Induced Technical Change in Energy and Environmental Modeling: Analytic Approaches and Policy Implications

Abstract

Key Words induced technical change, energy-environment-economy modelss Abstract Technical change in the energy sector is central for addressing longterm environmental issues, including climate change. Most models of energy, economy, and the environment (E3 models) use exogenous assumptions for this. This is an important weakness. We show that there is strong evidence that technical change in the energy sector is to an important degree induced by market circumstances and expectations and, by implication, by environmental policies such as CO 2 abatement. We classify the main approaches to modeling such induced technical change and review results with particular reference to climate change. Among models with learning by doing, weak responses are only obtained from models that are highly aggregated (lack technological diversity) and/or that equate rates of return to innovation across sectors. Induced technical change broadens the scope of efficient policies toward mitigation, including not just research and development and aggregated market instruments but a range of sectoral-based policies potentially at divergent marginal costs. Furthermore, to the extent that cleaner technologies induced by mitigation diffuse globally, a positive spillover will result that will tend to offset the substitution-based negative spillover usually hypothesized to result from the migration of polluting industries. Initial explorations suggest that this effect could also be very large.

Combining stated and revealed choice research to simulate the neighbor effect: The case of hybrid-electric vehicles

“…CIMS is known as a ''hybrid'' model (Bohringer, 1998;Jaccard et al, 2003) because it combines the technological detail of ''bottom-up'' models with the behavioral realism and macro-economic equilibrium effects of ''top-down'' models (Jaffe and Stavins, 1994;Grubb et al, 2002). CIMS is technologically explicit in that it details thousands of technologies that compete for market share in a given node.…”

Marginal Abatement Cost Curves (MACCs): Important Approaches to Obtain (Firm and Sector) Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) Reduction

“…If the top-down approach produces parameters for the imaging of technological change, the elasticity of substitution and autonomous energy efficiency improvement is the amount of data compiled historically. There is no guarantee that these parameter values will still be valid in the future under different policies to improve the environment (Grubb, Köhler, & Anderson, 2002). Growing concern with this issue has led to some top-down models exploring methods of treatment of technological change using the bottom-up approach.…”

Proyecciones del impacto económico del cambio climático sobre la agricultura en Europa

“…As it is revised on Grubb et al (2002), there is no consensus on the technological change modelling. Macroeconomic environmental models such as GREEN, GEM-E3 and G-cubed have a constant autonomous energy efficiency improvement, typically in a range of 0.5-2.5% a year, while the DICE model has an exponential slowdown in productivity growth (1-e dt ) starting from a base of 1.41% per year in 1965 with the constant d set at 0.11 per decade.…”