IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ancewp/249388.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Clean energy technology and the role of non-carbon price based policy: an evolutionary economics perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Knight, Eric
  • Howarth, Nicholas

Abstract

Much academic attention has been paid to the role of carbon pricing in developing a market-led response to low carbon energy innovation. Taking an evolutionary economics perspective this paper makes the case as to why price mechanisms alone are insufficient to support new energy technologies coming to market. In doing so, we set out the unique investment barriers in the clean energy space. For guidance on possible approaches to non-carbon price based policies that seek to tackle these barriers we turn to case studies from Asia, a region which has experienced a strong uptake in climate policy in recent years.

Suggested Citation

  • Knight, Eric & Howarth, Nicholas, 2011. "Clean energy technology and the role of non-carbon price based policy: an evolutionary economics perspective," Working Papers 249388, Australian National University, Centre for Climate Economics & Policy.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ancewp:249388
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.249388
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/249388/files/CCEP-2-11.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.249388?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Paul Lanoie & Michel Patry & Richard Lajeunesse, 2008. "Environmental regulation and productivity: testing the porter hypothesis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 121-128, October.
    4. Hazilla, Michael & Kopp, Raymond J, 1990. "Social Cost of Environmental Quality Regulations: A General Equilibrium Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 853-873, August.
    5. Bürer, Mary Jean & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2009. "Which renewable energy policy is a venture capitalist's best friend? Empirical evidence from a survey of international cleantech investors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 4997-5006, December.
    6. Ben Kriechel & Thomas Ziesemer, 2009. "The environmental Porter hypothesis: theory, evidence, and a model of timing of adoption," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(3), pages 267-294.
    7. Dieter Helm, 2005. "Economic Instruments and Environmental Policy," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 36(3), pages 205-228.
    8. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    9. Costantini, Valeria & Crespi, Francesco, 2008. "Environmental regulation and the export dynamics of energy technologies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 447-460, June.
    10. Nick Johnstone & Ivan Haščič & David Popp, 2010. "Renewable Energy Policies and Technological Innovation: Evidence Based on Patent Counts," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(1), pages 133-155, January.
    11. repec:dgr:umamer:2005008 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. repec:dgr:umamer:2003011 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Richard G. Newell & Adam B. Jaffe & Robert N. Stavins, 1999. "The Induced Innovation Hypothesis and Energy-Saving Technological Change," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(3), pages 941-975.
    14. repec:ner:maastr:urn:nbn:nl:ui:27-19334 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. repec:dgr:unumer:2007024 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Adam B. Jaffe & Richard G. Newell & Robert N. Stavins, 2004. "Technology Policy for Energy and the Environment," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 4, pages 35-68, 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. Shum, Kwok L., 2017. "Renewable energy deployment policy: A transition management perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1380-1388.

    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. Eric Knight & Nicholas Howarth, 2011. "Clean Energy Technology and the Role of Non-Carbon Price Based Policy: an Evolutionary Economics Perspective," CCEP Working Papers 1102, Centre for Climate & Energy Policy, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    2. Nicholas Howarth, 2011. "Clean Energy Technology and the Role of Non-Carbon Price-Based Policy: An Evolutionary Economics Perspective," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 871-891, October.
    3. Howarth, Nicholas A.A. & Rosenow, Jan, 2014. "Banning the bulb: Institutional evolution and the phased ban of incandescent lighting in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 737-746.
    4. Shuai Shao & Zhigao Hu & Jianhua Cao & Lili Yang & Dabo Guan, 2020. "Environmental Regulation and Enterprise Innovation: A Review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1465-1478, March.
    5. Carraro, Carlo & De Cian, Enrica & Nicita, Lea & Massetti, Emanuele & Verdolini, Elena, 2010. "Environmental Policy and Technical Change: A Survey," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(2), pages 163-219, October.
    6. Stefan Ambec & Mark A. Cohen & Stewart Elgie & Paul Lanoie, 2013. "The Porter Hypothesis at 20: Can Environmental Regulation Enhance Innovation and Competitiveness?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 2-22, January.
    7. Yao, Shiyue & Yu, Xueying & Yan, Sen & Wen, Shiyan, 2021. "Heterogeneous emission trading schemes and green innovation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Felix Groba & Barbara Breitschopf, 2013. "Impact of Renewable Energy Policy and Use on Innovation: A Literature Review," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1318, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Giovanni Marin & Francesca Lotti, 2017. "Productivity effects of eco-innovations using data on eco-patents," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 26(1), pages 125-148.
    10. Borghesi, Simone & Cainelli, Giulio & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2012. "Brown Sunsets and Green Dawns in the Industrial Sector: Environmental Innovations, Firm Behavior and the European Emission Trading," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 121701, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    11. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Simone Borghesi, 2012. "The European Emission Trading Scheme and environmental innovation diffusion: Empirical analyses using Italian CIS data," Working Papers 201201, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    12. Cameron Hepburn & Jacquelyn Pless & David Popp, 2018. "Policy Brief—Encouraging Innovation that Protects Environmental Systems: Five Policy Proposals," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 154-169.
    13. George van Leeuwen & Pierre Mohnen, 2017. "Revisiting the Porter hypothesis: an empirical analysis of Green innovation for the Netherlands," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 63-77, February.
    14. Grazia Cecere & Sascha Rexhäuser & Patrick Schulte, 2019. "From less promising to green? Technological opportunities and their role in (green) ICT innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 45-63, January.
    15. Lorena D’Agostino, 2015. "How MNEs respond to environmental regulation: integrating the Porter hypothesis and the pollution haven hypothesis," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 32(2), pages 245-269, August.
    16. Herman, Kyle S. & Xiang, Jun, 2019. "Induced innovation in clean energy technologies from foreign environmental policy stringency?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 198-207.
    17. Costantini, Valeria & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2012. "On the green and innovative side of trade competitiveness? The impact of environmental policies and innovation on EU exports," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 132-153.
    18. Jung‐Ah Hwang & Yeonbae Kim, 2017. "Effects of Environmental Regulations on Trade Flow in Manufacturing Sectors: Comparison of Static and Dynamic Effects of Environmental Regulations," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 688-706, July.
    19. Giulio Cainelli & Massimiliano Mazzanti & Roberto Zoboli, 2011. "Enviromental Innovations, Complementarity and Local/Global Cooperation," Working Papers 201104, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    20. Raphael Calel, 2020. "Adopt or Innovate: Understanding Technological Responses to Cap-and-Trade," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 170-201, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and 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:ags:ancewp:249388. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/creauau.html .

    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.