The clean development mechanism versus international permit trading: The effect on technological change
The clean development mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol may induce technological change in developing countries. As an alternative to the clean development mechanism regime, developing countries may accept a (generous) cap on their own emissions, allow domestic producers to invest in new efficient technologies, and sell the excess emission permits on the international permit market. The purpose of this article is to show how the gains from investment, and hence the incentive to invest in new technology in developing countries, differ between the two alternative regimes. We show that the difference in the gains from investment depends on whether the producers in developing countries face competitive or noncompetitive output markets, whether the investment affects fixed or variable production costs, and whether producers can reduce emissions through means other than investing in new technology.
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.:
- Greaker, Mads, 2003. "Strategic environmental policy; eco-dumping or a green strategy?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 692-707, May.
- Fischer, Carolyn, 2004.
"Project-Based Mechanisms for Emissions Reductions: Balancing Trade-offs with Baselines,"
dp-04-32, Resources For the Future.
- Fischer, Carolyn, 2005. "Project-based mechanisms for emissions reductions: balancing trade-offs with baselines," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(14), pages 1807-1823, September.
- Breton, Michele & Zaccour, Georges & Zahaf, Mehdi, 2006. "A game-theoretic formulation of joint implementation of environmental projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 168(1), pages 221-239, January.
- Cathrine Hagem, 1996. "Joint implementation under asymmetric information and strategic behavior," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(4), pages 431-447, December.
- Millock, Katrin, 2002. "Technology transfers in the Clean Development Mechanism: an incentives issue," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(03), pages 449-466, July.
- Kjersti-Gro Lindquist, 1994. "Testing for Market Power in the Norwegian Primary Aluminium Industry," Discussion Papers 132, Research Department of Statistics Norway.
- Requate, Till, 1998. "Incentives to innovate under emission taxes and tradeable permits," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 139-165, February.
- Montero, Juan-Pablo, 2002. "Permits, Standards, and Technology Innovation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 23-44, July.
- Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, June.
- Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
- Peter Bohm, 2002. "Improving Cost-effectiveness and Facilitating Participation of Developing Countries in International Emissions Trading," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 261-273, September.
- Steffen Kallbekken & Hege Westskog, 2005. "Should Developing Countries Take on Binding Commitments in a Climate Agreement? An Assessment of Gains and Uncertainty," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 41-60.
- Sheng-Peng Yang, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the U.S. Aluminum Industry: A Residual Demand Approach," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 365-380, November.
- Franz Wirl & Claus Huber & I.O Walker, 1998. "Joint Implementation: Strategic Reactions and Possible Remedies," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(2), pages 203-224, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:31:y:2009:i:1:p:1-12. 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: (Zhang, Lei)
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.