IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lec/leecon/11-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Emission Taxes and the Adoption of Cleaner Technologies: The Case of Environmentally Conscious Consumers

Author

Listed:
  • Maria José Gil-Moltó
  • Dimitrios Varvarigos

Abstract

We model a market with environmentally conscious consumers and a duopoly in which firms consider the adoption of a clean technology. We show that as pollution increases, consumers shift more resources to the environmental activities, thereby affecting negatively the demand faced by the duopoly. This effect generates incentives for firms to adopt the clean technology even in the absence of emissions taxes. When such taxes are considered, our results indicate that the benefit of adopting the clean technology is initially increasing and then decreasing in the emission tax. The range of values for which the emission tax increases this benefit becomes narrower when the consumers’ environmental awareness is stronger.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria José Gil-Moltó & Dimitrios Varvarigos, 2011. "Emission Taxes and the Adoption of Cleaner Technologies: The Case of Environmentally Conscious Consumers," Discussion Papers in Economics 11/49, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    • Handle: RePEc:lec:leecon:11/49
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.le.ac.uk/economics/research/RePEc/lec/leecon/dp11-49.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klaus Conrad, 2005. "Price Competition and Product Differentiation When Consumers Care for the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(1), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Bréchet, Thierry & Meunier, Guy, 2014. "Are clean technology and environmental quality conflicting policy goals?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 61-83.
    3. Baker, Erin & Shittu, Ekundayo, 2006. "Profit-maximizing R&D in response to a random carbon tax," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 160-180, May.
    4. John, A & Pecchenino, R, 1994. "An Overlapping Generations Model of Growth and the Environment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(427), pages 1393-1410, November.
    5. Russell Cooper & Andrew John, 1988. "Coordinating Coordination Failures in Keynesian Models," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 441-463.
    6. Aurora García‐Gallego & Nikolaos Georgantzís, 2009. "Market Effects of Changes in Consumers' Social Responsibility," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 235-262, March.
    7. Goeree, Jacob K. & Holt, Charles A. & Laury, Susan K., 2002. "Private costs and public benefits: unraveling the effects of altruism and noisy behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 255-276, February.
    8. Andreoni, James, 1989. "Giving with Impure Altruism: Applications to Charity and Ricardian Equivalence," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1447-1458, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Andreoni, James, 1990. "Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of Warm-Glow Giving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 100(401), pages 464-477, June.
    11. van Soest, Daan P., 2005. "The impact of environmental policy instruments on the timing of adoption of energy-saving technologies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 235-247, October.
    12. Palfrey, Thomas R & Prisbrey, Jeffrey E, 1997. "Anomalous Behavior in Public Goods Experiments: How Much and Why?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(5), pages 829-846, December.
    13. Andr, Francisco J. & Gonzlez, Paula & Porteiro, Nicols, 2009. "Strategic quality competition and the Porter Hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 182-194, March.
    14. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, December.
    15. Petrakis Emmanuel & Sartzetakis Eftichios Sophocles & Xepapadeas Anastasios, 2005. "Environmental Information Provision as a Public Policy Instrument," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-33, November.
    16. Paolo Buonanno & Carlo Carraro & Efrem Castelnuovo & Marzio Galeotti, 2001. "Emission Trading Restrictions with Endogenous Technological Change," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 379-395, July.
    17. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "The Search for R&D Spillovers," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 251-268 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Bansal, Sangeeta & Gangopadhyay, Shubhashis, 2003. "Tax/subsidy policies in the presence of environmentally aware consumers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2, Supple), pages 333-355, March.
    19. Klaus Conrad, 2003. "Price Competition and Product Differentiation when Consumers Care for the Environment," Working Papers 2003.66, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    20. Clarke, Leon & Weyant, John & Birky, Alicia, 2006. "On the sources of technological change: Assessing the evidence," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 579-595, November.
    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. García-Alaminos, Ángela & Rubio, Santiago J., 2019. "Emission Taxes, Feed-in Subsidies and the Investment in a Clean Technology by a Polluting Monopoly," ES: Economics for Sustainability 291524, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM) > ES: Economics for Sustainability.
    2. Corinne Langinier & Amrita Ray Chaudhuri, 2020. "Green Technology and Patents in the Presence of Green Consumers," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(1), pages 73-101.
    3. Lambertini, Luca & Poyago-Theotoky, Joanna & Tampieri, Alessandro, 2017. "Cournot competition and “green” innovation: An inverted-U relationship," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 116-123.
    4. Moner-Colonques, R. & Rubio, S., 2015. "The timing of environmental policy in a duopolistic market," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 15(01).
    5. Wen, Wen & Zhou, P. & Zhang, Fuqiang, 2018. "Carbon emissions abatement: Emissions trading vs consumer awareness," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 34-47.
    6. Christos Constantatos & Christos Pargianas & Eftichios S. Sartzetakis, 2021. "Green consumers and environmental policy," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(1), pages 105-140, February.
    7. Wenjun Sun & Naoto Jinji, 2014. "The Effects of Emission Taxes on Pollution through the Diffusion of Clean Technology:The Presence of Green Consumers," Discussion papers e-14-014, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.
    8. Jason M. Walter, 2018. "Understanding the dynamics of clean technology: implications for policy and industry," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(2), pages 365-386, April.
    9. Dongdong Li, 2022. "Dynamic optimal control of firms' green innovation investment and pricing strategies with environmental awareness and emission tax," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(4), pages 920-932, June.
    10. Pang, Yu, 2018. "Profitable pollution abatement? A worker productivity perspective," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 33-49.
    11. Zhang, Wenjie & He, Lingling & Yuan, Hongping, 2022. "Enterprises’ decisions on adopting low-carbon technology by considering consumer perception disparity," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    12. Guo, Jian-Xin & Zhu, Kaiwei, 2021. "Implications for enterprise to adopt cleaner technology: From the perspective of energy market and commodity market," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    13. Abdulla, Eman & Lim, King Yoong & Morris, Diego & Saliba, Faten, 2022. "Climate Change, Gender Equality, and Firm-Level Innovation : Cross-Country Evidence," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1429, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    14. Manman Wang & Shuai Lian & Shi Yin & Hengmin Dong, 2020. "A Three-Player Game Model for Promoting the Diffusion of Green Technology in Manufacturing Enterprises from the Perspective of Supply and Demand," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-26, September.
    15. Jinhuan Tang & Shoufeng Ji & Liwen Jiang, 2016. "The Design of a Sustainable Location-Routing-Inventory Model Considering Consumer Environmental Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-20, February.
    16. Gongbing Bi & Minyue Jin & Liuyi Ling & Feng Yang, 2017. "Environmental subsidy and the choice of green technology in the presence of green consumers," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 547-568, August.

