IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aen/journl/2006se_jaccard-a05.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards General Equilibrium in a Technology-Rich Model with Empirically Estimated Behavioral Parameters

Author

Listed:
  • Chris Bataille, Mark Jaccard, John Nyboer and Nic Rivers

Abstract

Most energy-economy policy models offered to policy makers are deficient in terms of at least one of technological explicitness, microeconomic realism, or macroeconomic completeness. We herein describe CIMS, a model which starts with the technological explicitness of the Òbottom-upÓ approach and adds the microeconomic realism and macroeconomic completeness of the ÒtopdownÓ CGE approach. This paper demonstrates CIMSÕ direct utility for policy analysis, and also how it can be used to better estimate the long run capital-forenergy substitution elasticity (ESUB) and autonomous energy efficiency index (AEEI) technology parameters used in top-down models. By running CIMS under several possible energy price futures and observing their effects on capital and energy input shares and energy consumption, we estimate an economy-wide ESUB of 0.26 and an AEEI of 0.57%, with significant sectoral differences for both parameters.

Suggested Citation

  • Chris Bataille, Mark Jaccard, John Nyboer and Nic Rivers, 2006. "Towards General Equilibrium in a Technology-Rich Model with Empirically Estimated Behavioral Parameters," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 93-112.
    • Handle: RePEc:aen:journl:2006se_jaccard-a05
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iaee.org/en/publications/ejarticle.aspx?id=2169
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to IAEE members and subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frei, Christoph W. & Haldi, Pierre-Andre & Sarlos, Gerard, 2003. "Dynamic formulation of a top-down and bottom-up merging energy policy model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(10), pages 1017-1031, August.
    2. Sands, Ronald D., 2004. "Dynamics of carbon abatement in the Second Generation Model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 721-738, July.
    3. Bohringer, Christoph, 1998. "The synthesis of bottom-up and top-down in energy policy modeling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 233-248, June.
    4. Christensen, Laurits R & Jorgenson, Dale W & Lau, Lawrence J, 1973. "Transcendental Logarithmic Production Frontiers," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 55(1), pages 28-45, February.
    5. McKibbin, Warwick J. & Wilcoxen, Peter J., 1998. "The theoretical and empirical structure of the G-Cubed model," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 123-148, January.
    6. McDonald, Alan & Schrattenholzer, Leo, 2001. "Learning rates for energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 255-261, March.
    7. Jaccard, Mark & Bataille, Chris, 2000. "Estimating future elasticities of substitution for the rebound debate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6-7), pages 451-455, June.
    8. Schafer, Andreas & Jacoby, Henry D., 2005. "Technology detail in a multisector CGE model: transport under climate policy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-24, January.
    9. Mark K. Jaccard & John Nyboer & Crhis Bataille & Bryn Sadownik, 2003. "Modeling the Cost of Climate Policy: Distinguishing Between Alternative Cost Definitions and Long-Run Cost Dynamics," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 49-73.
    10. Koopmans, Carl C. & te Velde, Dirk Willem, 2001. "Bridging the energy efficiency gap: using bottom-up information in a top-down energy demand model," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 57-75, January.
    11. Mark Jaccard & Alison Bailie & John Nyboer, 1996. "CO2 Emission Reduction Costs in the Residential Sector: Behavioral Parameters in a Bottom-Up Simulation Model," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 107-134.
    12. Klinge Jacobsen, Henrik, 1998. "Integrating the bottom-up and top-down approach to energy-economy modelling: the case of Denmark," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 443-461, September.
    13. Griffin, James M, 1977. "The Econometrics of Joint Production: Another Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(4), pages 389-397, November.
    14. McKitrick, Ross R., 1998. "The econometric critique of computable general equilibrium modeling: the role of functional forms," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 543-573, October.
    15. Nic Rivers & Mark Jaccard, 2005. "Combining Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Energy-Economy Modeling Using Discrete Choice Methods," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1), pages 83-106.
    16. Michaelis, Laurie & Davidson, Ogunlade, 1996. "GHG mitigation in the transport sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(10-11), pages 969-984.
    17. McFarland, J. R. & Reilly, J. M. & Herzog, H. J., 2004. "Representing energy technologies in top-down economic models using bottom-up information," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 685-707, July.
