IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sip/dpaper/15-002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing an Optimal 'Tech Fix' Path to Global Climate Stability: Directed R&D and Embodied Technical Change in a Multi-phase Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Paul David

    (Stanford University)

  • Adriaan van Zon

    (SBE Maastricht University and United Nations University)

Abstract

This paper reports research focused on the inter-temporal resource allocation requirements of a program of technological changes that would halt global warming by completing the transition to a "green" production regime (i.e., zero net CO2-emissions) within the possibly brief finite interval that remains before Earth's climate is driven beyond a catastrophic tipping point. We formulate a multi-phase, just-in-time transition model incorporating carbon-based and carbon-free technical options that require physical embodiment in durable production facilities, and whose performance attributes can be enhanced by investment in directed R&D. Transition paths indicating the best ordering and durations of the distinct phases during which intangible and tangible capital formation is taking place and capital stocks of different types are being utilized in production (or scrapped when replaced types embodying socially more efficient technologies) are obtained as optimal solutions for each of a trio of related models in which the global macro-economy's dynamics are coupled with the dynamics of the climate system. The climate-integrated (annual) discrete-time endogenous growth models envisage the implementation of different technology policy options, but, for comparability of their solutions, all three are calibrated to emulate the same global settings of the "transition planning" problem. Our dynamic integrated requirements analysis modeling (DIRAM) approach exposes the sensitivity of the specifics of alternative "tech fix" transition paths to parametric variations in key exogenous specifications. Of particular interest among the latter is the conjectured location of a pair of successive climate "tipping points", the first of which initiates higher expected rates of damage to the carbon-fueled capital stock due to more frequent extreme weather events being driven by the rising mean global temperature. The second, far more dangerous tipping point (at a still higher MGT) corresponds to the lowest conjectured level of atmospheric CO2 concentration that could trigger an irreversible climate catastrophe. Having to stop short of that point, in effect sets a "minimal regret" carbon budget for the optimal transition to a sustainable phase of global economic growth. Sensitivity analysis results are displayed to show how varying the catastrophic tipping point (and its implied carbon budget) alters the transition dynamics in each of the three models.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul David & Adriaan van Zon, 2015. "Designing an Optimal 'Tech Fix' Path to Global Climate Stability: Directed R&D and Embodied Technical Change in a Multi-phase Framework," Discussion Papers 15-002, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:sip:dpaper:15-002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-siepr.stanford.edu/repec/sip/15-002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Henri Delanghe & Ugur Muldur & Luc Soete (ed.), 2009. "European Science and Technology Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13427.
    2. Borghans, Lex & Meijers, Huub & ter Weel, Bas, 2013. "The importance of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation for measuring IQ," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 17-28.
    3. Tahvonen, Olli & Salo, Seppo, 2001. "Economic growth and transitions between renewable and nonrenewable energy resources," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1379-1398, August.
    4. Valente, Simone, 2011. "Endogenous Growth, Backstop Technology Adoption, And Optimal Jumps," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(3), pages 293-325, June.
    5. David, Paul A., 2009. "Preparing for the Next, Very Long Crisis: Towards a ‘Cool’ Science and Technology Policy Agenda For a Globally Warming Economy," MERIT Working Papers 2009-031, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    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. 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.
    2. 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.

    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. van der Meijden, Gerard & Smulders, Sjak, 2018. "Technological Change During The Energy Transition," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(4), pages 805-836, June.
    2. Hadi Sasana & Imam Ghozali, 2017. "The Impact of Fossil and Renewable Energy Consumption on the Economic Growth in Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 7(3), pages 194-200.
    3. Voosholz, Frauke, 2014. "The influence of different production functions on modeling resource extraction and economic growth," CAWM Discussion Papers 72, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    4. Grimaud, Andre & Rouge, Luc, 2005. "Polluting non-renewable resources, innovation and growth: welfare and environmental policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 109-129, June.
    5. Tiwari A.K. & Mohnen P. & Palm F.C. & Schim van der Loeff S., 2013. "Microeconometric evidence of financing frictions and innovative activity - a revision," MERIT Working Papers 2013-027, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Stefan, Matthias & Huber, Jürgen & Kirchler, Michael & Sutter, Matthias & Walzl, Markus, 2023. "Monetary and social incentives in multi-tasking: The ranking substitution effect," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    7. Fabre, Adrien & Fodha, Mouez & Ricci, Francesco, 2020. "Mineral resources for renewable energy: Optimal timing of energy production," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    8. Matthias Stefan & Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler & Matthias Sutter & Markus Walzl, 2020. "Monetary and Social Incentives in Multi-Tasking: The Ranking Substitution Effect," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2020_10, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    9. Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Leach, Andrew & Moreaux, Michel, 2009. ""Twin Peaks" in Energy Prices: A Hotelling Model with Pollution Learning," Working Papers 2009-10, University of Alberta, Department of Economics.
    10. Agnani, Betty & Gutierrez, Maria-Jose & Iza, Amaia, 2005. "Growth in overlapping generation economies with non-renewable resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 387-407, September.
    11. Recalde, Marina & Ramos-Martin, Jesús, 2012. "Going beyond energy intensity to understand the energy metabolism of nations: The case of Argentina," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 122-132.
    12. Hart, Rob & Spiro, Daniel, 2011. "The elephant in Hotelling's room," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7834-7838.
    13. Biggiero, Lucio & Angelini, Pier Paolo, 2015. "Hunting scale-free properties in R&D collaboration networks: Self-organization, power-law and policy issues in the European aerospace research area," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 21-43.
    14. Bai, Yiyi & Okullo, Samuel J., 2018. "Understanding oil scarcity through drilling activity," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 261-269.
    15. Growiec, Jakub & Schumacher, Ingmar, 2008. "On technical change in the elasticities of resource inputs," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 210-221, December.
    16. Heinzel, Christoph & Winkler, Ralph, 2006. "Gradual versus structural technological change in the transition to a low-emission energy industry: How time-to-build and differing social and individual discount rates influence environmental and tec," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 09/06, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    17. Di Vita, Giuseppe, 2008. "Is the discount rate relevant in explaining the Environmental Kuznets Curve?," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 191-207.
    18. Raymond, Wladimir & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre & Palm, Franz, 2015. "Dynamic models of R & D, innovation and productivity: Panel data evidence for Dutch and French manufacturing," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 285-306.
    19. Csereklyei, Zsuzsanna & Anantharama, Nandini & Kallies, Anne, 2021. "Electricity market transitions in Australia: Evidence using model-based clustering," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    20. Gassmann F. & Tsukada R., 2013. "Switching off or switching source : energy consumption and household," MERIT Working Papers 2013-047, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    global warming; tipping point; catastrophic climate instability; extreme weather- related damages; R&D; directed technical change; capital-embodied technologies; optimal sequencing; multi-phase optimal control; sustainable endogenous growth;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O41 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models
    • O44 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Environment and 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:sip:dpaper:15-002. 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: Anne Shor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cestaus.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.