    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. Jesse Matheson, 2011. "Prices and social behavior: A study of adult smoking in Canadian Aboriginal communities," Discussion Papers in Economics 11/50, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester, revised Dec 2012.
    2. Freundt, Jana & Lange, Andreas, 2021. "On the voluntary provision of public goods under risk," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    3. Arbel, Yuval & Bar-El, Ronen & Schwarz, Mordechai E. & Tobol, Yossef, 2019. "To What Do People Contribute? Ongoing Operations vs. Sustainable Supplies," IZA Discussion Papers 12180, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Korenok, Oleg & Millner, Edward L. & Razzolini, Laura, 2013. "Impure altruism in dictators' giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-8.
    5. James Andreoni, 2006. "Giving Gifts to Groups: How Congestible is Altruism?," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000166, UCLA Department of Economics.
    6. Mirco Tonin & Michael Vlassopoulos, 2014. "An experimental investigation of intrinsic motivations for giving," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(1), pages 47-67, January.
    7. Doni, Nicola & Ricchiuti, Giorgio, 2013. "Market equilibrium in the presence of green consumers and responsible firms: A comparative statics analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 380-395.
    8. Mark Ottoni-Wilhelm & Lise Vesterlund & Huan Xie, 2017. "Why Do People Give? Testing Pure and Impure Altruism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(11), pages 3617-3633, November.
    9. repec:awi:wpaper:0561 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Carpenter, Jeffrey & Myers, Caitlin Knowles, 2010. "Why volunteer? Evidence on the role of altruism, image, and incentives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 911-920, December.
    11. Kotani, Koji & Messer, Kent D. & Schulze, William D., 2010. "Matching Grants and Charitable Giving: Why People Sometimes Provide a Helping Hand to Fund Environmental Goods," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 324-343, April.
    12. Konow, James, 2010. "Mixed feelings: Theories of and evidence on giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(3-4), pages 279-297, April.
    13. Takafumi Yamakawa & Yoshitaka Okano & Tatsuyoshi Saijo, 2016. "Detecting motives for cooperation in public goods experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 500-512, June.
    14. Carpenter, Jeffrey P. & Myers, Caitlin Knowles, 2007. "Why Volunteer? Evidence on the Role of Altruism, Reputation, and Incentives," IZA Discussion Papers 3021, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Yann Algan & Yochai Benkler & Mayo Fuster Morell & Jérôme Hergueux, 2013. "Cooperation in Peer-Production Economy: Experimental Evidence from Wikipedia," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03460797, HAL.
    16. Krieg, Justin & Samek, Anya, 2017. "When charities compete: A laboratory experiment with simultaneous public goods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 40-57.
    17. Crumpler, Heidi & Grossman, Philip J., 2008. "An experimental test of warm glow giving," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1011-1021, June.
    18. Vasileiou, Efi & Georgantzís, Nikolaos, 2015. "An experiment on energy-saving competition with socially responsible consumers: Opening the black box," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1-10.
    19. Lata Gangadharan & Philip J. Grossman & Kristy Jones, 2014. "Deconstructing Giving: Donor Types and How They Give," Monash Economics Working Papers 53-14, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    20. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5ulf84sluc9vlb5mrjr32mfetg is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Yann Algan & Yochai Benkler & Mayo Fuster Morell & Jerome Hergueux, 2013. "Cooperation in Peer-Production Economy: Experimental Evidence from Wikipedia," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/5ulf84sluc9, Sciences Po.
    22. Konishi, Yoshifumi, 2011. "Efficiency properties of binary ecolabeling," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 798-819.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmentally Conscious Consumers; Technology Choice; Environmental Taxation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:lec:leecon:11/49. 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: Abbie Sleath (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deleiuk.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.