Climate agreements: emission quotas versus technology policies
The Kyoto Agreement is the result of international negotiations over many years. However, because of a number of weaknesses, different sorts of climate agreement have been suggested: for example, coordinated R&D activities that reduce abatement costs for all firms. We will compare an agreement focusing only on emissions (a Kyoto type of agreement) with an agreement focusing only on technology, assuming that the costs of abatement are affected by R&D in all firms through technology spillovers. In an emissions agreement, emissions should be restricted to the extent that the carbon price exceeds the Pigovian level. For sufficiently low technology spillovers, an emissions agreement is more efficient than a technology agreement specifying an R&D subsidy to be imposed on all firms in all countries. The opposite may hold if technology spillovers are sufficiently large. Finally, an alternative technology agreement specifying R&D expenditure in each country is more efficient than an agreement specifying an R&D subsidy.
|Date of creation:||29 Sep 2006|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Department of Economics, University of Oslo, P.O Box 1095 Blindern, N-0317 Oslo, Norway|
Phone: 22 85 51 27
Fax: 22 85 50 35
Web page: http://www.oekonomi.uio.no/indexe.html
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Carlo Carraro & Barbara Buchner, 2006.
"Economic and Environmental Effectiveness of a Technology-based Climate Protocol,"
2006_12, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
- 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.
- Carlo Carraro & Barbara Buchner, 2004. "Economic and Environmental Effectiveness of a Technology-based Climate Protocol," Working Papers 2004.61, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-21, January.
- Golombek, Rolf & Hagem, Cathrine & Hoel, Michael, 1995. "Efficient incomplete international climate agreements," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 25-46, May.
- Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-96, September.
- Hoel Michael, 1994.
"Efficient Climate Policy in the Presence of Free Riders,"
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 259-274, November.
- Hoel, M., 1993. "Efficient Climate Policy in the Presence of Free Riders," Memorandum 04/1993, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
- David G. Victor & Lesley A. Coben, 2005. "A Herd Mentality in the Design of International Environmental Agreements?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 5(1), pages 24-57, 02.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:osloec:2006_021. 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: (Magnus Gabriel Aase)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.