Modeling Induced Innovation in Climate Change Policy

By William Nordhaus. 2002

413 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f34b003c8d12c624420f3863a09dc7f2e2a9c837

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Citations in the corpus

Climate change, innovation and jobs (2008, background): “There is a fair amount of theoretical and model-based literature that asserts this (see, for instance, Nordhaus, 2002; Sue Wing, 2006; and the 2006 Special Issue of Energy Journal), but actual empirical evidence is rare. One of the few empirical studies is that of Popp (2002), who used 1970–1994 US ”
The Optimal Climate Policy Portfolio When Knowledge Spills Across Sectors (2010, background): “…in energy R&D. Carraro, Massetti and Nicita (2009) widely discussed this result and argued against the exogenous crowding-out hypothesis imposed in Nordhaus (2002) and Popp (2004, 2006) on the grounds that, at least in the medium/long term, societies are free to allocate the optimal amount of…”
Where does energy R&D come from? Examining crowding out from energy R&D (2012, background): “…rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2011.07.001 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Energy Economics j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r.com/ locate /eneco which technology improves, Nordhaus (2002) assumes a fixed supply of R&D labor, so that new energy R&D completely crowds out other R&D.”
Induced Innovation and Energy Prices (2001, background): “…as exogenous.1 As a result, they miss the important link between policy and technological change.2 One reason for leaving out induced innovation is that there is little empirical evidence on induced innovation 1 Two recent exceptions are Goulder and Schneider (forthcoming) and Nordhaus (1997).”
Modeling endogenous technological change for climate policy analysis (2008, methodology): “Nordhaus (2002) compares this ETC specification with the specification in DICE (where carbon intensity only is affected by mitigation efforts substituting abatement for consumption).”
The Economics of Growth (2008, background): “Several papers have tried to estimate these consequences and concluded that ignoring DTC overstates the costs of environmental regulation (see Grübler and Messner 1998; Manne and Richels 2004; Messner 1997; Buonanno, Carraro, and Galeotti 2003; Nordhaus 2002; Sue Wing 2003).”
Uncertain R&D, backstop technology and GHGs stabilization (2007, positive): “To model the high social returns of R&D, the positive externality of knowledge creation is accounted for by assuming that the return on energy R&D investment is four times higher than the one in physical capital, as originally proposed by Nordhaus [8].”
Technological Change and the Environment (2001, positive): “29 Parry et al. (2000) showed that the importance of the welfare gains from cost-reducing technological change relative to the welfare gains from optimal pollution control using existing technology tends to be higher when marginal benefits are flatter, marginal costs are steeper (and optimal abateme”