Current Developments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 198-211.
    24. World Bank, 2012. "Inclusive Green Growth : The Pathway to Sustainable Development," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 6058, December.
    25. William D. Nordhaus, 1992. "The 'DICE' Model: Background and Structure of a Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy Model of the Economics of Global Warming," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1009, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    26. Pietro Peretto & Michelle Connolly, 2007. "The Manhattan Metaphor," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 329-350, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bondarev, Anton & Greiner, Alfred, 2020. "Global warming and technical change: Multiple steady-states and policy options," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Naqvi, Asjad & Stockhammer, Engelbert, 2018. "Directed Technological Change in a Post-Keynesian Ecological Macromodel," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 168-188.
    2. Lamperti, F. & Dosi, G. & Napoletano, M. & Roventini, A. & Sapio, A., 2020. "Climate change and green transitions in an agent-based integrated assessment model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    3. Orlov, Sergey & Rovenskaya, Elena, 2022. "Optimal transition to greener production in a pro-environmental society," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    4. Jin, Wei, 2021. "Path dependence, self-fulfilling expectations, and carbon lock-in," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    5. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2023. "Climate, technology, family size; on the crossroad between two ultimate externalities," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    6. Anton Bondarev & Alfred Greiner, 2022. "How ongoing structural change creates a double dividend: outdating of technologies and green growth," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 21(2), pages 125-160, May.
    7. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    8. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2022. "Climate, Technology, Family Size; on the Crossroad between Two Ultimate Externalities," Other publications TiSEM b6d5b02f-4624-46fd-836a-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Wei, Yi-Ming & Mi, Zhi-Fu & Huang, Zhimin, 2015. "Climate policy modeling: An online SCI-E and SSCI based literature review," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PA), pages 70-84.
    10. Paul Lehmann & Patrik Söderholm, 2018. "Can Technology-Specific Deployment Policies Be Cost-Effective? The Case of Renewable Energy Support Schemes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 475-505, October.
    11. Bezin, Emeline, 2019. "The economics of green consumption, cultural transmission and sustainable technological change," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 497-546.
    12. Acemoglu, Daron & Rafey, Will, 2023. "Mirage on the horizon: Geoengineering and carbon taxation without commitment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    13. Etienne Espagne, 2018. "Money, Finance and Climate: The Elusive Quest for a Truly Integrated Assessment Model," Comparative Economic Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Association for Comparative Economic Studies, vol. 60(1), pages 131-143, March.
    14. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2022. "Climate, Technology, Family Size; on the Crossroad between Two Ultimate Externalities," Discussion Paper 2022-027, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Martin Zapf & Hermann Pengg & Christian Weindl, 2019. "How to Comply with the Paris Agreement Temperature Goal: Global Carbon Pricing According to Carbon Budgets," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-20, August.
    16. Patricia Laurens & Christian Le Bas & Stéphane Lhuillery & Antoine Schoen, 2017. "The determinants of cleaner energy innovations of the world’s largest firms: the impact of firm learning and knowledge capital," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(4), pages 311-333, May.
    17. Antosiewicz, Marek & Witajewski-Baltvilks, Jan, 2021. "Short- and long-run dynamics of energy demand," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    18. Adrien Vogt-Schilb & St�phane Hallegatte & Christophe de Gouvello, 2015. "Marginal abatement cost curves and the quality of emission reductions: a case study on Brazil," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(6), pages 703-723, November.
    19. Peter K. Kruse-Andersen, 2019. "Directed Technical Change, Environmental Sustainability, and Population Growth," Discussion Papers 19-12, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    20. Song, Malin & Wang, Shuhong, 2016. "Can employment structure promote environment-biased technical progress?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 285-292.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Greenhouse gases; Doubly-differentiated R&D; Double dividend; Fiscal policy; Technology lock-in; Public spending;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • C62 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Existence and Stability Conditions of Equilibrium
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy
    • O44 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Environment and Growth
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:chieco:v:62:y:2020:i:c:s1043951x20301085. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/chieco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.