IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ssb/dispap/521.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The clean development mechanism versus international permit trading: the effect on technological change

Author

Listed:

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Cathrine Hagem, 2007. "The clean development mechanism versus international permit trading: the effect on technological change," Discussion Papers 521, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
  • Handle: RePEc:ssb:dispap:521
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssb.no/a/publikasjoner/pdf/DP/dp521.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cathrine Hagem, 2002. "A Note on The Kyoto Protocol, Tradeable Quotas and Firm Survival," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(3), pages 467-468, July.
    2. Jeremy I. Bulow & John Geanakoplos & Paul D. Klemperer, 1983. "Multimarket Oligopoly," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 674, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Montero, Juan-Pablo, 2002. "Permits, Standards, and Technology Innovation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 23-44, July.
    4. Kjersti-Gro Lindquist, 1994. "Testing for Market Power in the Norwegian Primary Aluminium Industry," Discussion Papers 132, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    5. James A. Brander & Barbara J. Spencer, 1983. "Strategic Commitment with R&D: The Symmetric Case," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 14(1), pages 225-235, Spring.
    6. Fischer, Carolyn, 2005. "Project-based mechanisms for emissions reductions: balancing trade-offs with baselines," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(14), pages 1807-1823, September.
    7. 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.
    8. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, January.
    9. 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.
    10. Dixit, Avinash, 1980. "The Role of Investment in Entry-Deterrence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(357), pages 95-106, March.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Franz Wirl & Claus Huber & I.O Walker, 1998. "Joint Implementation: Strategic Reactions and Possible Remedies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(2), pages 203-224, September.
    15. Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
    16. Sheng-Peng Yang, 2001. "Measuring Market Power in the U.S. Aluminum Industry: A Residual Demand Approach," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 19(3), pages 365-380, November.
    17. Cathrine Hagem, 1996. "Joint implementation under asymmetric information and strategic behavior," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(4), pages 431-447, December.
    18. 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.
    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. Strand, Jon, 2011. "Carbon offsets with endogenous environmental policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 371-378, March.
    2. Klepper, Gernot, 2011. "The future of the European Emission Trading System and the Clean Development Mechanism in a post-Kyoto world," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 687-698, July.
    3. Imai, Kenichi, 2015. "Assessing the Effects of Kyoto Mechanisms on the Diffusion of Climate Change Mitigation Technologies," AGI Working Paper Series 2015-15, Asian Growth Research Institute.
    4. Strand, Jon & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2012. "Global emissions effects of CDM projects with relative baselines," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 533-548.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Climate Policy; Technology Adoption; Emission Trading; Clean Development Mechanism; Technological Change; Cournot Competition;

    JEL classification:

    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    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:ssb:dispap:521. 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: (L Maasø). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbgvno.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.