IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeeman/v64y2012i3p456-467.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does more stringent environmental regulation induce or reduce technology adoption? When the rate of technology adoption is inverted U-shaped

Author

Listed:
  • Perino, Grischa
  • Requate, Till

Abstract

We show that for a broad class of technologies the relationship between policy stringency and the rate of technology adoption is inverted U-shaped. This happens when the marginal abatement cost (MAC) curves of conventional and new technologies intersect, which invariably occurs when emissions are proportional to output and technological progress reduces emissions per output. This outcome does not result from policy failure. On the contrary, in social optimum, the relationship between the slope of the marginal damage curve and the rate of technology adoption is also inverted U-shaped. Under more general conditions, these curves can look even more complicated (e.g., such as inverted W-shaped).

Suggested Citation

  • Perino, Grischa & Requate, Till, 2012. "Does more stringent environmental regulation induce or reduce technology adoption? When the rate of technology adoption is inverted U-shaped," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 456-467.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:64:y:2012:i:3:p:456-467
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2012.03.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069612000307
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jeem.2012.03.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Y.H. Farzin & P.M. Kort, 2000. "Pollution Abatement Investment When Environmental Regulation Is Uncertain," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 2(2), pages 183-212, April.
    2. 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.
    3. Bréchet, Thierry & Meunier, Guy, 2014. "Are clean technology and environmental quality conflicting policy goals?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 61-83.
    4. Baker, Erin & Shittu, Ekundayo, 2006. "Profit-maximizing R&D in response to a random carbon tax," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 160-180, May.
    5. Suzi Kerr & Richard G. Newell, 2003. "Policy‐Induced Technology Adoption: Evidence from the U.S. Lead Phasedown," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 317-343, September.
    6. David Levhari, 1965. "A Nonsubstitution Theorem and Switching of Techniques," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 79(1), pages 98-105.
    7. Grischa Perino, 2010. "Technology Diffusion with Market Power in the Upstream Industry," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(4), pages 403-428, August.
    8. Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Innes, Robert, 2010. "Environmental innovation and environmental performance," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 27-42, January.
    9. Paul A. Samuelson, 1966. "A Summing Up," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 80(4), pages 568-583.
    10. Adam B. Jaffe & Karen Palmer, 1997. "Environmental Regulation And Innovation: A Panel Data Study," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 610-619, November.
    11. Fischer, Carolyn & Parry, Ian W. H. & Pizer, William A., 2003. "Instrument choice for environmental protection when technological innovation is endogenous," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 523-545, May.
    12. Denicolo, Vincenzo, 1999. "Pollution-Reducing Innovations under Taxes or Permits," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 184-199, January.
    13. Loschel, Andreas, 2002. "Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 105-126, December.
    14. Rabah Amir & Marc Germain & Vincent Van Steenberghe, 2008. "On the Impact of Innovation on the Marginal Abatement Cost Curve," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 10(6), pages 985-1010, December.
    15. Raphael Calel, 2011. "Market-based instruments and technology choices: a synthesis," GRI Working Papers 57, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    16. Bréchet, Thierry & Jouvet, Pierre-André, 2008. "Environmental innovation and the cost of pollution abatement revisited," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 262-265, April.
    17. Simpson, R. David & Bradford, Robert III, 1996. "Taxing Variable Cost: Environmental Regulation as Industrial Policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 282-300, May.
    18. Till Requate & Wolfram Uunold, 2001. "On the Incentives Created by Policy Instruments to Adopt Advanced Abatement Technology if Firms are Asymmetric," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 157(4), pages 536-554, December.
    19. Marc Baudry, 2000. "Joint Management of Emission Abatement and Technological Innovation for Stock Externalities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(2), pages 161-183, June.
    20. Jung, Chulho & Krutilla, Kerry & Boyd, Roy, 1996. "Incentives for Advanced Pollution Abatement Technology at the Industry Level: An Evaluation of Policy Alternatives," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 95-111, January.
    21. Joan Robinson, 1975. "The Unimportance of Reswitching," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 89(1), pages 32-39.
    22. David Popp, 2002. "Induced Innovation and Energy Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 160-180, March.
    23. BRECHET, Thierry & JOUVET, Pierre-André, 2006. "Environmental innovation and the cost of pollution abatement," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2006040, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    24. Till Requate, 2005. "Timing and Commitment of Environmental Policy, Adoption of New Technology, and Repercussions on R&D," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(2), pages 175-199, June.
