No abstract

No abstract

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW. Abstract This paper analyzes the relationship between information and communication technology (ICT) and energy demand. We construct a comprehensive cross-country cross-industry panel data set covering 13 years, 10 OECD countries, and 27 industries. Using up to 2889 country-industry observations, we find that: (1) ICT capital is associated with a significant reduction in energy demand. (2) This relationship differs with regard to different types of energy. ICT use is not significantly correlated with electricity demand, but is significantly related to a reduction in non-electric energy demand. That is, ICT use comes with a reduction in total energy demand and an increase in the relative demand for electric over non-electric energy. ICT and theJEL Classification: O33; O44; Q41; Q43.Keywords: Technical Change; ICT; energy demand; energy efficiency; energy mix; Green IT; cross-country cross-industry data; environmental policy. * We thank Irene Bertschek, Steve Bond, Grazia Cecere, Daniel Erdsiek, Nikolas Georgantzis, Thomas Niebel, Marianne Saam, Thomas Triebs and Michael Ward for their valuable comments. We also benefited from discussions with participants of the Mannheim Energy Conference 2013, the IIIrd Munich ICT Conference 2013 and the seminars at ZEW. Also we would like to thank James Binfield and Liana Platon for very helpful research assistance. For the authors' other projects please refer to

Die Dis cus si on Pape rs die nen einer mög lichst schnel len Ver brei tung von neue ren For schungs arbei ten des ZEW. Die Bei trä ge lie gen in allei ni ger Ver ant wor tung der Auto ren und stel len nicht not wen di ger wei se die Mei nung des ZEW dar.Dis cus si on Papers are inten ded to make results of ZEW research prompt ly avai la ble to other eco no mists in order to encou ra ge dis cus si on and sug gesti ons for revi si ons. The aut hors are sole ly respon si ble for the con tents which do not neces sa ri ly repre sent the opi ni on of the ZEW.Download this ZEW Discussion Paper from our ftp server:ftp://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp10074.pdf The present study uses data from the German part of the CIS in 2009, the Mannheim Innovation Panel (MIP). Evidence for nine different classes of environmental benefits of introduced innovations is provided by a question where firms were asked to state the amount of environmental benefits (ranging between no, low, medium, and high benefits). Furthermore, firms were asked about the determinants of these innovations. The focus in this paper is only on governmental regulation. In cases where innovations are introduced due to regulatory constraints, firms were asked to cite the respective laws to be responsible for these innovations. Non-Technical SummaryThese laws were classified into three major fields of environmental policy and furthermore, the effective dates of these laws were identified. Almost all of the cited regulations are nonmarket based.The ordered probit estimation approach used in this paper provides only limited support for innovative effects of these three policy types in general. They only trigger environmentally related innovations for strongly related environmental aspects. In addition to this finding, the results provide evidence for long-term innovative effects of command-and-control regulation. However, such long-term effects of regulation on environmentally related innovation do not exist for all of the examined environmental benefits of innovations. Das Wichtigste in KürzeIn