Skip to main content

Impact Assessment and Sustainability

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: ZEW Economic Studies ((ZEW,volume 31))

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Blanchard, O., P. Criqui, A. Kitous, and L. Viguier (2003), Combining Efficiency with Equity: A Pragmatic Approach, in: Kaul, I., P. Conceicao, K. Le Goulven, and R. Mendoza (Eds.), Providing Global Public Goods: Making Globalization Work for All, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanchard, O., P. Criqui, M. Trommetter, and L. Viguier (2001), Equity and Efficiency in Climate Change Negotiations: A Scenario for World Emission Entitlements by 2030, IEPE, Cahier de Recherche no 26, http://www.upmf-grenoble.fr/iepe/Publications/cahiers.html.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer, C. (2002), Climate Politics from Kyoto to Bonn: From Little to Nothing?, The Energy Journal 23(2), 51–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer, C. and A. Löschel (2002), Assessing the Costs of Compliance: The Kyoto Protocol, European Environment, 12(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer, C. and A. Löschel (2002), Economic Impacts of Carbon Abatement Strategies, in: C. Böhringer, M. Finus, and C. Vogt, Controlling Global Warming, Cheltenham, 105–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer, C. and T.F. Rutherford (2002), Carbon Abatement and International Spillovers, Environmental and Resource Economics 22(3), 391–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer, C. (2002), Sustainable Impact Analysis: The Use of Computable General Equilibrium Models in Methodological Tools for SIA, Report of the CEPII Workshop held on 7–8 November 2002 in Brussels, No. 2003-19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer, C. (2001), Climate Politics from Kyoto to Bonn: From Little to Nothing?!?, ZEW Discussion Paper No. 01-49, Mannheim, http://www.zew.de/de/publikationen/neuepublikationen.php3?action=article_show&id=0000000813.

    Google Scholar 

  • Böhringer, C. et al. (2000), European Emission Mitigation Policy and Technological Evolution: Economic Evaluation with the GEM-E3-EG Model (GEM-E3-ELITE), Final Report to the EC, Contract No. JOS3-CT97-0017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulanger, P.M. and T. Brechet (2002), Setting Concepts into Motion. Improving Scientific Tools in Support of Sustainable Development Decision-Making, http://www.belspo.be/belspo/home/publ/pub_ostc/AS/dddobo_en.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capros, P., N. Kouvaritakis and L. Mantzos (2001), Top-Down Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Possibilities in the EU, Final Report to EC-DG ENV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capros, P. (2000), Technology Evolution and Energy Modelling, special issue of the International Journal of Global Energy Issues (IJGEI) 14, 1–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capros, P., L. Mantzos, D. Petrellis, V. Panos, K. Delkis, J-F. Guilmot, and E.L. Vouyoukas (1999), European Union Energy Outlook to 2020, special issue of Energy in Europe, European Commission Directorate General for Energy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capros, P., P. Georgakopoulos, D. Van Regemorter, S. Proost, T. Schmidt, H. Koschel, K. Conrad, and E.L. Vouyoukas (1999), Climate Technology Strategies 2 — The Macro-Economic Cost and Benefit of Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the European Union, ZEW Economic Studies Vol. 4, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capros, P., P. Georgakopoulos, D. van Regemorter, and D. Willenbockel (1998), Aggregate Results of the Single Market Programme, in: General Equilibrium Macro-Economic Ex-Post Evaluation of the EU Single Market Programme, Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Criqui, P. and N. Kouvaritakis (2000), World Energy Projections to 2030, International Journal of Global Energy Issues 14, 116–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Criqui, P., N. Kouvaritakis, and C. Thonet (2000), World Post-Kyoto Scenarios: Benefits from Accelerated Technology Progress, International Journal of Global Energy Issues, 14, 184–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Criqui, P., S. Mima, and L. Viguier (1999), Marginal Abatement Costs of C02 Emission Reductions, Geographical Flexibility and Concrete Ceilings: An Assessment Using the POLES Model, Energy Policy, 27(10), 585–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckerinann, F., A. Hunt, T. Taylor, and M. Stronzik (2003), The Role of Transaction Costs and Risk Premia in the Determination of Climate Change Policy Responses, ZEW Discussion Paper No. 03-59, Mannheim, ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp0359.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2002), Communication on Impact Assessment, COM(2002)276 final.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (1996), POLES 2.2, DG XII, EUR 17358, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (1995/1999), EXTERNE: Externalities of Energy, volumes 1-10, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (1995), Computable General Equilibrium Model for Studying Economy-Energy-Environment Interactions GEM-E3, DG XII, EUR 16714, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (1995), PRIMES, DG XII, EUR 16713, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrich, R. and P. Bickel (Eds.) (2001), Environmental External Costs of Transport, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • HM Treasury (1997), The Green Book. Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Löschel, A. and M. Mraz (2002), EU Enlargement and Environmental Policy, in: p Böhringer, C. and A. Loschel (Eds.), Empirical Modeling of the Economy and the Environment, ZEW Economic Studies Vol. 20, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Navrud S. (2000), Strengths, Weaknesses and Policy Utility of Valuation Techniques and Benefit Transfer Methods, Invited paper for the OECD-USDA workshop “The Value of Rural Amenities: Dealing with Public Goods, Non-Market Goods and Externalities”, Washington D.C., June 5–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navrud, S. and O. Bergland (2000) Value Transfer and Environmental Policy, Policy Research Brief Series 8, Cambridge Research for the Environment, http://www.mluri.sari.ac.uk/serp/research/eve/publ.html#PRB).

