IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v17y2026i1p107-121.html

Should Green Industrial Policy Be Technology Neutral?

Author

Listed:
  • Emma Aisbett
  • Wenting Cheng
  • Ralf Steinhauser
  • Fiona Beck

Abstract

The central question of this paper is whether technology neutrality is, on balance, a helpful principle for green industrial policy (GIP). To answer this question, we first conduct a systematic literature review to understand what GIP is. We find that the term is most often used by authors in a neoclassical economic tradition and propose a definition that encapsulates the dominant elements of various definitions in this literature. Using a transdisciplinary approach, we turn to the question of technology neutrality in GIP. Considering a range of disciplinary perspectives and arguments, we conclude that the weight of argument and evidence lies strongly against de jure technology neutrality in GIP. Furthermore, the literature provides a range of alternative principles and approaches that can better address potential government failures in GIP and related policies. Finally, combining theoretical approaches and case‐study evidence from the US Inflation Reduction Act and the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, we provide potential explanations for why technology neutrality nonetheless remains a popular principle in GIP.

Suggested Citation

  • Emma Aisbett & Wenting Cheng & Ralf Steinhauser & Fiona Beck, 2026. "Should Green Industrial Policy Be Technology Neutral?," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 17(1), pages 107-121, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:17:y:2026:i:1:p:107-121
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.70124
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.70124
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.70124?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
    ---><---

    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:bla:glopol:v:17:y:2026:i:1:p:107-121. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.