IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/5418.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey

Author

Listed:
  • Löschel, Andreas

Abstract

This paper provides an overview of the treatment of technological change in economic models of environmental policy. Numerous economic modeling studies have confirmed the sensitivity of mid- and long-run climate change mitigation cost and benefit projections to assumptions about technology costs. In general, technical progress is considered to be a noneconomic, exogenous variable in global climate change modeling. However, there is overwhelming evidence that technological change is not an exogenous variable but to an important degree endogenous, induced by needs and pressures. Hence, some environmenteconomy models treat technological change as endogenous, responding to socio-economic variables. Three main elements in models of technological innovation are: (i) corporate investment in research and development, (ii) spillovers from R&D, and (iii) technology learning, especially learning-by-doing. The incorporation of induced technological change in different types of environmental-economic models tends to reduce the costs of environmental policy, accelerates abatement and may lead to positive spillover and negative leakage.

Suggested Citation

  • Löschel, Andreas, 2001. "Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey," ZEW Discussion Papers 01-62, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:5418
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/24483/1/dp0162.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacobsen, Henrik Klinge, 2001. "Technological progress and long-term energy demand -- a survey of recent approaches and a Danish case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 147-157, January.
    2. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1994. "Endogenous Innovation in the Theory of Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 23-44, Winter.
    3. Jones, Clifton T, 1994. "Accounting for technical progress in aggregate energy demand," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 245-252, October.
    4. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    5. Stephen H. Schneider & Lawrence H. Goulder, 1997. "Achieving low-cost emissions targets," Nature, Nature, vol. 389(6646), pages 13-14, September.
    6. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    7. Demetrios Papathanasiou and Dennis Anderson, 2001. "Uncertainties in Responding to Climate Change: On the Economic Value of Technology Policies for Reducing Costs and Creating Options," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 79-114.
    8. Snorre Kverndokk & Knut Rosendahl & Thomas Rutherford, 2004. "Climate Policies and Induced Technological Change: Which to Choose, the Carrot or the Stick?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(1), pages 21-41, January.
    9. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    10. Lans Bovenberg, A. & Smulders, Sjak, 1995. "Environmental quality and pollution-augmenting technological change in a two-sector endogenous growth model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 369-391, July.
    11. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    12. Grubb, Michael & Chapuis, Thierry & Duong, Minh Ha, 1995. "The economics of changing course : Implications of adaptability and inertia for optimal climate policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4-5), pages 417-431.
    13. Stephen C. Peck & Thomas J. Teisberg, 1999. "CO2 Emissions Control Agreements: Incentives for Regional Participation," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 367-390.
    14. Ad Seebregts & Tom Kram & Gerrit Jan Schaeffer & Alexandra Bos, 2000. "Endogenous learning and technology clustering: analysis with MARKAL model of the Western European energy system," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(1/2/3/4), pages 289-319.
    15. Kemfert, Claudia & Welsch, Heinz, 2000. "Energy-Capital-Labor Substitution and the Economic Effects of CO2 Abatement: Evidence for Germany," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 641-660, November.
    16. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    17. Michael Grubb, 2000. "Economic dimensions of technological and global responses to the Kyoto protocol," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 27(1/2), pages 111-125, January.
    18. Grubler, Arnulf & Messner, Sabine, 1998. "Technological change and the timing of mitigation measures," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 495-512, December.
    19. Sabine Messner, 1997. "Endogenized technological learning in an energy systems model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 291-313.
    20. Neij, Lena, 1997. "Use of experience curves to analyse the prospects for diffusion and adoption of renewable energy technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(13), pages 1099-1107, November.
    21. M. Ha-Duong & M. J. Grubb & J.-C. Hourcade, 1997. "Influence of socioeconomic inertia and uncertainty on optimal CO2-emission abatement," Nature, Nature, vol. 390(6657), pages 270-273, November.
    22. John Beghin & David Roland-Holts & Dominique van der Mensbrugghe, 1995. "Trade Liberalization and the Environment in the Pacific Basin: Coordinated Approaches to Mexican Trade and Environment Policy," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(3), pages 778-785.
    23. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    24. Hourcade, Jean-Charles & Robinson, John, 1996. "Mitigating factors : Assessing the costs of reducing GHG emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(10-11), pages 863-873.
    25. Richard Tol, 1999. "Spatial and Temporal Efficiency in Climate Policy: Applications of FUND," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(1), pages 33-49, July.
    26. Terry Barker & Jonathan Köhler, 1998. "Equity and ecotax reform in the EU: achieving a 10 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions using excise duties," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 19(4), pages 375-402, November.
    27. Binswanger, Mathias, 2001. "Technological progress and sustainable development: what about the rebound effect?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 119-132, January.
    28. C Carraro & Jc Hourcade, 1998. "Climate modelling and policy strategies. The role of technical change and uncertainty," Post-Print hal-00716515, HAL.
    29. Stephen C Peck & Thomas J. Teisberg, 1992. "CETA: A Model for Carbon Emissions Trajectory Assessment," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 55-78.
