IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/resene/v32y2010i1p1-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investment and emission control under technology and pollution externalities

Author

Listed:
  • Heal, Geoffrey
  • Tarui, Nori

Abstract

This paper studies incentives to develop advanced pollution abatement technology when technology may spillover across agents and pollution abatement is a public good. We are motivated by a variety of pollution control issues where solutions require the development and implementation of new pollution abatement technologies. We show that at the Nash equilibrium of a simultaneous-move game with R&D investment and emission abatement, whether the free rider effect prevails and under-investment and excess emissions occur depends on the degree of technology spillovers and the effect of R&D on the marginal abatement costs. There are cases in which, contrary to conventional wisdom, Nash equilibrium investments in emissions reductions exceed the first-best case.

Suggested Citation

  • Heal, Geoffrey & Tarui, Nori, 2010. "Investment and emission control under technology and pollution externalities," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 1-14, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:resene:v:32:y:2010:i:1:p:1-14
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0928-7655(09)00037-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    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. Popp, David, 2006. "International innovation and diffusion of air pollution control technologies: the effects of NOX and SO2 regulation in the US, Japan, and Germany," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 46-71, January.
    3. Barbara Buchner & Carlo Carraro & Igor Cersosimo & Carmen Marchiori, 2002. "Back to Kyoto? US Participation and the Linkage between R&D and Climate Cooperation," CESifo Working Paper Series 688, CESifo.
    4. Emmanuel Petrakis & Eftichios S. Sartzetakis & Anastasios Xepapadeas (ed.), 1999. "Environmental Regulation and Market Power," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1553.
    5. Karp, Larry, 2006. "Multiplicity of investment equilibria when pollution permits are not tradable," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt53s4p5wf, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    6. 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).
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Tarui, Nori & Polasky, Stephen, 2005. "Environmental regulation with technology adoption, learning and strategic behavior," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 447-467, November.
    11. Malik, Arun S., 1991. "Permanent versus interim regulations: A game-theoretic analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 127-139, September.
    12. Kolstad, Charles D., 2007. "Systematic uncertainty in self-enforcing international environmental agreements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 68-79, January.
    13. Golombek, Rolf & Hoel, Michael, 2005. "The Kyoto agreement and Technology Spillovers," Memorandum 05/2005, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    14. Moledina, Amyaz A. & Coggins, Jay S. & Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher, 2003. "Dynamic environmental policy with strategic firms: prices versus quantities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2, Supple), pages 356-376, March.
    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. El-Sayed, Abeer & Rubio, Santiago J., 2014. "Sharing R&D investments in cleaner technologies to mitigate climate change," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 168-180.
    2. Robert Schmidt & Roland Strausz, 2015. "On the Timing of Climate Agreements," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(3), pages 521-547, November.
    3. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2014-044 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Casoria, Fortuna & Ciccone, Alice, 2021. "Do upfront investments increase cooperation? A laboratory experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    5. Helm, Carsten & Schmidt, Robert C., 2015. "Climate cooperation with technology investments and border carbon adjustment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 112-130.
    6. Wei Jin, 2012. "International Knowledge Spillover and Technology Externality: Why Multilateral R&D Coordination Matters for Global Climate Governance," CAMA Working Papers 2012-53, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    7. De Cian, Enrica & Tavoni, Massimo, 2012. "Do technology externalities justify restrictions on emission permit trading?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 624-646.
    8. Di Maria, Corrado & Smulders, Sjak, 2017. "A paler shade of green: Environmental policy under induced technical change," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 151-169.
    9. Jin, Wei, 2016. "International technology diffusion, multilateral R&D coordination, and global climate mitigation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 357-372.
    10. Narita, Daiju & Wagner, Ulrich J., 2011. "Expectation-driven climate treaties with breakthrough technologies," Kiel Working Papers 1732, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    11. Yi, Yongxi & Xu, Rongwei & Zhang, Sheng, 2019. "A differential game of R&D investment for pollution abatement in different market structures," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 524(C), pages 587-600.
    12. Zhonghao Zhang & Tiantian Nie & Yingtao Wu & Jiahui Ling & Danhuang Huang, 2022. "The Temporal and Spatial Distributions and Influencing Factors of Transboundary Pollution in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-15, April.

    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. Heal, Geoffrey & Tarui, Nori, 2008. "Technology Diffusion, Abatement Cost, and Transboundary Pollution," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 46653, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    2. Karp, Larry S., 2008. "Correct (and misleading) argument for using market-based pollution control policies," 2008 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2008, Orlando, Florida 6030, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    3. Larry Karp & Jiangfeng Zhang, 2016. "Taxes Versus Quantities for a Stock Pollutant with Endogenous Abatement Costs and Asymmetric Information," Studies in Economic Theory, in: Graciela Chichilnisky & Armon Rezai (ed.), The Economics of the Global Environment, pages 493-533, Springer.
    4. Alessio D’Amato & Bouwe R. Dijkstra, 2018. "Adoption incentives and environmental policy timing under asymmetric information and strategic firm behaviour," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(1), pages 125-155, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Krysiak, Frank C., 2011. "Environmental regulation, technological diversity, and the dynamics of technological change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 528-544, April.
    7. Spyros Arvanitis & Michael Peneder & Christian Rammer & Tobias Stucki & Martin Wörter, 2016. "The adoption of green energy technologies: The role of policies in an international comparison," KOF Working papers 16-411, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    8. Anja Deelen, 2011. "Wage-Tenure Profiles and Mobility," CPB Discussion Paper 198.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    9. Joëlle Noailly & Svetlana Batrakova & Ruslan Lukach, 2010. "Home green home; a case study of inducing energy-efficient innovations in the Dutch building sector," CPB Document 198.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    10. Clara Villegas-Palacio & Jessica Coria, 2010. "On the interaction between imperfect compliance and technology adoption: taxes versus tradable emissions permits," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 274-291, December.
    11. Karp, Larry S., 2006. "Multiplicity of investment equilibria when pollution permits are not tradable," CUDARE Working Papers 7202, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    12. Martin Woerter & Tobias Stucki, 2016. "Intra-Firm Diffusion of Green Energy Technologies and the Choice of Policy Instruments," KOF Working papers 16-401, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    13. 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.
    14. Florian Habermacher & Paul Lehmann, 2020. "Commitment Versus Discretion in Climate and Energy Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(1), pages 39-67, May.
    15. Cameron Hepburn & Jacquelyn Pless & David Popp, 2018. "Policy Brief—Encouraging Innovation that Protects Environmental Systems: Five Policy Proposals," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 154-169.
    16. Raphael Calel & Antoine Dechezleprêtre, 2016. "Environmental Policy and Directed Technological Change: Evidence from the European Carbon Market," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(1), pages 173-191, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Jay S. Coggins & Andrew L. Goodkind & Jason Nguyen & Zhiyu Wang, 2019. "Price Effects, Inefficient Environmental Policy, and Windfall Profits," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(3), pages 637-656, March.
    19. Harstad, Bård & Lancia, Francesco & Russo, Alessia, 2022. "Prices vs. quantities for self-enforcing agreements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    20. Jessica Coria & Magnus Hennlock, 2012. "Taxes, permits and costly policy response to technological change," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(1), pages 35-60, January.

    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:resene:v:32:y:2010:i:1:p:1-14. 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/505569 .

    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.