1932

Abstract

Climate change poses an existential threat. Theoretical and empirical research suggest that carbon pricing and green R&D support are the right tools, but their implementation can be improved. Other policies, such as standards, bans, and targeted subsidies, also all have a role to play, but they have often been incoherent, and their implementation is delicate.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-economics-051520-015113
2023-09-13
2024-09-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/economics/15/1/annurev-economics-051520-015113.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-economics-051520-015113&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Acemoglu D, Aghion P, Bursztyn L, Hémous D. 2012.. The environment and directed technical change. . Am. Econ. Rev. 102:(1):13166
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aghion P, Akcigit U, Howitt P. 2014.. What do we learn from Schumpeterian growth theory?. In Handbook of Economic Growth 2B, ed. P Aghion, SN Durlauf , pp. 51563 Amsterdam:: North-Holland
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Aghion P, Dechezleprêtre A, Hémous D, Martin R, van Reenen J. 2016.. Carbon taxes, path dependency, and directed technical change: evidence from the auto industry. . J. Political Econ. 124::151
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ambec S, Crampes C. 2020.. Energy efficiency in buildings: from theory to practice. Unpublished manuscript , Toulouse Sch. Econ., Toulouse, Fr.:
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bénabou R, Tirole J. 2010.. Individual and corporate social responsibility. . Economica 77:(305):119
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bénabou R, Tirole J. 2016.. Mindful economics: the production, consumption, and value of beliefs. . J. Econ. Perspect. 30:(3):14164
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Berger J. 2019.. Signaling can increase consumers’ willingness to pay for green products. Theoretical model and experimental evidence. . J. Consum. Behav. 18:(3):23346
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Blaise G, Glachant M. 2019.. Quel est l'impact des travaux de rénovation énergétique des logements sur la consommation d'énergie? Une évaluation ex post sur données de panel. . Rev. Énerg. 646::4660
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Blanchard O, Tirole J. 2021.. Les grands défis économiques. Rep. , Fr. Stratég., Paris:. https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/sites/strategie.gouv.fr/files/atoms/files/fs-2021-rapport-les_grands_defis_economiques-juin_0.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Borenstein S, Davis LW. 2016.. The distributional effects of US clean energy tax credits. . Tax Policy Econ. 30:(1):191234
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Chancel L. 2022.. Global carbon inequality over 1990–2019. . Nat. Sustain. 5::93138
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Coady D, Parry IWH, Le N-P, Shang B. 2019.. Global fossil fuel subsidies remain large: an update based on country-level estimates. IMF Work. Pap. 19/89 , Int. Monet. Fund, Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Cochrane JH. 2020.. Central banks and climate: a case of mission creep. . Hoover Institution, Nov. 13. https://www.hoover.org/research/central-banks-and-climate-case-mission-creep
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cole WJ, Greer D, Denholm P, Frazier AW, Machen S, et al. 2021.. Quantifying the challenge of reaching a 100% renewable energy power system for the United States. . Joule 5:(7):173248
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Crampes C, Léautier TO. 2021.. White certificates and competition. . Concurrences 1::98493
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Criqui P. 2021.. Les coûts d'abattement, partie 2: transports. Rep. , Fr. Stratég., Paris:. https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/sites/strategie.gouv.fr/files/atoms/files/fs-2021-rapport-les_couts_dabattement-_partie_2_transports-juin.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Dechezleprêtre A, Fabre A, Kruse T, Planterose B, Sanchez Chico A, Stantcheva S. 2022.. Fighting climate change: international attitudes toward climate policies. OECD Econ. Dep. Work. Pap. 1714 , Organ. Econ. Coop. Dev., Paris:
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Delpla J, Gollier C. 2019.. Pour une banque centrale du carbone. . Asterion Anal. 1:. http://groupelavigne.free.fr/delpla1019.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Dixit AK, Pindyck RS. 1994.. Investment Under Uncertainty. Princeton, NJ:: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Douenne T, Fabre A. 2022.. Yellow vests, pessimistic beliefs, and carbon tax aversion. . Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 14:(1):81110
