Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fem/femwpa/2008.53.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Linking Environmental and Innovation Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Reyer Gerlagh

    (University of Manchester)

  • Snorre Kverndokk

    (Ragnar Frisch Centre for Economic Research)

  • Knut Einar Rosendah

    (Research Department, Statistics Norway)

Abstract
This paper addresses the timing and interdependence between innovation and environmental policy in a model of research and development (R&D). On a first-best path the environmental tax is set at the Pigouvian level, independent of innovation policy. With infinite patent lifetime, the R&D subsidy should be constant and independent of the state of the environment. However, with finite patent lifetime, optimal innovation policy depends on the stage of the environmental problem. In the early stages of an environmental problem, abatement research should be subsidized at a high level and this subsidy should fall monotonically over time to stimulate initial R&D investments. Alternatively, with a constant R&D subsidy, patents’ length should initially have a very long life-time but this should be gradually shortened. In a second-best situation with no deployment subsidy for abatement equipment, we find that the environmental tax should be high compared to the Pigouvian levels when an abatement industry is developing, but the relative difference falls over time. That is, environmental policies will be accelerated compared to first-best.

Suggested Citation

  • Reyer Gerlagh & Snorre Kverndokk & Knut Einar Rosendah, 2008. "Linking Environmental and Innovation Policy," Working Papers 2008.53, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    • Handle: RePEc:fem:femwpa:2008.53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://feem-media.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/NDL2008-053.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bovenberg, A Lans & Smulders, Sjak A, 1996. "Transitional Impacts of Environmental Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 861-893, November.
    2. Bramoulle, Yann & Olson, Lars J., 2005. "Allocation of pollution abatement under learning by doing," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(9-10), pages 1935-1960, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Stephen M. Maurer & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2006. "Profit Neutrality in Licensing: The Boundary Between Antitrust Law and Patent Law," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 8(3), pages 476-522.
    5. 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.
    6. Stern,Nicholas, 2007. "The Economics of Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521700801.
    7. 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.
    8. Gerlagh , Reyer & Kverndokk , Snorre & Rosendahl , Knut Einar, 2007. "Optimal Timing of Environmental Policy: Interaction Between Environmental Taxes and Innovation Externalities," Memorandum 26/2006, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    9. Bretschger, Lucas & Smulders, Sjak, 2000. "Explaining environmental Kuznets curves: How pollution induces policy and new technologies," Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Diskussionspapiere 12/2000, University of Greifswald, Faculty of Law and Economics.
    10. Hoel, Michael & Kverndokk, Snorre, 1996. "Depletion of fossil fuels and the impacts of global warming," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 115-136, June.
    11. Reyer Gerlagh & Bob van der Zwaan, 2006. "Options and Instruments for a Deep Cut in CO2 Emissions: Carbon Dioxide Capture or Renewables, Taxes or Subsidies?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3), pages 25-48.
    12. Mads Greaker & Lise-Lotte Pade, 2008. "Optimal CO2 abatement and technological change. Should emission taxes start high in order to spur R&D?," Discussion Papers 548, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    13. Parry, Ian W. H., 1995. "Optimal pollution taxes and endogenous technological progress," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 69-85, May.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    17. Hart, Rob, 2008. "The timing of taxes on CO2 emissions when technological change is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 194-212, March.
    18. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2005. "A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 164-174, August.
    19. Loschel, Andreas, 2002. "Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 105-126, December.
    20. Futagami, Koichi & Iwaisako, Tatsuro, 2007. "Dynamic analysis of patent policy in an endogenous growth model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 306-334, January.
    21. Chien-fu Chou & Oz Shy, 1993. "The Crowding-Out Effects of Long Duration of Patents," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 304-312, Summer.
    22. van der Zwaan, B. C. C. & Gerlagh, R. & G. & Klaassen & Schrattenholzer, L., 2002. "Endogenous technological change in climate change modelling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-19, January.
    23. Carraro, Carlo & Gerlagh, Reyer & Zwaan, Bob van der, 2003. "Endogenous technical change in environmental macroeconomics," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-10, February.
    24. Tatsuro Iwaisako & Koichi Futagami, 2003. "Patent Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 78(3), pages 239-258, March.
    25. 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.
    26. Liski, Matti, 2002. "Taxing average emissions to overcome the shutdown problem," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 363-384, September.
    27. Kverndokk, Snorre & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2007. "Climate policies and learning by doing: Impacts and timing of technology subsidies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 58-82, January.
    28. 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.
    29. Judd, Kenneth L, 1985. "On the Performance of Patents," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(3), pages 567-585, May.
    30. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
    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. 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.
    2. Grimaud, André & Lafforgue, Gilles & Magné, Bertrand, 2011. "Climate change mitigation options and directed technical change: A decentralized equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 938-962.
    3. André Grimaud & Gilles Lafforgue, 2008. "Climate change mitigation policies : Are R&D subsidies preferable to a carbon tax ?," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 118(6), pages 915-940.
    4. Grimaud, André & Rouge, Luc, 2014. "Carbon sequestration, economic policies and growth," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 307-331.
    5. Heggedal, Tom-Reiel & Jacobsen, Karl, 2011. "Timing of innovation policies when carbon emissions are restricted: An applied general equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 913-937.
    6. Chu, Hsun & Lai, Ching-chong, 2014. "Abatement R&D, market imperfections, and environmental policy in an endogenous growth model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 20-37.
    7. EFI - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation (ed.), 2013. "Research, innovation and technological performance in Germany - EFI Report 2013," Reports on Research, Innovation and Technological Performance in Germany, Expertenkommission Forschung und Innovation (EFI) - Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin, volume 127, number 2013e, September.
    8. Grimaud, André & Magné, Bertrand & Rougé, Luc, 2009. "Polluting Non-Renewable Resources, Carbon Abatement and Climate Policy in a Romer Growth Model," TSE Working Papers 09-023, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    9. Reyer Gerlagh & Snorre Kverndokk & Knut Rosendahl, 2009. "Optimal Timing of Climate Change Policy: Interaction Between Carbon Taxes and Innovation Externalities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(3), pages 369-390, July.
    10. Bye, Brita & Jacobsen, Karl, 2011. "Restricted carbon emissions and directed R&D support; an applied general equilibrium analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 543-555, May.
    11. Mads Greaker & Lise-Lotte Pade, 2008. "Optimal CO2 abatement and technological change. Should emission taxes start high in order to spur R&D?," Discussion Papers 548, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    12. Brita Bye & Karl Jacobsen, 2009. "On general versus emission saving R&D support," Discussion Papers 584, Statistics Norway, Research Department.

