IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2004.157.html

How Consistent are Alternative Short-Term Climate Policies with Long-Term Goals?

Author

Listed:
  • Valentina Bosetti

    (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei)

  • Marzio Galeotti

    (Università di Milano and Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei)

  • Alessandro Lanza

    (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Eni S.p.A., and CreNos)

Abstract

Choosing long-term goals is a key issue in the climate policy agenda. Targets should be easily measurable and feasible, but also effective in damage control. Once goals are set globally, given the uncertainty affecting long-term strategies and region-specific preferences for different policy instruments, policies will be better represented by a diversified portfolio to be revised over time, rather than “once and forever” decisions. It therefore becomes crucial to understand to what extent different strategies (or policy portfolios) are consistent with long-term targets, that is, when they imply emission paths which do not irreversibly diverge from globally set goals. The present paper aims to investigate emission paths implied by plausible policy scenarios against those derived by imposing alternative long-term targets, comparing, for example, differences in peak periods. Plausible policy scenarios are for instance Kyoto-type targets with or without participation by the U.S. and/or by developing countries. Different long-term targets considered focus on stabilisation of CO2 concentrations, radiative forcing and the increase in atmospheric temperature relative to pre-industrial levels. In order to account for the uncertainty surrounding the climate cycle, for each long-term goal multiple paths of emission - the most probable, the optimistic and the pessimistic ones - are considered in the comparison exercise. Comparative analysis is performed using a newly developed version of the FEEM-RICE model, a regional economy-climate model of optimal economic growth which is based on Nordhaus and Boyer’s RICE model crucially extended in order to account for induced technical change. In particular, both carbon and energy intensity are affected by a new endogenous variable – Technical Progress – which captures both the role of Learning by Researching and of Learning by Doing. These are in turn determined by the optimal levels of Research and Development and of Emission Abatement.

