Climatic Change

, Volume 114, Issue 1, pp 121–143 | Cite as

Technology innovation and diffusion in “less than ideal” climate policies: An assessment with the WITCH model

  • Enrica De CianEmail author
  • Valentina Bosetti
  • Massimo Tavoni


This paper examines the dynamics of innovation in low-carbon energy technologies distinguishing between research and development and technology diffusion as a response to alternative climate policies. We assess the implications of second-best policies that depart from the assumption of immediate and global participation and of full technology availability. The analysis highlights the heterogeneous effects of climate policy on different energy R&D programs and discusses the contribution of important determinants such as carbon price and policy stringency, policy credibility, policy and technological spillovers and absorptive capacity.


OECD Country Clean Development Mechanism Climate Policy Absorptive Capacity Carbon Price 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Baker E, Shittu E (2006) Profit maximizing R&D investment in response to a random carbon tax. Resource Energ Econ 28:105–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barreto L, Kypreos S (2004) Endogenizing R&D and market experience in the bottom-up energy-systems ERIS model. Technovation 2:615–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bastianin A, Favero A, Massetti E (2010) Investments and financial flows induced by climate mitigation policies. FEEM Working Paper No. 13, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Milan.Google Scholar
  4. Binswanger HP, Ruttan VW (1978) Induced innovation: technology institutions and development. John Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  5. Blanford GJ (2009) R&D Investment strategy for climate change. Energy Econ 31(S1):S27–S36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bosetti V, Victor DG (2010) Politics and Economics of Second-Best Regulation of Greenhouse Gases: The Importance of Regulatory Credibility, FEEM Working Paper No. 29, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Milan.Google Scholar
  7. Bosetti V, Carraro C, Galeotti M, Massetti E, Tavoni M (2006) WITCH: a world induced technical change hybrid model. The Energ J, Special Issue on Hybrid Modeling of Energy-Environment Policies: Reconciling Bottom-up and Top-down, 13–38Google Scholar
  8. Bosetti V, Carraro C, Massetti E, Tavoni M (2008) International energy R&D spillovers and the economics of greenhouse gas atmospheric stabilization. Energ Econ 30:2912–2929CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bosetti V, Carraro C, Tavoni M (2009a) Climate change mitigation strategies in fast-growing countries: the benefits of early action, CESifo Working Paper No. 2742.Google Scholar
  10. Bosetti V, Carraro C, Duval R, Sgobbi A, Tavoni M (2009b) The role of R&D and technology diffusion in climate change mitigation: new perspectives using the WITCH model. OECD Working Paper No. 664, February.Google Scholar
  11. Bosetti V, Carraro C, Duval R, Tavoni M (2010) What should we expect from innovation? A model-based assessment of the environmental and mitigation cost implications of climate-related R&D, FEEM Working Paper No. 42, Fondazione Eni, Milan.Google Scholar
  12. Bürer MJ, Wüsternhagen R (2009) Which renewable energy policy is a venture capitalist’s best friend? Empirical evidence from a survey of international cleantech investors. Energ Pol 37:4997–5006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carraro C, De Cian E, Tavoni M (2009a) Human capital formation and global warming mitigation: evidence from an integrated assessment model, CESifo Working Paper No. 2874.Google Scholar
  14. Carraro C, Massetti E, Nicita L (2009b) How does climate policy affect technical change? An analysis of the direction and pace of technical progress in a climate-economy model. The Energ J 30(2):7–38Google Scholar
  15. Carraro C, De Cian E, Massetti E, Nicita L, Verdolini E (2010) Environmental policy and technical change: a survey. Int Rev Environ Resour Econ 4:163–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coe DT, Helpman E (1995) International R&D spillovers. Eur Econ Rev 39(5):859–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Criqui P, Klassen G, Schrattenholzer L (2000) The efficiency of energy R&D expenditures. Economic modeling of environmental policy and endogenous technical change, Amsterdam, November 16–17, 2000Google Scholar
  18. De Cian E, Tavoni M (2010) The role of international carbon offsets in a second-best climate policy: a numerical evaluation. FEEM Working Paper, No. 33, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei, Milan.Google Scholar
  19. Dechezleprêtre A, Glachant M, Ménière Y (2008) The clean development mechanism and the international diffusion of technologies: an empirical study. Energ Pol 36:1273–1283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dechezleprêtre A, Glachant M, Johnstone N, Haščič I, Ménière Y (2009) Invention and transfer of climate change mitigation technologies on a global scale: a study drawing on patent data, FEEM Working Paper 082.2009.Google Scholar
