Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 43, Issue 3, pp 369–390 | Cite as

Optimal Timing of Climate Change Policy: Interaction Between Carbon Taxes and Innovation Externalities

  • Reyer Gerlagh
  • Snorre Kverndokk
  • Knut Einar Rosendahl
Article

Abstract

This paper addresses the impact of endogenous technology through research and development (R&D) on the timing of climate change policy. We develop a model with a stock pollutant (carbon dioxide) and abatement technological change through R&D, and we use the model to study the interaction between carbon taxes and innovation externalities. Our analysis shows that the timing of optimal emission reduction policy strongly depends on the set of policy instruments available. When climate-specific R&D targeting instruments are available, policy has to use these to step up early innovation. When these instruments are not available, policy has to steer innovation through creating demand for emission saving technologies. That is, carbon taxes should be high compared to the Pigouvian levels when the abatement industry is developing. Finally, we calibrate the model in order to explore the magnitude of the theoretical findings within the context of climate change policy.

Keywords

Climate change Environmental policy Technological change Research and development 

JEL Classification

H21 O30 Q42 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barro R, Sala-i-Martin X (1995) Economic growth. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  2. Bovenberg AL, de Mooij RA (1994) Environmental levies and distortionary taxation. Am Econ Rev 84: 1085–1089Google Scholar
  3. BP Statistical Review of World Energy. June 2006. http://www.bp.com/productlanding.do?categorupId=6929&contentId=7044622
  4. Bramoulle Y, Olson LJ (2005) Allocation of pollution abatement under learning by doing. J Public Econ 89: 1935–1960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chou C, Shy O (1993) The crowding-out effects of long duration of patents. Rand J Econ 24(2): 304–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dixit A, Stiglitz JE (1977) Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. Am Econ Rev 67: 297–308Google Scholar
  7. Encaoua D, Ulph D (2004) Catching-up or leapfrogging? The effects of competition on innovation and growth. Updated version of report 2000.97. Economie Mathematique et Applications, ParisGoogle Scholar
  8. Gerlagh R, Lise W (2005) Carbon taxes: a drop in the ocean, or a drop that erodes the stone? The effect of carbon taxes on technological change. Ecol Econ 54: 241–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gerlagh R, van der Zwaan BCC (2004) A sensitivity analysis on timing and costs of greenhouse gas abatement, calculations with DEMETER. Clim Change 65: 39–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gerlagh R, Kverndokk S, Rosendahl KE (2008) Linking environmental and innovation policy, Nota di Lavoro 53.2008, FEEM—Fondazione Eni Enrico MatteiGoogle Scholar
  11. Golombek R, Hoel M (2005) Climate policy under technology spillover. Environ Res Econ 31: 201–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Goulder LH, Mathai K (2000) Optimal CO2 abatement in the presence of induced technological change. J Environ Econ Manag 39: 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greaker M, Pade L-L, Optimal CO2 abatement and technological change—should emission taxes start high to spur R&D? Discussion paper 548, Statistics Norway, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  14. Grübler A, Messner S (1998) Technological change and the timing of mitigation measures. Energy Econ 20: 495–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ha-Duong M, Grubb MJ, Hourcade JC (1997) Influence of socioeconomic inertia and uncertainty on optimal CO2-emission abatement. Nature 390: 270–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hartman R, Kwon OS (2005) Sustainable growth and the environmental Kuznets curve. J Econ Dyn Control 29: 1701–1736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hart R (2008) The timing of taxes on CO2 emissions when technological change is endogenous. J Env Econ Manag 55: 194–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hoel M (1996) Should a carbon tax be differentiated across sectors. J Public Econ 59: 17–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. IEA (2002) Renewables information 2002. OECD/IEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  20. IEA (2005) World energy outlook 2005. OECD/IEA, ParisGoogle Scholar
  21. IPCC (1995) Climate change 1994. Radiative forcing of climate change and an evaluation of the IPCC IS92 emission scenarios. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. IPCC (2000) Special report on emissions scenarios (SRES). Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USA(1996) The MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  23. IPCC (2007) Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  24. Isoard S, Soria A (2001) Technical change dynamics: evidence from the emerging renewable energy technologies. Energy Econ 23: 619–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Iwaisako T, Futagami K (2003) Patent policy in an endogenous growth model. J Econ 78: 239–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Judd KL (1985) On the performance of patents. Econometrica 53: 567–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Knapp KE (1999) Exploring energy technology substitution for reducing atmoshperic carbon emissions. Energy J 20(2): 121–143Google Scholar
  28. Kverndokk S, Rosendahl KE, Rutherford TF (2004) Climate policies and induced technological change: which to choose, the carrot or the stick?.  Environ Res Econ 27(1): 21–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kverndokk S, Rosendahl KE (2007) Climate policies and learning by doing: impacts and timing of technology subsidies. Res Energy Econ 29: 58–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lieberman MB (1984) The learning curve and pricing in the chemical processing industries. Rand J Econ 15: 213–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liski M (2002) Taxing average emissions to overcome the shutdown problem. J Public Econ 85: 363–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Manne A, Richels R (2004) The impact of learning-by-doing on the timing and costs of CO 2 abatement. Energy Econ (Special Issue) 26: 603–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nordhaus WD (1969) Theory of innovation, an economic theory of technological change. Am Econ Rev 59: 18–28Google Scholar
  34. Nordhaus WD (2002) Modeling induced innovation in climate-change policy. In: Grübler A, Nakicenovic N, Nordhaus WD (eds), Modeling induced innovation in climate-change policy, Chap. 9. Resources for the Future Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  35. Popp D (2004) ENTICE: endogenous technological change in the DICE model of global warming. J Environ Econ Manag 48: 742–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rivers N, Jaccard M (2006) Choice of environmental policy in the presence of learning by doing. Energy Econ 28: 223–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Romer PM (1987) Growth based on increasing returns due to specialization. Am Econ Rev 77(2): 56–62Google Scholar
  38. Romer PM (1990) Endogenous technological change. J Polit Econ 98(5): 71–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosendahl KE (2004) Cost-effective environmental policy: implications of induced technological change. J Environ Econ Manag 48: 1099–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Söderholm P, Klaassen G (2007) Wind power in Europe: a simultaneous innovation-diffusion model. Energy Res Econ 36: 163–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Söderholm P, Sundqvist T (2006) Empirical challenges in the use of learning curves for assessing the economic prospects of renewable energy technologies. Renew Energy 32: 2559–2578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stern review on the economics of climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  43. van der Zwaan BCC, Gerlagh R, Klaassen GAJ, Schrattenholzer L (2002) Endogenous technological change in climate change modelling. Energy Econ 24: 1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wigley TML, Richels R, Edmonds JA (1996) Economic and environmental choices in the stabilization of atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Nature 379: 240–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Reyer Gerlagh
    • 1
    • 2
  • Snorre Kverndokk
    • 3
  • Knut Einar Rosendahl
    • 4
  1. 1.Economics, School of Social SciencesUniversity of ManchesterManchesterUK
  2. 2.Institute for Environmental StudiesVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamNetherlands
  3. 3.Ragnar Frisch Centre for Economic ResearchOsloNorway
  4. 4.Research DepartmentStatistics NorwayOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations