Restricted carbon emissions and directed R&amp;D support; an applied general equilibrium analysis

Bye, Brita; Jacobsen, Karl

doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2010.12.007

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Firms can reduce actual emissions by undertaking costly abatement activity. We do not include the direct effects on utility of reductions in emissions and in this we follow Bye and Jacobsen (2011).…”

Section: The Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Emission reduction policy: A regional economic analysis for China

Chen

Groenewold

2015

Economic Modelling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the CGE class, there are models for many countries, e.g., Bohringer and Rutherford (1997) for Germany, Metcalf (2009) for the US, Meng et al (2013) for Australia, Callan et al (2009) for Ireland, Bye and Jacobsen (2011) for Norway and Devarajan et al (2011) for South Africa.…”

Section: The Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Emission reduction policy: A regional economic analysis for China

Chen

Groenewold

2015

Economic Modelling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Work has identified the important roles of prices and public policy in inducing innovation (Popp, 2003(Popp, , 2006Taylor et al, 2005) and particularly the varying effectiveness of policy instruments (Johnstone et al, 2010). More directly normative policy analysis has examined the incentives created by the intellectual property system itself, theoretically (W. Nordhaus, 2011), empirically (Hall & Helmers, 2010), and in an optimization modeling framework (Bye & Jacobsen, 2011). Patent citation studies have shown the more important role played by institutional, rather than individual inventors (Acosta et al, 2009), a point we return to in our discussion below.…”

Section: Patent Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing learning in low carbon technologies: Toward a more comprehensive approach

Lewis

Nemet

2021

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With decades of experience developing and deploying low carbon technologies around the world, much has been learned. We assess six categories that represent the diversity of methodological approaches that have been used to study low carbon learning: (1) learning curves; (2) expert elicitations; (3) patent analysis; (4) engineering-based decomposition; (5) policy intervention studies; and (6) case studies. Based on a review of low carbon learning studies in these six areas, we summarize what we know about low carbon learning, and what we have yet to fully understand, including the methodological strengths and limitations of key studies conducted to date. We find that a more comprehensive understanding of low carbon learning is necessary and timely given the massive scale and short time horizon of the low carbon transition, and that there are real benefits to employing a comprehensive approach using multiple methods. We find a need for better data sets, and for studies of a more diverse set of technologies, as well as of interactions among technologies. In addition, studies should be more explicit about local context, with a particular need for additional focus on emerging and developing countries. We identify key topics that warrant further research, including technology specific learning methods; spatial distinctions and the local and global linkages that influence learning; and an expanded study of the cultural, social, environmental, and political factors that influence learning. Finally, we recommend more nuance in the design of policies directed at accelerating low carbon learning. This article is categorized under:The Carbon Economy and Climate Mitigation > Future of Global Energy K E Y W O R D S climate change, innovation, learning, low carbon technologies, methods 1 | INTRODUCTION Climate change necessitates the transition to a low carbon economy, presenting both challenges and opportunities. One main challenge is the scale of energy investment needed (estimated at between 1.6 and 3.8 trillion USD annually between 2016 and 2050) (Climate Policy Initiative, 2019; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC], 2018), along with the need to overcome technological lock in and path dependency, all in a relatively short time horizon given looming climate disasters. However, many opportunities lie in the commercialization of low carbon energy

show abstract

“…The topic has mainly been addressed in aggregate general equilibrium settings (reviewed in Löschel, 2004; see early contributions by e.g., Goulder and Schneider, 1999; and more recently by e.g., Acemoglu et al, 2012). While some sectordisaggregated, country models address endogenous R&D impacts (e.g., Bretschger et al, 2011;Popp, 2004, Bye andJacobsen, 2011), regionalized global models with knowledge spillovers are rare (see Bretschger et al, 2017 for an example). The MAGNET model includes endogenous R&D in biofuels;…”

Section: A Richer Context For Policy Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing Key Energy and Emission Trends in CGE Models: Assessment of Status and Remaining Challenges

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Limiting global warming in line with the goals in the Paris Agreement will require substantial technological and behavioural transformations. This challenge drives many of the current modelling trends. This article undertakes a review of 17 state-of-the-art recursive-dynamic computable general equilibrium (CGE) models and assesses the key methodologies and applied modules they use for representing sectoral energy and emission characteristics and dynamics. The purpose is to provide technical insight into recent advances in the modelling of current and future energy and abatement technologies and how they can be used to make baseline projections and scenarios 20-80 years ahead. Numerical illustrations are provided. In order to represent likely energy system transitions in the decades to come, modern CGE tools have learned from bottom-up studies. Three different approaches to baseline quantification can be distinguished: (a) exploiting bottom-up model characteristics to endogenize responses of technological investment and utilization, (b) relying on external information sources to feed the exogenous parameters and variables of the model, and (c) linking the model with more technology-rich, partial models to obtain bottom-up-and pathwayconsistent parameters.

show abstract

Restricted carbon emissions and directed R&D support; an applied general equilibrium analysis

Cited by 16 publications

References 27 publications

Emission reduction policy: A regional economic analysis for China

Emission reduction policy: A regional economic analysis for China

Assessing learning in low carbon technologies: Toward a more comprehensive approach

Capturing Key Energy and Emission Trends in CGE Models: Assessment of Status and Remaining Challenges

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About