|
on Resource Economics |
|
Issue of 2017‒01‒22
four papers chosen by |
| By: | de Melo, Jaime |
| Abstract: | The Paris Agreement (PA) signed by 175 parties is now a Treaty since a quorum of signatories has been obtained. This Treaty is really the first important step taken to limit temperature increase, as pledges, if sustained and far more ambitious beyond 2030, would drastically limit the projected temperature increase from projections in the absence of measures to limit emissions of greenhouse gases. Contributions however fall short of the intentions to limit temperature increase to the +1.5° to +2° Celsius range since the onset of industrialization. Drawing on recent contributions, this paper reviews where we stand in tackling four challenges ahead: (i) taking fuller cognizance of the accumulating scientific evidence calling for urgent action; (ii) designing an architecture that will render effective the blend of 'bottom-up' and 'top-down' approaches; (iii) choosing policy options and tackling the slow transition to a low-carbon economy, and; (iv) raising finance and addressing burden sharing. |
| Keywords: | Burden Sharing; climate change; GHG; Pricing carbon. |
| JEL: | F18 O44 |
| Date: | 2017–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:11781&r=res |
| By: | Liu, Liyuan; Peng, Fei |
| Abstract: | Environmental protection against pollution has become a common issue faced by the whole world. In the case of the international cooperation on controlling the environmental pollution, the developing and developed countries have different understanding on the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities”. This paper has set up an optimal pollution controlling model for the developing and developed countries to incorporate environmental protection and economic growth. Based on a dynamic differential game, we find that the increasing environmental expenditure of developed countries in the initial stage of the economic growth path of the developing country can stimulate more international cooperation on pollution controlling. The developing and developed countries can control the environment pollution without significant loss of social welfare. |
| Keywords: | Environment pollution; Economic growth; Game theory |
| JEL: | C71 O44 Q52 Q56 |
| Date: | 2015–12 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:76261&r=res |
| By: | Lööf, Hans (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology); Martinsson, Gustav (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology); Mohammadi, Ali (CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies, Royal Institute of Technology) |
| Abstract: | This report discusses how financing difficulties can affect private sector innovation investments in environmental technology applied to the Swedish setting. Innovative investments are often intangible, the outcomes are highly uncertain, and information asymmetries between entrepreneurs and outside investors are potentially severe. These factors make external finance costly and drive investment in environmental technology below its socially desirable level. Recent evidence from the literature on financing and innovation suggests that financing constraints on innovation are likely economically significant. Therefore, policies and financial developments that affect the availability of finance can have important effects on economy wide rates of environmental technology innovation. |
| Keywords: | Clean technology; Innovation Investments; Financial constraints; Spillovers; Sustainable growth |
| JEL: | O32 O33 Q55 Q56 Q58 |
| Date: | 2017–01–16 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:cesisp:0445&r=res |
| By: | Sharat Ganapati (Dept. of Economics, Yale University); Joseph S. Shapiro (Cowles Foundation, Yale University); Reed Walker (University of California, Berkeley, IZA, & NBER) |
| Abstract: | This paper estimates how increases in production costs due to energy inputs affect consumer versus producer surplus (i.e., incidence). In doing so, we develop a general methodology to measure the incidence of changes in input costs that can account for three first-order issues: factor substitution amongst inputs used for production, incomplete pass-through of input costs, and industry competitiveness. We apply this methodology to a set of U.S. manufacturing industries for which we observe plant-level output prices and input costs. We find that about 70 percent of energy price-driven changes in input costs are passed through to consumers. This implies that the share of welfare cost borne by consumers is 25-75 percent smaller (and the share borne by producers is correspondingly larger) than most existing work assumes. |
| Keywords: | Pass-through, incidence, energy prices, productivity, climate change |
| JEL: | H22 H23 Q40 Q54 |
| Date: | 2017–01 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cwl:cwldpp:2038r&r=res |