IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/renvpo/v9y2015i2p246-265..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Introduction to the Green Paradox: The Unintended Consequences of Climate Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Svenn Jensens
  • Kristina Mohlin
  • Karen Pittel
  • Thomas Sterner

Abstract

How important is the Green Paradox? We address this question in three ways. First, we present a simple model explaining how announcing a future climate policy may increase carbon emissions today – the Green Paradox effect. This effect is a result of fossil fuel producers increasing their extraction today as a response to a reduction in future resource rents. Second, we examine the theoretical and empirical literature to assess whether green paradoxes are likely to occur, and if they are, whether they are big enough to be of concern for policy makers. We consider several factors that affect the existence of the green paradox, including long-term extraction costs, short-term extraction capacities, the mix of policy instruments, and potential spatial carbon leakage to countries that have no climate policy. We find that these and other factors can sometimes strengthen, but mostly weaken, the case for concern about the green paradox. Third, we identify the lessons the literature offers for policy makers. We argue that in designing climate policy, policy makers need to consider the supply side of the fossil fuel market.

Suggested Citation

  • Svenn Jensens & Kristina Mohlin & Karen Pittel & Thomas Sterner, 2015. "An Introduction to the Green Paradox: The Unintended Consequences of Climate Policies," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(2), pages 246-265.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:renvpo:v:9:y:2015:i:2:p:246-265.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reep/rev010
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Reyer Gerlagh, 2011. "Too Much Oil," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 57(1), pages 79-102, March.
    2. Frederick van der Ploeg & Cees Withagen, 2015. "Global Warming and the Green Paradox: A Review of Adverse Effects of Climate Policies," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(2), pages 285-303.
    3. Sinclair, Peter J N, 1994. "On the Optimum Trend of Fossil Fuel Taxation," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 869-877, Supplemen.
    4. Sinclair, P.J.N., 1994. "On the Optimum Trend of Fossil Fuel Taxation," Discussion Papers 94-16, Department of Economics, University of Birmingham.
    5. Michael Hoel, 2010. "Climate Change and Carbon Tax Expectations," CESifo Working Paper Series 2966, CESifo.
    6. Gerlagh, Reyer, 2010. "Too Much Oil," Sustainable Development Papers 59419, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    7. Ngo Van Long, 2015. "The Green Paradox in Open Economies: Lessons from Static and Dynamic Models," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 9(2), pages 266-284.
    8. Fischer, Carolyn & Salant, Stephen, 2012. "Alternative Climate Policies and Intertemporal Emissions Leakage: Quantifying the Green Paradox," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-16, Resources for the Future.
    9. Sinn, Hans-Werner, 2012. "The Green Paradox: A Supply-Side Approach to Global Warming," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262016680, April.
    10. Ulph, Alistair & Ulph, David, 1994. "The Optimal Time Path of a Carbon Tax," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 857-868, Supplemen.
    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. Johannes Pfeiffer, 2017. "Fossil Resources and Climate Change – The Green Paradox and Resource Market Power Revisited in General Equilibrium," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 77.
    2. Hendrik Ritter & Mark Schopf, 2014. "Unilateral Climate Policy: Harmful or Even Disastrous?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(1), pages 155-178, May.
    3. Hart, Rob & Spiro, Daniel, 2011. "The elephant in Hotelling's room," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7834-7838.
    4. Quentin Grafton, R. & Kompas, Tom & Van Long, Ngo, 2012. "Substitution between biofuels and fossil fuels: Is there a green paradox?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 328-341.
    5. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Ru¨diger, 2013. "Flattening the carbon extraction path in unilateral cost-effective action," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 185-201.
    6. Luise Röpke, 2015. "Essays on the Integration of New Energy Sources into Existing Energy Systems," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 58.
    7. Nachtigall, Daniel & Rübbelke, Dirk, 2016. "The green paradox and learning-by-doing in the renewable energy sector," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 74-92.
    8. Garth Day & Creina Day, 2022. "The supply-side climate policy of decreasing fossil fuel tax profiles: can subsidized reserves induce a green paradox?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 1-19, August.
    9. Christian Beermann, 2015. "Climate Policy and the Intertemporal Supply of Fossil Resources," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 62.
    10. Gerard Meijden & Frederick Ploeg & Cees Withagen, 2017. "Frontiers of Climate Change Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(1), pages 1-14, September.
    11. van der Ploeg, Frederick & Withagen, Cees, 2012. "Too much coal, too little oil," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 62-77.
    12. van der Ploeg, Frederick & Withagen, Cees, 2012. "Is there really a green paradox?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 342-363.
    13. Hoel, Michael & Jensen, Svenn, 2012. "Cutting costs of catching carbon—Intertemporal effects under imperfect climate policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 680-695.
    14. Max Franks & Ottmar Edenhofer & Kai Lessmann, 2017. "Why Finance Ministers Favor Carbon Taxes, Even If They Do Not Take Climate Change into Account," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 445-472, November.
    15. Fischer, Carolyn & Salant, Stephen W., 2017. "Balancing the carbon budget for oil: The distributive effects of alternative policies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 191-215.
    16. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rüdiger, 2015. "Unilateral consumption-based carbon taxes and negative leakage," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 127-142.
    17. van der Werf, Edwin & Di Maria, Corrado, 2012. "Imperfect Environmental Policy and Polluting Emissions: The Green Paradox and Beyond," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(2), pages 153-194, March.
    18. Hassan Benchekroun & Gerard (G.C.) van der Meijden & Cees Withagen, 2017. "OPEC, Shale Oil, and Global Warming - On the importance of the order of extraction," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 17-104/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    19. Marc Gronwald & Ngo Van Long & Luise Röpke, 2013. "Simultaneous Supplies of Dirty and Green Fuels with Capacity Constraint: Is there a Green Paradox?," CESifo Working Paper Series 4360, CESifo.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    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:oup:renvpo:v:9:y:2015:i:2:p:246-265.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aereeea.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.