    18. Bernstein, Paul M. & Montgomery, W. David & Rutherford, Thomas F., 1999. "Global impacts of the Kyoto agreement: results from the MS-MRT model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 375-413, 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. Hanson, Donald & Laitner, John A. Skip, 2004. "An integrated analysis of policies that increase investments in advanced energy-efficient/low-carbon technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 739-755, 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. Rivers, Nic & Jaccard, Mark, 2006. "Useful models for simulating policies to induce technological change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(15), pages 2038-2047, October.
    2. Jaccard, Mark & Murphy, Rose & Rivers, Nic, 2004. "Energy-environment policy modeling of endogenous technological change with personal vehicles: combining top-down and bottom-up methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 31-46, November.
    3. Nic Rivers & Mark Jaccard, 2005. "Combining Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches To Energy-Economy Modeling Using Discrete Choice Methods," The Energy Journal, , vol. 26(1), pages 83-106, January.
    4. Murphy, Rose & Jaccard, Mark, 2011. "Energy efficiency and the cost of GHG abatement: A comparison of bottom-up and hybrid models for the US," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7146-7155.
    5. Julien Lefevre, 2018. "Modeling the Socioeconomic Impacts of the Adoption of a Carbon Pricing Instrument – Literature review," CIRED Working Papers hal-03128619, HAL.
    6. Horne, Matt & Jaccard, Mark & Tiedemann, Ken, 2005. "Improving behavioral realism in hybrid energy-economy models using discrete choice studies of personal transportation decisions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 59-77, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Giraudet, Louis-Gaëtan & Guivarch, Céline & Quirion, Philippe, 2012. "Exploring the potential for energy conservation in French households through hybrid modeling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 426-445.
    9. Schumacher, Katja & Sands, Ronald D., 2007. "Where are the industrial technologies in energy-economy models? An innovative CGE approach for steel production in Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 799-825, July.
    10. Gi-Young Chae & Seung-Hyun An & Chul-Yong Lee, 2021. "Demand Forecasting for Liquified Natural Gas Bunkering by Country and Region Using Meta-Analysis and Artificial Intelligence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-18, August.
    11. Lee, Chul-Yong & Huh, Sung-Yoon, 2017. "Forecasting new and renewable energy supply through a bottom-up approach: The case of South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 207-217.
    12. Halkos, George, 2014. "The Economics of Climate Change Policy: Critical review and future policy directions," MPRA Paper 56841, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Dellink, Rob & van Ierland, Ekko, 2006. "Pollution abatement in the Netherlands: A dynamic applied general equilibrium assessment," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, February.
    14. Sue Wing, Ian & Eckaus, Richard S., 2007. "The implications of the historical decline in US energy intensity for long-run CO2 emission projections," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5267-5286, November.
    15. Kiuila, O. & Rutherford, T.F., 2013. "The cost of reducing CO2 emissions: Integrating abatement technologies into economic modeling," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 62-71.
    16. Park, Sang Yong & Yun, Bo-Yeong & Yun, Chang Yeol & Lee, Duk Hee & Choi, Dong Gu, 2016. "An analysis of the optimum renewable energy portfolio using the bottom–up model: Focusing on the electricity generation sector in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 319-329.
    17. Fortes, Patrícia & Pereira, Rui & Pereira, Alfredo & Seixas, Júlia, 2014. "Integrated technological-economic modeling platform for energy and climate policy analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 716-730.
    18. Bibas, Ruben & Méjean, Aurélie & Hamdi-Cherif, Meriem, 2015. "Energy efficiency policies and the timing of action: An assessment of climate mitigation costs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 137-152.
    19. Fox, Jacob & Axsen, Jonn & Jaccard, Mark, 2017. "Picking Winners: Modelling the Costs of Technology-specific Climate Policy in the U.S. Passenger Vehicle Sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 133-147.
    20. Graham, Paul W. & Williams, David J., 2003. "Optimal technological choices in meeting Australian energy policy goals," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 691-712, November.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F0 - International Economics - - General

    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:aen:journl:2006se_jaccard-a05. 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: David Williams (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaeeeea.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.