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Edgecliffe-Johnson A, Nauman B. 2019.. Fossil fuel divestment has “zero” climate impact, says Bill Gates. . Financial Times, Sept. 17
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Epley N, Gilovich T. 2016.. The mechanics of motivated reasoning. . J. Econ. Perspect. 30:(3):13340
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Eur. Comm. 2021. Fit for 55”: delivering the EU's 2030 Climate Target on the way to climate neutrality. Commun. COM(2021) 550 final , Eur. Comm., Brussels, Belg:. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/eur211249.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Ewald J, Sterner T, Sterner E. 2022.. Understanding the resistance to carbon taxes: drivers and barriers among the general public and fuel-tax protesters. . Resour. Energy Econ. 70::101331
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Falkner R, Nasiritousi N, Reischl G. 2022.. Climate clubs: politically feasible and desirable?. Clim. Policy 22:(4):48087
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Fowlie M, Greenstone M, Wolfram C. 2018.. Do energy efficiency investments deliver? Evidence from the weatherization assistance program. . Q. J. Econ. 133:(3):1597644
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Garicano L. 2021.. Towards a feasible carbon border adjustment mechanism: explanation and analysis of the European Parliament's proposal. Tech. Rep. , Eur. Parliam., Strasbourg, Fr.:
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Glachant M, Kahn V, Lévêque F. 2021.. Quand les économies d'énergie deviennent fictives. . Les Échos, Dec. 21
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Gollier C. 2022.. The cost-efficiency carbon pricing puzzle. Work. Pap. 18–952 , Toulouse Sch. Econ., Toulouse, Fr.:
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Gollier C, Jullien B, Treich N. 2000.. Scientific progress and irreversibility: an economic interpretation of the “precautionary principle. J. Public Econ. 75:(2):22953
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Gollier C, Pouget S. 2022.. Investment strategies and corporate behavior with socially responsible investors: a theory of active ownership. . Economica 89:(356):9971023
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Golman R, Loewenstein G, Moene KO, Zarri L. 2016.. The preference for belief consonance. . J. Econ. Perspect. 30:(3):16587
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Greenstone M, Nath I. 2020.. Do renewable portfolio standards deliver cost-effective carbon abatement? BFI Work. Pap. 2019–62 , Becker Friedman Inst. Econ., Chicago:
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Greenstone M, Sunstein C, Ori S. 2020.. Fuel economy 2.0. . Harv. Environ. Law 44:(1):142
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Gruber J. 2003.. The new economics of smoking. . NBER Rep. 3. https://www.nber.org/reporter/summer-2003/new-economics-smoking
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Guyomard H, Bureau JC, Chatelier V, Detang-Dessendre C, Dupraz P, et al. 2020.. The Green Deal and the CAP: policy implications to adapt farming practices and to preserve the EU's natural resources. Study, Eur. Parliam., Strasbourg, Fr:. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2020/629214/IPOL_STU(2020)629214_EN.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Heal G. 2022.. The economics of carbon accounting and carbon offsets. NBER Work. Pap. 30649
    [Google Scholar]
  38. IEA (Int. Energy Agency). 2020.. Sustainable recovery. World Energy Outlook Spec. Rep. , Int. Energy Agency, Paris:
    [Google Scholar]
  39. IEA (Int. Energy Agency). 2021.. Conditions and requirements for the technical feasibility of a power system with a high share of renewables in France towards 2050. Country Rep. , Int. Energy Agency, Paris:
    [Google Scholar]
  40. IPCC (Intergov. Panel Climate Change). 2022.. Climate change 2022: mitigation of climate change. Summary for policymakers. Summ., Intergov. Panel Climate Change, Geneva, Switz:. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Jarvis S. 2021.. The economic costs of NIMBYism: evidence from renewable energy projects. Work. Pap. 311 , Energy Inst. Haas, Univ. Calif., Berkeley:
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Laffont JJ, Tirole J. 1996.. Pollution permits and compliance strategies. . J. Public Econ. 62:(1–2):85125
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Lemoine D. 2020.. The climate risk premium: how uncertainty affects the social cost of carbon. . J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 8::2757