    Google Scholar 

  • Navrud, S. and G.J. Pruckner (1997), Environmental Valuation — To Use or Not to Use? A Comparative Study of the United States and Europe, Environmental and Resource Economics 10, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1997), Regulatory Impact Analysis — Best Practices in OECD Countries, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J. (1998), Methods for IA: The Challenges and Opportunities ahead, in: Rotmans, J. and P. Vellinga (Eds.), Challenges and Opportunities for Integrated Environmental Assessment, Environmental Modeling & Assessment, Bussum, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J. and H. Dowlatabadi (1998), Integrated Assessment of Climate Change: Evaluation of Methods and Strategies, in: Reyner, S. and E. Malone (Eds.), Human Choice and Climate change: An International Social Sciences Assessment, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rotmans, J. and P. Vellinga (Eds.) (1998), Challenges and Opportunities for Integrated Environmental Assessment, Environmental Modeling & Assessment, Bussum, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spash, C. (2000), The Concerted Action on Environmental Valuation in Europe (EVE): an Introduction, Policy Research Brief Series 1, Cambridge Research for the Environment, Cambridge, United Kingdom (http://www.mluri.sari.ac.uk/serp/research/eve/publ.html#PRB).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stirling, A. (Ed.) (1999), On Science and Precaution in the Management of Technological Risks, A ESTO Project Report — IPTS, EUR 19056 EN, Luxembourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamborra M. (2003), Developing Tools for Sustainability Impact Assessment: The Role of Socioeconomic Research in the EU, paper presented at the conference “New Directions in Impact Assessment for Development: Methods and Practice”, 24–25 November 2003, http://www.enterprise-impact.org.uk/conference/Abstracts/Tamborra. shtml.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamborra, M. (2002), Socio-Economic Tools for Sustainability Impact Assessment, the Contribution of EU Research to Sustainable Development, European Commission, EUR 20437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viscusi, W.K. (1997), Improving the Analytical Basis for Regulatory Decision-Making, in: OECD, Regulatory Impact Analysis. Best Practices in OECD Countries, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Physica-Verlag Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tamborra, M. (2005). Impact Assessment and Sustainability. In: Böhringer, C., Lange, A. (eds) Applied Research in Environmental Economics. ZEW Economic Studies, vol 31. Physica-Verlag HD. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-7908-1645-0_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics