|
on Resource Economics |
| By: | Claes, Ek (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University); Söderberg, Magnus (Department of Accounting, Finance and Economics, Griffith University); Kataria, Mitesh (Department of Economics, School of Business, Economics and Law, Göteborg University) |
| Abstract: | In two separate field experiments with Swedish school children aged 10-16, we evaluate variants of an Environmental Education Program designed to promote pro-environmental behavior; specifically, reduce household waste. We match the addresses of participating students with high-resolution administrative records on collected household waste. This allows us to estimate causal effects on the waste generated in households where a child was treated. Both experiments produce null effects on waste generation. In the second experiment, we are also able to estimate the effect of regular environmental education within the Swedish school curriculum, and find only weak evidence that this affects household waste. |
| Keywords: | Field experiments; Environmental Education Programs; Household waste; Intergenerational learning |
| JEL: | D13 I21 Q53 |
| Date: | 2024–10–30 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0848 |
| By: | Ornella Tarola (DISSE, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy); Emmanuelle Taugourdeau (CNRS, CREST, Palaiseau, France) |
| Abstract: | In light of the ongoing debate on Common But Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR), we wonder whether it is worthwile for industrialized countries to take the lead in reducing emissions, rather than acting simultaneously with less advanced countries. To do this, we compare national payoffs and global emissions in each situation. We also examine whether industrial leakage is an inevitable outcome of asymmetric policies with differentiated abatement responsibilities and, if so, whether unambigously hurts the more industrialized countries. We show that leadership can improve payoffs while reducing global emissions, even though these goals appear to be at odds. |
| Keywords: | Tax Competition, Capital Integration, Global Pollution, Environmental agreements |
| JEL: | H2 R3 R5 Q5 |
| Date: | 2024–11–01 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:crs:wpaper:2024-11 |
| By: | Ana Abeliansky (Austrian National Bank (OeNB)); Klaus Prettner (Department of Economics, Vienna University of Economics and Business); Ernesto Rodríguez Crespo (Department of Economic Structure and Development Economics, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) |
| Abstract: | What are the environmental impacts of the increasing use of automation technologies? To answer this question, we propose a model of production in the age of automation that incorporates emission externalities. We derive a threshold condition subject to which the use of industrial robots affects emissions. This model leads to three testable predictions, i) the use of industrial robots causes higher emissions on average, ii) with increasing efficiency of industrial robots, the effect becomes weaker and could turn negative, and iii) in countries in which electricity is predominantly produced using (clean) renewable energy, industrial robot use has the potential of decreasing emissions. Empirically, we find support for the theoretical hypotheses implying that the effect of automation on emissions is non-linear or moderated by other variables. |
| Keywords: | Automation, Robots, Emissions, Climate Change |
| JEL: | O11 O33 O44 Q54 Q55 Q56 |
| Date: | 2024–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wiw:wiwwuw:wuwp370 |