Suggested Citation

  • Valentina Bosetti & Marzio Galeotti & Alessandro Lanza, 2004. "How Consistent are Alternative Short-Term Climate Policies with Long-Term Goals?," Working Papers 2004.157, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
  • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2004.157
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2004-157.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:aen:journl:2006se-a09 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. David Popp, 2003. "ENTICE: Endogenous Technological Change in the DICE Model of Global Warming," NBER Working Papers 9762, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Marzio Galeotti & Carlo Carraro, 2004. "Does Endogenous Technical Change Make a Difference in Climate Policy Analysis? A Robustness Exercise with the FEEM-RICE Model," Working Papers 2004.152, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    4. Carlo Carraro & Barbara Buchner, 2003. "China and the Evolution of the Present Climate Regime," Working Papers 2003.103, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    5. Valentina Bosetti & Carlo Carraro & Marzio Galeotti, 2006. "The Dynamics of Carbon and Energy Intensity in a Model of Endogenous Technical Change," The Energy Journal, , vol. 27(1_suppl), pages 191-206, January.
    6. repec:aen:journl:1997v18-01-a01 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & Galeotti, Marzio, 2006. "Stabilisation Targets, Technical Change and the Macroeconomic Costs of Climate Change Control," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 12050, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Cantore, Nicola, 2011. "Distributional aspects of emissions in climate change integrated assessment models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2919-2924, May.
    3. Barry Anderson & Emanuele Borgonovo & Marzio Galeotti & Roberto Roson, 2014. "Uncertainty in Climate Change Modeling: Can Global Sensitivity Analysis Be of Help?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 271-293, February.
    4. Valentina Bosetti & Carlo Carraro & Marzio Galeotti, 2006. "The Dynamics of Carbon and Energy Intensity in a Model of Endogenous Technical Change," The Energy Journal, , vol. 27(1_suppl), pages 191-206, January.
    5. Castellini, Marta & Castelli, Chiara & Gusperti, Camilla & Lupi, Veronica & Vergalli, Sergio, 2025. "Balancing climate policies and economic development in the Mediterranean countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    6. Marzio Galeotti & Carlo Carraro, 2004. "Does Endogenous Technical Change Make a Difference in Climate Policy Analysis? A Robustness Exercise with the FEEM-RICE Model," Working Papers 2004.152, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    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. Radulescu, Doina & Stimmelmayr, Michael, 2010. "The impact of the 2008 German corporate tax reform: A dynamic CGE analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 454-467, January.
    2. Shiell, Leslie & Lyssenko, Nikita, 2014. "Climate policy and induced R&D: How great is the effect?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 279-294.
    3. Grimaud, André & Lafforgue, Gilles & Magné, Bertrand, 2011. "Climate change mitigation options and directed technical change: A decentralized equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 938-962.
    4. Greiner, Alfred & Semmler, Willi, 2005. "Economic growth and global warming: A model of multiple equilibria and thresholds," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 430-447, August.
    5. Barbara Buchner & Carlo Carraro, 2004. "Economic and environmental effectiveness of a technology-based climate protocol," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(3), pages 229-248, September.
    6. Johan Eyckmans & Cathrine Hagem, 2009. "The European Union's Potential for Strategic Emissions Trading through Minimal Permit Sale Contracts," CESifo Working Paper Series 2809, CESifo.
    7. Grimaud, André & Lafforgue, Gilles & Magné, Bertrand, 2007. "Innovation Markets in the Policy Appraisal of Climate Change Mitigation," IDEI Working Papers 481, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    8. Benchekroun, H. & Ray Chaudhuri, A., 2010. "'The Voracity Effect' and Climate Change : The Impact of Clean Technologies," Discussion Paper 2010-97, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    9. Hart, Rob, 2008. "The timing of taxes on CO2 emissions when technological change is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 194-212, March.
    10. Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B. & Stavins, Robert N., 2006. "The effects of economic and policy incentives on carbon mitigation technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 563-578, November.
    11. Castellini, Marta & Castelli, Chiara & Gusperti, Camilla & Lupi, Veronica & Vergalli, Sergio, 2025. "Balancing climate policies and economic development in the Mediterranean countries," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    12. Wei, Yi-Ming & Mi, Zhi-Fu & Huang, Zhimin, 2015. "Climate policy modeling: An online SCI-E and SSCI based literature review," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 57(PA), pages 70-84.
    13. Greiner, Alfred, 2005. "Anthropogenic climate change and abatement in a multi-region world with endogenous growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 224-234, November.
    14. Hammar, Henrik & Löfgren, Åsa, 2010. "Explaining adoption of end of pipe solutions and clean technologies--Determinants of firms' investments for reducing emissions to air in four sectors in Sweden," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 3644-3651, July.
    15. Chris Belmert Milindi & Roula Inglesi-Lotz, 2023. "Impact of technological progress on carbon emissions in different country income groups," Energy & Environment, , vol. 34(5), pages 1348-1382, August.
    16. Lucas Bretschger & Roger Ramer & Florentine Schwark, 2010. "Long-Run Effects of Post-Kyoto Policies: Applying a Fully Dynamic CGE model with Heterogeneous Capital," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 10/129, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    17. Bosetti, Valentina & Carraro, Carlo & Galeotti, Marzio, 2006. "Stabilisation Targets, Technical Change and the Macroeconomic Costs of Climate Change Control," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 12050, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    18. Nicola Cantore & Emilio Padilla, 2009. "Emissions distribution in post–Kyoto international negotiations: a policy perspective," Working Papers wpdea0907, Department of Applied Economics at Universitat Autonoma of Barcelona.
    19. Eyckmans, Johan & Hagem, Cathrine, 2011. "The European Union's potential for strategic emissions trading through permit sales contracts," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 247-267, January.
    20. Shenglang Yang, 2016. "Intangible capital and sectoral energy intensity: Evidence from 40 economies," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2016-646, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H0 - Public Economics - - General
    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • H3 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents

    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:fem:femwpa:2004.157. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Alberto Prina Cerai to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.