    25. Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
    26. Paul A. Samuelson, 1975. "Steady-State and Transient Relations: A Reply on Reswitching," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 89(1), pages 40-47.
    27. Requate, Till & Unold, Wolfram, 2003. "Environmental policy incentives to adopt advanced abatement technology:: Will the true ranking please stand up?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 125-146, February.
    28. Yoram Bauman & Myunghun Lee & Karl Seeley, 2008. "Does Technological Innovation Really Reduce Marginal Abatement Costs? Some Theory, Algebraic Evidence, and Policy Implications," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 507-527, August.
    29. Requate, Till, 2005. "Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments--a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 175-195, August.
    30. 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.
    31. 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.
    32. Carraro,Carlo & Siniscalco,Domenico (ed.), 1997. "New Directions in the Economic Theory of the Environment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521590891, September.
    33. Brunnermeier, Smita B. & Cohen, Mark A., 2003. "Determinants of environmental innovation in US manufacturing industries," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 278-293, March.
    34. Milliman, Scott R. & Prince, Raymond, 1989. "Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 247-265, November.
    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. 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.
    2. Bouwe R. Dijkstra & Maria J. Gil‐Moltó, 2018. "Is emission intensity or output U‐shaped in the strictness of environmental policy?," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 20(2), pages 177-201, April.
    3. Haiyang Xia & Tijun Fan & Xiangyun Chang, 2019. "Emission Reduction Technology Licensing and Diffusion Under Command-and-Control Regulation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(2), pages 477-500, February.
    4. Marit E. Klemetsen & Brita Bye & Arvid Raknerud, 2013. "Can non-market regulations spur innovations in environmental technologies? A study on firm level patenting," Discussion Papers 754, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    5. Endres, Alfred & Friehe, Tim, 2011. "Incentives to diffuse advanced abatement technology under environmental liability law," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 30-40, July.
    6. Hattori, Keisuke, 2011. "Optimal Environmental Policy under Monopolistic Provision of Clean Technologies," MPRA Paper 28837, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Kneller, Richard & Manderson, Edward, 2012. "Environmental regulations and innovation activity in UK manufacturing industries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 211-235.
    8. Bréchet, Thierry & Meunier, Guy, 2014. "Are clean technology and environmental quality conflicting policy goals?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 61-83.
    9. Mehdi Fadaee & Luca Lambertini, 2015. "Non-tradeable pollution permits as green R&D incentives," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(1), pages 27-42, January.
    10. repec:bla:germec:v:11:y:2010:i::p:86-107 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Lee, Jaegul & Veloso, Francisco M. & Hounshell, David A., 2011. "Linking induced technological change, and environmental regulation: Evidence from patenting in the U.S. auto industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1240-1252.
    12. Carrión-Flores, Carmen E. & Innes, Robert & Sam, Abdoul G., 2013. "Do voluntary pollution reduction programs (VPRs) spur or deter environmental innovation? Evidence from 33/50," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 444-459.
    13. 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.
    14. Alfred Endres & Tim Friehe & Bianca Rundshagen, 2015. "Environmental liability law and R&D subsidies: results on the screening of firms and the use of uniform policy," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(4), pages 521-541, October.
    15. Ekundayo Shittu & Geoffrey Parker & Xiaoyue Jiang, 2015. "Energy technology investments in competitive and regulatory environments," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 453-471, December.
    16. Alfred Endres & Tim Friehe & Bianca Rundshagen, 2020. "Diffusion and adoption of advanced emission abatement technology induced by permit trading," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 22(5), pages 1313-1337, September.
    17. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    18. Shuai Shao & Zhigao Hu & Jianhua Cao & Lili Yang & Dabo Guan, 2020. "Environmental Regulation and Enterprise Innovation: A Review," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 1465-1478, March.
    19. Halvor Briseid Storrøsten, 2014. "Prices vs. Quantities with Endogenous Cost Structure," CESifo Working Paper Series 4625, CESifo.
    20. Anja Deelen, 2011. "Wage-Tenure Profiles and Mobility," CPB Discussion Paper 198.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    21. Dagmar Nelissen & Till Requate, 2007. "Pollution-reducing and resource-saving technological progress," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 5-44.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Induced diffusion; Environmental policy;

    JEL classification:

    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    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:eee:jeeman:v:64:y:2012:i:3:p:456-467. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622870 .

    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.