IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ube/dpvwib/dp0502.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intensity Targeting or Emission CAPS: Non-Cooperative Climate Change Policies and Technological Change

Author

Listed:
  • Georg M ller-F rstenberger
  • Gunter Stephan

Abstract

This paper analyses costs and benefits of three different post-Kyoto policy options: On the one hand there is PARETO which is the nickname for the pareto-efficient internationalization of the external effects of global climate change through trading carbon emission rights on open global markets. And there is QCAP as well as ICAP on the other. Both are unilateral climate policies. QCAP denotes a scenario where regions aim for reducing domestic carbon emissions by a certain percentage annually. ICAP is a short cut for intensity targeting which is the US' most preferred climate policy option. In a world without uncertainty about future GDP and carbon dioxide emissions it refers to the same abatement policy, however by means of technological progress only

Suggested Citation

  • Georg M ller-F rstenberger & Gunter Stephan, 2005. "Intensity Targeting or Emission CAPS: Non-Cooperative Climate Change Policies and Technological Change," Diskussionsschriften dp0502, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    • Handle: RePEc:ube:dpvwib:dp0502
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repec.vwiit.ch/dp/dp0502.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William D. Nordhaus & Joseph G. Boyer, 1999. "Requiem for Kyoto: An Economic Analysis of the Kyoto Protocol," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 93-130.
    2. Wolfgang Keller, 2004. "International Technology Diffusion," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 752-782, September.
    3. Reyer Gerlagh & Bob van der Zwaan & Marjan Hofkes & Ger Klaassen, 2004. "Impacts of CO 2 -Taxes in an Economy with Niche Markets and Learning-by-Doing," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(3), pages 367-394, July.
    4. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Chakravorty, Ujjayant & Roumasset, James & Tse, Kinping, 1997. "Endogenous Substitution among Energy Resources and Global Warming," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(6), pages 1201-1234, December.
    6. Manne, Alan & Mendelsohn, Robert & Richels, Richard, 1995. "MERGE : A model for evaluating regional and global effects of GHG reduction policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 17-34, January.
    7. Georg Müller-Fürstenberg & Gunter Stephan, 2002. "Where-to-Abate' And 'Where-to-Invest' Flexibility - An Integrated Assessment Analysis of Climate Change," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 138(II), pages 191-213, June.
    8. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    9. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Mathai, Koshy, 2000. "Optimal CO2 Abatement in the Presence of Induced Technological Change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 1-38, January.
    10. Buonanno, Paolo & Carraro, Carlo & Galeotti, Marzio, 2003. "Endogenous induced technical change and the costs of Kyoto," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 11-34, February.
    11. 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.
    12. Gunter Stephan & Georg Müller-Fürstenberger, 2004. "Does Distribution Matter? Efficiency, Equity and Flexibility in Greenhouse Gas Abatement," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(1), pages 87-107, January.
    13. Stephan, Gunter & Muller-Furstenberger, Georg, 1998. "Discounting and the Economic Costs of Altruism in Greenhouse Gas Abatement," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 321-338.
    14. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Schneider, Stephen H., 1999. "Induced technological change and the attractiveness of CO2 abatement policies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 211-253, August.
    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. Jürgen Hogrefe & Jörg Jasper & Uwe Knickrehm & Felix Würtenberger, 2007. "Fragen der künftigen Entwicklung des europäischen Handelssystems für Emissionsrechte," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 76(1), pages 126-139.

    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. Sue Wing, Ian, 2006. "Representing induced technological change in models for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(5-6), pages 539-562, November.
    2. Gerlagh, Reyer & Lise, Wietze, 2005. "Carbon taxes: A drop in the ocean, or a drop that erodes the stone? The effect of carbon taxes on technological change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 241-260, August.
    3. 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.
    4. Pizer, William A. & Popp, David, 2008. "Endogenizing technological change: Matching empirical evidence to modeling needs," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2754-2770, November.
    5. Reyer Gerlagh & Marjan W. Hofkes, 2004. "Time Profile of Climate Change Stabilization Policy," Working Papers 2004.139, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    6. Popp, David, 2004. "ENTICE: endogenous technological change in the DICE model of global warming," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 742-768, July.
    7. Nidhi R. Santen & Mort D. Webster & David Popp & Ignacio Pérez-Arriaga, 2014. "Inter-temporal R&D and Capital Investment Portfolios for the Electricity Industry's Low Carbon Future," CESifo Working Paper Series 5139, CESifo.
    8. Rolf Golombek & Michael Hoel, 2005. "Climate Policy under Technology Spillovers," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(2), pages 201-227, June.
    9. David Popp, 2003. "ENTICE: Endogenous Technological Change in the DICE Model of Global Warming," NBER Working Papers 9762, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2008. "A climate-change policy induced shift from innovations in carbon-energy production to carbon-energy savings," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 425-448, March.
    11. CARRARO Carlo & MASSETTI Emanuele & NICITA Lea, 2010. "How Does Climate Policy Affect Technical Change? ?An Analysis of the Direction and Pace of Technical Progress in a Climate-Economy Model (Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei)," ESRI Discussion paper series 229, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    12. Bye, Brita & Fæhn, Taran & Heggedal, Tom-Reiel, 2009. "Welfare and growth impacts of innovation policies in a small, open economy; an applied general equilibrium analysis," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1075-1088, September.
    13. Popp, David & Newell, Richard G. & Jaffe, Adam B., 2010. "Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 873-937, Elsevier.
    14. Nidhi R. Santen & Mort D. Webster & David Popp & Ignacio Pérez-Arriaga, 2014. "Inter-temporal R&D and Capital Investment Portfolios for the Electricity Industry’s Low Carbon Future," NBER Working Papers 20783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Di Maria, Corrado & Smulders, Sjak, 2017. "A paler shade of green: Environmental policy under induced technical change," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 151-169.
    16. 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.
    17. Reyer Gerlagh, 2004. "A Climate-Change Policy Induced Shift from Innovations in Energy Production to Energy Savings," Working Papers 2004.128, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2007. "Measuring the value of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5287-5297, November.
    19. Leimbach, Marian & Baumstark, Lavinia, 2010. "The impact of capital trade and technological spillovers on climate policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2341-2355, October.
    20. Carraro, Carlo & De Cian, Enrica & Nicita, Lea & Massetti, Emanuele & Verdolini, Elena, 2010. "Environmental Policy and Technical Change: A Survey," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(2), pages 163-219, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Climate policy; intensity targeting; R&D investments; Integrated Assessment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q38 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy (includes OPEC Policy)
    • Q43 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy and the Macroeconomy

    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:ube:dpvwib:dp0502. 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: Franz Koelliker (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vwibech.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.