    30. 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.
    31. Mackay, R.M & Probert, S.D, 1998. "Likely market-penetrations of renewable-energy technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 1-38, January.
    32. Bergman, Lars, 1990. "Energy and environmental constraints on growth: A CGE modeling approach," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 671-691.
    33. Dowlatabadi, Hadi, 1998. "Sensitivity of climate change mitigation estimates to assumptions about technical change," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(5-6), pages 473-493, December.
    34. Nikolaos Kouvaritakis & Antonio Soria & Stephane Isoard, 2000. "Modelling energy technology dynamics: methodology for adaptive expectations models with learning by doing and learning by searching," International Journal of Global Energy Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(1/2/3/4), pages 104-115.
    35. 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.
    36. 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.
    37. Alan S. Manne & Richard G. Richels, 1994. "The Costs of Stabilizing Global CO2 Emissions: A Probabilistic Analysis Based on Expert Judgments," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 31-56.
    38. Gritsevskyi, Andrii & Nakicenovi, Nebojsa, 2000. "Modeling uncertainty of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(13), pages 907-921, November.
    39. Jorgenson, Dale W. & Wilcoxen, Peter J., 1990. "Intertemporal general equilibrium modeling of U.S. environmental regulation," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 715-744.
    40. Michael E. Porter & Claas van der Linde, 1995. "Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 97-118, Fall.
    41. Ruttan, Vernon W, 1997. "Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory and Path Dependence:," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1520-1529, September.
    42. Manne, Alan S. & Barreto, Leonardo, 2004. "Learn-by-doing and carbon dioxide abatement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 621-633, July.
    43. Alan S. Manne & Richard G. Richels, 1999. "The Kyoto Protocol: A Cost-Effective Strategy for Meeting Environmental Objectives?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 1-23.
    44. Grubb, M. & Kohler, J., 2000. "Induced Technical Change: Evidence and Implications for Energy-Environmental Modelling and Policy," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 0031, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    45. Carraro, Carlo & Galeotti, Marzio, 1997. "Economic growth, international competitiveness and environmental protection: R & D and innovation strategies with the WARM model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 2-28, March.
    46. Carraro,Carlo & Siniscalco,Domenico (ed.), 1997. "New Directions in the Economic Theory of the Environment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521590891.
    47. Grubb, Michael, 1997. "Technologies, energy systems and the timing of CO2 emissions abatement : An overview of economic issues," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 159-172, February.
    48. Alan S. Mann & Richard G. Richels, 1990. "The Costs of Reducing U.S. CO2 Emissions - Further Sensitivity Analyses," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 69-78.
    49. Lucas, Robert Jr., 1988. "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-42, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Gillingham, Kenneth & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2008. "Modeling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2734-2753, November.
    2. Berglund, Christer & Soderholm, Patrik, 2006. "Modeling technical change in energy system analysis: analyzing the introduction of learning-by-doing in bottom-up energy models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(12), pages 1344-1356, August.
    3. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516, Elsevier.
    4. Kahouli-Brahmi, Sondes, 2008. "Technological learning in energy-environment-economy modelling: A survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 138-162, January.
    5. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Jacobsen, Henrik Klinge, 2001. "Technological progress and long-term energy demand -- a survey of recent approaches and a Danish case," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 147-157, January.
    9. Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2004. "Cost-effective environmental policy: implications of induced technological change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 1099-1121, November.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Karali, Nihan & Park, Won Young & McNeil, Michael, 2017. "Modeling technological change and its impact on energy savings in the U.S. iron and steel sector," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 447-458.
    13. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2007. "Measuring the value of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5287-5297, November.
    14. Kverndokk, Snorre & Rosendahl, Knut Einar & Rutherford, Thomas F., 2004. "Climate policies and induced technological change: Impacts and timing of technology subsidies," Memorandum 05/2004, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    15. Kalkuhl, Matthias & Edenhofer, Ottmar & Lessmann, Kai, 2012. "Learning or lock-in: Optimal technology policies to support mitigation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-23.
    16. 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.
    17. Lehmann, Paul & Gawel, Erik, 2013. "Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 597-607.
    18. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    19. Lindman, Åsa & Söderholm, Patrik, 2012. "Wind power learning rates: A conceptual review and meta-analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 754-761.
    20. Chen, Huayi & Zhou, P., 2019. "Modeling systematic technology adoption: Can one calibrated representative agent represent heterogeneous agents?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 257-270.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    exogenous technological change; induced technological change; environmenteconomy models;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C50 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - General
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • C68 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Computable General Equilibrium Models

    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:zbw:zewdip:5418. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.