IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2011.95.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Environment and Directed Technical Change: Comment

Author

Listed:
  • Jean-Charles Hourcade

    (CIRED, Centre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement)

  • Antonin Pottier

    (CIRED, Centre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement)

  • Etienne Espagne

    (CIRED, Centre International de Recherche sur l'Environnement et le Développement)

Abstract

This paper discusses the growth model with environmental constraints recently presented in (Acemoglu et al., 2011) which focuses on the redirection of technical change by climate policies with research subsidies and a carbon tax. First, Acemoglu et al.'s model and chosen parameters yield numerical results that do not support the conclusion that ambitious climate policies can be conducted “without sacrificing (much or any) long-run growth”. Second, they select unrealistic key parameters for carbon sinks and elasticity of substitution. We find that more realistic parameters lead to very different results. Third, the model leads to an unrealistic conclusion when used to analyse endogenous growth, suggesting specification problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean-Charles Hourcade & Antonin Pottier & Etienne Espagne, 2011. "The Environment and Directed Technical Change: Comment," Working Papers 2011.95, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2011.95
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2011-095.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of 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. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    3. Dahl, Carol A., 1993. "A survey of energy demand elasticities in support of the development of the NEMS," MPRA Paper 13962, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Schmidt, Robert C. & Marschinski, Robert, 2009. "A model of technological breakthrough in the renewable energy sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 435-444, December.
    5. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    6. M. Ha-Duong & M. J. Grubb & J.-C. Hourcade, 1997. "Influence of socioeconomic inertia and uncertainty on optimal CO2-emission abatement," Nature, Nature, vol. 390(6657), pages 270-273, November.
    7. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    8. Espey, Molly, 1998. "Gasoline demand revisited: an international meta-analysis of elasticities," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 273-295, June.
    9. Fischer, Carolyn & Newell, Richard G., 2008. "Environmental and technology policies for climate mitigation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 142-162, March.
    10. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Schneider, Stephen H., 1999. "Induced technological change and the attractiveness of CO2 abatement policies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 211-253, August.
    11. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2008. "A climate-change policy induced shift from innovations in carbon-energy production to carbon-energy savings," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 425-448, March.
    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. Malin Song & Shuhong Wang & Kaiya Wu, 2018. "Environment-biased technological progress and industrial land-use efficiency in China’s new normal," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 268(1), pages 425-440, September.
    2. Carolyn Fischer & Garth Heutel, 2013. "Environmental Macroeconomics: Environmental Policy, Business Cycles, and Directed Technical Change," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 5(1), pages 197-210, June.
    3. Yingying Lu & David I. Stern, 2016. "Substitutability and the Cost of Climate Mitigation Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(1), pages 81-107, May.
    4. Gerlagh, Reyer & Kverndokk, Snorre & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2014. "The optimal time path of clean energy R&D policy when patents have finite lifetime," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 2-19.
    5. Mattauch, Linus & Creutzig, Felix & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2015. "Avoiding carbon lock-in: Policy options for advancing structural change," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 49-63.
    6. Laura Nowzohour, 2021. "Can Adjustments Costs in Research Derail the Transition to Green Growth ?," CIES Research Paper series 67-2021, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    7. Lennox, James A. & Witajewski-Baltvilks, Jan, 2017. "Directed technical change with capital-embodied technologies: Implications for climate policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 400-409.
    8. Paul David & Adriaan van Zon, 2014. "Designing an Optimal 'Tech Fix' Path to Global Climate Stability: Integrated Dynamic Requirements Analysis for the 'Tech Fix'," Discussion Papers 13-039, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    9. van den Bijgaart, Inge, 2017. "The unilateral implementation of a sustainable growth path with directed technical change," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 305-327.
    10. Jean-Charles Hourcade & Michael J. Grubb & Aurélie Méjean, 2015. "The 'Dark Matter' in the Search for Sustainable Growth: Energy, Innovation and the Financially Paradoxical Role of Climate Confidence," Post-Print hal-01646242, HAL.
    11. Papageorgiou, Chris & Saam, Marianne & Schulte, Patrick, 2013. "Elasticity of substitution between clean and dirty energy inputs: A macroeconomic perspective," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-087, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Dutz, Mark A. & Sharma, Siddharth, 2012. "Green growth, technology and innovation," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5932, The World Bank.
    13. Spencer, Thomas & Lucas, Chancel & Emmanuel, Guerin, 2012. "Exiting the crisis in the right direction: A sustainable and shared prosperity plan for Europe," MPRA Paper 38802, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. van den Bijgaart, Inge, 2016. "Essays in environmental economics and policy," Other publications TiSEM 298bee2a-cb08-4173-9fe1-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    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. Pottier, Antonin & Hourcade, Jean-Charles & Espagne, Etienne, 2014. "Modelling the redirection of technical change: The pitfalls of incorporeal visions of the economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 213-218.
    2. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    3. 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.
    4. Raphael Calel & Antoine Dechezleprêtre, 2016. "Environmental Policy and Directed Technological Change: Evidence from the European Carbon Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(1), pages 173-191, March.
    5. Shiell, Leslie & Lyssenko, Nikita, 2014. "Climate policy and induced R&D: How great is the effect?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 279-294.
    6. Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 873-937, Elsevier.
    7. Kemp-Benedict, Eric, 2014. "Shifting to a Green Economy: Lock-in, Path Dependence, and Policy Options," MPRA Paper 60175, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Mattauch, Linus & Creutzig, Felix & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2015. "Avoiding carbon lock-in: Policy options for advancing structural change," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 49-63.
    9. 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.
    10. Lehmann, Paul, 2013. "Supplementing an emissions tax by a feed-in tariff for renewable electricity to address learning spillovers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 635-641.
    11. Schmidt, Robert C. & Marschinski, Robert, 2009. "A model of technological breakthrough in the renewable energy sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 435-444, December.
    12. Lawrence H. Goulder, 2013. "Markets for Pollution Allowances: What Are the (New) Lessons?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 87-102, Winter.
    13. 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.
    14. Rik L. Rozendaal & Herman R. J. Vollebergh, 2021. "Policy-Induced Innovation in Clean Technologies: Evidence from the Car Market," CESifo Working Paper Series 9422, CESifo.
    15. Ted Temzelides & Borghan Narajabad & Bernardino Adao, 2016. "Renewable Technology Adoption and the Macroeconomy," 2016 Meeting Papers 6, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    16. 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.
    17. Lazkano, Itziar & Pham, Linh, 2016. "Do Fossil fuel Taxes Promote Innovation in Renewable Electricity Generation?," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 16/2016, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.
    18. Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2019. "Addressing climate change through price and non-price interventions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 594-612.
    19. Kristoffer Palage & Robert Lundmark & Patrik Söderholm, 2019. "The innovation effects of renewable energy policies and their interaction: the case of solar photovoltaics," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 21(2), pages 217-254, April.
    20. Armon Rezai & Frederick Van Der Ploeg, 2017. "Abandoning Fossil Fuel: How Fast and How Much," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 85(S2), pages 16-44, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Technological Change; Endogenous Growth; Climate; Energy Substitutability;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q43 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy and the Macroeconomy
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fem:femwpa:2011.95. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.