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Leroutier M. 2022.. Carbon pricing and power sector decarbonization: evidence from the UK. . J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 111::102580
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Levinson A. 2019.. Energy efficiency standards are more regressive than energy taxes: theory and evidence. . J. Assoc. Environ. Resour. Econ. 6:(S1):S736
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Marcu A, Mehling M, Cosbey A. 2020.. Border carbon adjustments in the EU: issues and options. Rep. , Eur. Roundtable Climate Change Sustain. Transit., Brussels, Belg.:
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Mehling MA, van Asselt H, Das K, Droege S, Verkuijl C. 2019.. Designing border carbon adjustments for enhanced climate action. . Am. J. Int. Law 113:(3):43381
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Metcalf GE, Stock JH. 2022.. The macroeconomic impact of Europe's carbon taxes. . Am. Econ. J. Macroecon. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  49. MIT Energy Initiat. 2022.. The future of energy storage: an interdisciplinary MIT study. Rep. , MIT Energy Initiat., Mass. Inst. Technol., Cambridge:. https://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/The-Future-of-Energy-Storage.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Moisson PH. 2022.. Ethics and impact investment. Unpublished manuscript , Toulouse Sch. Econ., Toulouse, Fr.:
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Nordhaus W. 2015.. Climate clubs: overcoming free-riding in international climate policy. . Am. Econ. Rev. 105:(4):133970
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Nordhaus W. 2021.. Dynamic climate clubs: on the effectiveness of incentives in global climate agreements. . PNAS 118:(45):e2109988118
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Pigou AC. 1920.. The Economics of Welfare. London:: Macmillan & Co
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Pindyck RS. 2017.. The use and misuse of models for climate policy. . Rev. Env. Econ. Policy. 11:(1):10014
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Pisani-Ferry J. 2021.. Climate policy is macroeconomic policy, and the implications will be significant. Policy Br. 21-20 , Peterson Inst. Int. Econ., Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Pizer WA, Campbell EJ. 2021.. Border carbon adjustments without full (or any) carbon pricing. . Resources for the Future, July 29
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Rennert K, Errickson F, Prest BC, Rennels L, Newell RG, et al. 2022.. Comprehensive evidence implies a higher social cost of CO2. . Nature 610::68792
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Rosenbloom D, Markard J, Geels FW, Fuenfschilling L. 2020.. Opinion: why carbon pricing is not sufficient to mitigate climate change and how “sustainability transition policy” can help. . PNAS 117:(16):866468
    [Google Scholar]
  59. RTE (Réseaux Transp. Electr.). 2021.. Energy pathways to 2050. Rep. , Réseaux Transp. Electr., Paris:
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Stern N, Stiglitz JE, Taylor C. 2022.. The economics of immense risk, urgent action and radical change: towards new approaches to the economics of climate change. . J. Econ. Methodol. 29:(3):181216
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Stiglitz JE. 2019.. Addressing climate change through price and non-price interventions. . Eur. Econ. Rev. 119::594612
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Tirole J. 2023.. Socially responsible agencies. . Compet. Law Policy Debate 7:(4):17177
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Trinks A, Mulder M, Scholtens B. 2022.. External carbon costs and internal carbon pricing. . Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 168::112780
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Ulph A, Ulph D. 1997.. Global warming, irreversibility and learning. . Econ. J. 107:(442):63650
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Weitzman ML. 2017.. On a world climate assembly and the social cost of carbon. . Economica 84:(336):55986
    [Google Scholar]
  66. World Bank. 2010.. World development report 2010: development and climate change. Rep. , World Bank, Washington, DC:. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/4387
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Wu C, Zhang XP, Sterling M. 2021.. Economic analysis of power grid interconnections among Europe, North-East Asia, and North America with 100% renewable energy generation. . IEEE Open Access J. Power Energy 8::26880
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-economics-051520-015113
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error