    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. Gerlagh, Reyer & Kverndokk, Snorre & Rosendahl, Knut Einar, 2014. "The optimal time path of clean energy R&D policy when patents have finite lifetime," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 2-19.
    2. 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.
    3. Gerlagh , Reyer & Kverndokk , Snorre & Rosendahl , Knut Einar, 2007. "Optimal Timing of Environmental Policy: Interaction Between Environmental Taxes and Innovation Externalities," Memorandum 26/2006, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    4. Reyer Gerlagh & Snorre Kverndokk & Knut Rosendahl, 2009. "Optimal Timing of Climate Change Policy: Interaction Between Carbon Taxes and Innovation Externalities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(3), pages 369-390, July.
    5. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2007. "Measuring the value of induced technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5287-5297, November.
    6. Tunç Durmaz & Fred Schroyen, 2020. "Evaluating Carbon Capture And Storage In A Climate Model With Endogenous Technical Change," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 1-47, February.
    7. Heggedal, Tom-Reiel & Jacobsen, Karl, 2011. "Timing of innovation policies when carbon emissions are restricted: An applied general equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 913-937.
    8. Brita Bye & Karl Jacobsen, 2009. "On general versus emission saving R&D support," Discussion Papers 584, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    9. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    10. Heinzel, Christoph & Winkler, Ralph, 2006. "Gradual versus structural technological change in the transition to a low-emission energy industry: How time-to-build and differing social and individual discount rates influence environmental and tec," Dresden Discussion Paper Series in Economics 09/06, Technische Universität Dresden, Faculty of Business and Economics, Department of Economics.
    11. Baker, Erin & Clarke, Leon & Shittu, Ekundayo, 2008. "Technical change and the marginal cost of abatement," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 2799-2816, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Bye, Brita & Jacobsen, Karl, 2011. "Restricted carbon emissions and directed R&D support; an applied general equilibrium analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 543-555, May.
    14. Mads Greaker & Lise-Lotte Pade, 2008. "Optimal CO2 abatement and technological change. Should emission taxes start high in order to spur R&D?," Discussion Papers 548, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    15. Rob Aalbers & Victoria Shestalova & Viktoria Kocsis, 2012. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," CPB Discussion Paper 223, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    16. Grimaud, André & Lafforgue, Gilles & Magné, Bertrand, 2011. "Climate change mitigation options and directed technical change: A decentralized equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 938-962.
    17. Oscar Afonso & Ana Catarina Afonso, 2015. "Endogenous Growth Effects of Environmental Policies," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 62(5), pages 607-629, December.
    18. 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.
    19. Vogt-Schilb, Adrien & Meunier, Guy & Hallegatte, Stéphane, 2018. "When starting with the most expensive option makes sense: Optimal timing, cost and sectoral allocation of abatement investment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 210-233.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Policy; Research and Development; Innovation Subsidies; Patents;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • Q42 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Alternative Energy Sources

    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:fem:femwpa:2008.53. 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: Alberto Prina Cerai (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.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.