The Diffusion of Biological Waste-Water Treatment Plants in the Dutch Food and Beverage Industry
AbstractThis article develops an economic model of environmental technology adoption decisions. The model is applied econometrically to the diffusion of biological waste-water treatment plants in the Dutch food and beverage industry. It shows that it is possible to explain the overall diffusion pattern of biological waste-water treatment plants in terms of a rational choice model in which prospective adopters trade off the costs of effluent treatment against the savings on effluent tax payments. Effluent charges are shown to be a significant positive factor in the timing of adoption of biological effluent treatment plants. This result is brought out by both the rational choice and the epidemic models. None of the models however can explain year-to-year changes in the ownership of biological waste-water treatment plants during the 1974–91 period, which suggests that there are other factors, not included in the model, that affect the timing of adoption. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1998
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists in its journal Environmental and Resource Economics.
Volume (Year): 12 (1998)
Issue (Month): 1 (July)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263
environmental technology; technological diffusion; effluent charges;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Pindyck, Robert S., 1990.
"Irreversibility, uncertainty, and investment,"
3137-90., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
- Avinash Dixit, 1992. "Investment and Hysteresis," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 107-132, Winter.
- René Kemp & Xander Olsthoorn & Frans Oosterhuis & Harmen Verbruggen, 1992. "Supply and demand factors of Cleaner technologies: Some empirical evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(6), pages 615-634, November.
- Jaffe Adam B. & Stavins Robert N., 1995. "Dynamic Incentives of Environmental Regulations: The Effects of Alternative Policy Instruments on Technology Diffusion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages S43-S63, November.
- Hans Th. A. Bressers, 1988. "A Comparison Of The Effectiveness Of Incentives And Directives: The Case Of Dutch Water Quality Policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 7(3), pages 500-518, 03.
- Popp, David, 2005. "Lessons from patents: Using patents to measure technological change in environmental models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 209-226, August.
- Taanman, Mattijs & Groot, Arend de & Kemp, René & Verspagen, Bart, 2006. "Diffusion Paths for Micro Cogeneration Using Hydrogen in the Netherlands," MERIT Working Papers 025, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
- William A. Pizer & David Popp, 2007.
"Endogenizing Technological Change: Matching Empirical Evidence to Modeling Needs,"
NBER Working Papers
13053, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Pizer, William A. & Popp, David, 2008. "Endogenizing technological change: Matching empirical evidence to modeling needs," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2754-2770, November.
- Pizer, William A. & Popp, David, 2007. "Endogenizing Technological Change: Matching Empirical Evidence to Modeling Needs," Discussion Papers dp-07-11, Resources For the Future.
- Marc Dijk & René Kemp & Pieter Valkering, 2013. "Incorporating social context and co-evolution in an innovation diffusion model—with an application to cleaner vehicles," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 295-329, April.
- Popp, David & Hafner, Tamara & Johnstone, Nick, 2011. "Environmental policy vs. public pressure: Innovation and diffusion of alternative bleaching technologies in the pulp industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1253-1268.
- Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
- Herman R.J. Vollebergh, 2006. "Differential Impact of Environmental Policy Instruments on Technological Change: A Review of the Empirical Literature," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-042/3, Tinbergen Institute.
- Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516 Elsevier.
- David Popp & Richard G. Newell & Adam B. Jaffe, 2009. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," NBER Working Papers 14832, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- G\'erard Weisbuch & Vincent Buskens & Luat Vuong, 2007. "Heterogeneity and Increasing Returns May Drive Socio-Economic Transitions," Papers 0706.1454, arXiv.org.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.