A note on environmental policy and innovation when governments cannot commit
It is widely accepted that one of the most important characteristics of an effective pollution control policy is to provide firms with credible incentives to make long-run investments in R&D that can drastically reduce pollution. Recognizing that a government may be tempted to revise its policy design after innovations become available, this note shows how the performance of two policy instruments—prices (uniform taxes) and quantities (tradeable pollution permits)—differ in such a setting. I also discuss the gains from combining either instrument with subsidies to adopting firms.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Juan-Pablo Montero, 2006.
"A Simple Auction Mechanism for the Optimal Allocation of the Commons,"
Documentos de Trabajo
311, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
- Juan-Pablo Montero, 2008. "A Simple Auction Mechanism for the Optimal Allocation of the Commons," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 496-518, March.
- Juan-Pablo Montero, 2006. "A simple auction mechanism for the optimal allocation of the commons," Working Papers 0608, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.
- Roberts, Marc J. & Spence, Michael, 1976. "Effluent charges and licenses under uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 193-208.
- Stavins, Robert N., 2003.
"Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments,"
Handbook of Environmental Economics,
in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 355-435
- Stavins, Robert, 2000. "Experience with Market-Based Environmental Policy Instruments," Working Paper Series rwp00-004, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
- Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Experience with Market-Based Environmental Policy Instruments," Discussion Papers dp-01-58, Resources For the Future.
- Montero, Juan-Pablo, 2002. "Permits, Standards, and Technology Innovation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 23-44, July.
- Laffont, J.J. & Tirole, J., 1995.
"Pollution Permits and Compliance Strategies,"
95.395, Toulouse - GREMAQ.
- J-J. Laffont & J. Tirole, 1994. "Pollution Permits and Compliance Strategies," Working papers 95-9, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1994. "Pollution Permits and Compliance Strategies," IDEI Working Papers 39, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
- M. L. Weitzman, 1973.
"Prices vs. Quantities,"
106, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Innes, Robert, 2010. "Environmental innovation and environmental performance," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 27-42, January.
- Requate, Till, 2005. "Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments--a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 175-195, August.
- Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1996.
"Pollution permits and environmental innovation,"
Journal of Public Economics,
Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 127-140, October.
- Cameron Hepburn, 2006. "Regulation by Prices, Quantities, or Both: A Review of Instrument Choice," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 226-247, Summer.
- Preston McAfee, 2003.
"Capacity Choice Counters the Coase Conjecture,"
Theory workshop papers
505798000000000046, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010.
"Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change,"
Handbook of the Economics of Innovation,
- Suzanne Scotchmer, 2011.
"Cap-and-Trade, Emissions Taxes, and Innovation,"
Innovation Policy and the Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 11(1), pages 29-54.
- Parry, Ian & Pizer, William & Fischer, Carolyn, 1998.
"Instrument Choice for Environmental Protection When Technological Innovation is Endogenous,"
dp-99-04, Resources For the Future.
- Fischer, Carolyn & Parry, Ian W. H. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 523-545, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:eneeco:v:33:y:2011:i:s1:p:s13-s19. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.