  21. Gerlagh R (2008) A climate–change policy induced shift from innovations in carbon-energy production to carbon-energy savings. Energ Econ 30(2):425–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gerschenkron A (1962) Economic backwardness in historical perspective. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gillingham K, Newell RG, Pizer WA (2008) Modelling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis. Energ Econ 30:2734–2753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goulder L, Schneider S (1999) Induced technological change and the attractiveness of CO2 emissions abatement policies. Resource Energ Econ 21:211–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Grossman G, Helpman E (1991) Innovation and growth in the global economy. The MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  26. Hart R (2008) The timing of taxes on CO2 emissions when technological change is endogenous. J Environ Econ Manage 55(2):194–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hicks JR (1932) The theory of wages. McMillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. Jamasab T (2007) Technical change theory and learning curves: patterns of progress in electric generation technologies. The Energ J 28(3)Google Scholar
  29. Keller W (2004) International technology diffusion. J Econ Lit 42(3):752–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kennedy C (1964) Induced bias in innovation and the theory of distribution. Econ J 74(295):541–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klassen G, Miketa A, Larsen K, Sundqvist T (2005) The impact of R&D on innovation for wind energy in Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom. Ecol Econ 54(2–3):227–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kouvaritakis N, Soria A, Isoard S (2000) Endogenous learning in world post-Kyoto scenarios: application of the POLES model under adaptive expectations. Int J Global Energ Issues 14(1–4):228–248Google Scholar
  33. Kypreos S (2007) A MERGE model with endogenous technical change and the cost of carbon stabilisation. Energ Pol 35:5327–5336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Löschel A (2002) Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey. Ecol Econ 43(2–3):105–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Luderer G, Bosetti V, Jakob M, Leimbach M, Steckel JC, Waisman H, Edenhofer O (2011) The economics of decarbonizing the energy system—results and insights from the RECIPE model intercomparison. Climatic Change. doi: 10.1007/s10584-011-0105-x.Google Scholar
  36. Meyer A (2004) Briefing: contraction and convergence. Eng Sustain 157(4):189–192Google Scholar
  37. Nemet GF (2010) Robust Incentives and the Design of a Climate Change Governance Regime, La Follette School Working Paper No. 2010–006.Google Scholar
  38. Nordhaus WD (2009) The Perils of the learning model for modeling endogenous technological change, NBER Working Paper 14638.Google Scholar
  39. Otto VM, Löschel A, Reilly J (2008) Directed technical change and differentiation of climate policy. Energ Econ 30(6):2855–2878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peri G (2005) Determinants of knowledge flows and their effects on innovation. The Rev Econ Stat 87(2):308–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Popp D (2002) Induced innovation and energy prices. Am Econ Rev 92(1):160–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Popp D (2004) ENTICE: endogenous technological change in the DICE model of global warming. J Environ Econ Manage 48(1):742–768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Popp D (2006) International innovation and diffusion of air pollution control technologies: the effects of NOX and SO2 regulation in the U.S., Japan, and Germany. J Environ Econ Manage 51(1):46–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Popp D, Hafner T, Johnstone N (2007) Policy vs. consumer pressure: innovation and diffusion of alternative bleaching technologies in the pulp industry. NBER Working Paper 13439Google Scholar
  45. Popp D, Newell R, Jaffe A (2009) Energy, the Environment, and Technological Change NBER Working Paper Series, No 14832, April 2009.Google Scholar
  46. Rosenberg N (1982) Inside the black box: technology and economics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. Rosenberg N (1994) Exploring the black box: technology, economics, and history. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Schmookler J (1966) Invention and economic growth. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  49. Seres S, Haites E, Murphy K (2009) Analysis of technology transfer in CDM projects: an update. Energ Pol 37:4919–4926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Söderholm P, Klassen G (2007) Wind power in Europe: a simultaneous innovation-diffusion model. Environ Res Econ 36(2):163–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sue Wing I (2003) Induced technical change and the cost of climate policy. MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change, Report No. 102, September 2003.Google Scholar
  52. Tavoni M, De Cian E, Luderer G, Steckel J (2011) The value of technology and of its evolution towards a low carbon economy. Climatic Change, forthcomingGoogle Scholar
  53. Verdolini E, Galeotti M (2009) At home and abroad: an empirical analysis of innovation and diffusion in energy-efficient technologies, FEEM Working Paper 123.2009.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Enrica De Cian
    • 1
    Email author
  • Valentina Bosetti
    • 1
  • Massimo Tavoni
    • 1
  1. 1.Fondazione ENI Enrico Mattei and Euro-Mediterranean Centre for Climate ChangeVeniceItaly

Personalised recommendations