IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/ipolec/doi10.1086-655817.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cap-and-Trade, Emissions Taxes, and Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Suzanne Scotchmer

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Suzanne Scotchmer, 2011. "Cap-and-Trade, Emissions Taxes, and Innovation," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 11(1), pages 29-54.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:ipolec:doi:10.1086/655817
    DOI: 10.1086/655817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/655817
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/655817
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/655817?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. Fischer, Carolyn & Parry, Ian W. H. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 523-545, May.
    2. Jung, Chulho & Krutilla, Kerry & Boyd, Roy, 1996. "Incentives for Advanced Pollution Abatement Technology at the Industry Level: An Evaluation of Policy Alternatives," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 95-111, January.
    3. Stephen P. Holland, 2009. "Taxes and Trading versus Intensity Standards: Second-Best Environmental Policies with Incomplete Regulation (Leakage) or Market Power," NBER Working Papers 15262, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Mehdi Fadaee & Luca Lambertini, 2015. "Non-tradeable pollution permits as green R&D incentives," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(1), pages 27-42, January.
    2. Montero, Juan Pablo, 2011. "A note on environmental policy and innovation when governments cannot commit," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(S1), pages 13-19.
    3. Kellogg, Ryan, 2018. "Gasoline price uncertainty and the design of fuel economy standards," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 14-32.
    4. Carratù, Maria & Chiarini, Bruno & Piselli, Paolo, 2020. "Effects of European emission unit allowance auctions on corporate profitability," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    5. Joel Wood, 2018. "The Pros and Cons of Carbon Taxes and Cap-and-Trade Systems," SPP Briefing Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 11(30), November.
    6. Clancy, Matthew S., 2015. "Combinatorial innovation, evidence from patent data, and mandated innovation," ISU General Staff Papers 201501010800005678, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Matthew S Clancy & GianCarlo Moschini, 2018. "Mandates and the Incentive for Environmental Innovation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(1), pages 198-219.

    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. Dongdong Li, 2021. "Optimal licensing strategy of green technology in a mixed oligopoly: Fixed fee versus royalty," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(4), pages 942-951, June.
    2. Perino, Grischa & Requate, Till, 2012. "Does more stringent environmental regulation induce or reduce technology adoption? When the rate of technology adoption is inverted U-shaped," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 456-467.
    3. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    4. Grischa Perino, 2010. "Price Discrimination Based on Downstream Regulation: Evidence from the Market for SO2 Scrubbers," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Competition Policy (CCP) 2010-09, Centre for Competition Policy, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    5. Stephen P. Holland & Jonathan E. Hughes & Christopher R. Knittel & Nathan C. Parker, 2013. "Unintended Consequences of Transportation Carbon Policies: Land-Use, Emissions, and Innovation," NBER Working Papers 19636, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Weber, Thomas A. & Neuhoff, Karsten, 2010. "Carbon markets and technological innovation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 115-132, September.
    7. Castillo, Anya & Linn, Joshua, 2011. "Incentives of carbon dioxide regulation for investment in low-carbon electricity technologies in Texas," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1831-1844, March.
    8. Fuhai Hong & Susheng Wang, 2012. "Climate Policy, Learning, and Technology Adoption in Small Countries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(3), pages 391-411, March.
    9. Martin Larsson, 2017. "EU Emissions Trading: Policy-Induced Innovation, or Business as Usual? Findings from Company Case Studies in the Republic of Croatia," Working Papers 1705, The Institute of Economics, Zagreb.
    10. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry, 2008. "Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(2), pages 152-174, Summer.
    11. Parry, Ian & Pizer, William & Fischer, Carolyn, 2000. "How Important is Technological Innovation in Protecting the Environment?," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-15, Resources for the Future.
    12. Runa Sarkar, 2008. "Public policy and corporate environmental behaviour: a broader view," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(5), pages 281-297, September.
    13. Helm Carsten & Schöttner Anja, 2008. "Subsidizing Technological Innovations in the Presence of R&D Spillovers," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 9(3), pages 339-353, August.
    14. Marit E. Klemetsen & Brita Bye & Arvid Raknerud, 2013. "Can non-market regulations spur innovations in environmental technologies? A study on firm level patenting," Discussion Papers 754, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    15. Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Problem of the Commons: Still Unsettled after 100 Years," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 81-108, February.
    16. Baker, Erin & Clarke, Leon & Shittu, Ekundayo, 2008. "Technical change and the marginal cost of abatement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2799-2816, November.
    17. Parry, Ian W H & Pizer, William A & Fischer, Carolyn, 2003. "How Large Are the Welfare Gains from Technological Innovation Induced by Environmental Policies?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 237-255, May.
    18. Fischer, Carolyn & Newell, Richard G., 2005. "Environmental and Technology Policies for Climate Change and Renewable Energy," Discussion Papers 10789, Resources for the Future.
    19. Alain-Désiré Nimubona & Ujjayant Chakravorty & Andrew Leach, 2014. "The Search for Abatement Technologies in the Alberta Oil Sands," CESifo Working Paper Series 4781, CESifo.
    20. Parry, Ian W.H., 2003. "On the implications of technological innovation for environmental policy," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 57-76, February.

    More about this item

    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:ucp:ipolec:doi:10.1086/655817. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/IPE .

    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.