Adaptation,mitigation and risk-taking in climate policy

The future consequences of climate change are highly uncertain and estimates of economic damages differ widely. Governments try to cope with these risks by investing in mitigation and adaptation measures. In contrast to most of the existing literature, we explicitly model the decision of risk averse governments on mitigation and adaptation policies. We also consider the interaction of the two strategies in presence of uncertainty. Mitigation efforts of a single country trigger crowding out as other countries will reduce their mitigation efforts. This may even lead to lower mitigation on the global scale. In contrast, a unilateral commitment to large adaptation efforts benefits the single country and can reduce the global risk from climate change at the expense of other countries.     

Adaptation and Mitigation in Long-term Climate Policy

The paper analytically explores the optimal allocation of investments into mitigation and environmental adaptation against climate change damages at a macroeconomic level. The economic-environmental model is formulated as a social planner problem where adaptation and abatement investments are separate decision variables. The existence of a unique steady state is proven. A comparative static analysis of optimal investments leads to essential implications for associated long-term environmental policies. It is shown that the optimal policy mix between adaptation and mitigation is lower for countries with higher economic efficiency for all applicable parameter ranges. Data calibration and numerical simulations are provided to estimate practical validity of theoretical outcomes.     

Does free trade promote environmental technology transfer?

We investigate how environmental and trade policies affect the transfer of environmental technology in a two-country model with global pollution. By comparing free trade and tariff policy with or without commitment, the following results are obtained. First, firms avoid the implementation of environmental tax by contracting technological transfer. Second, there is a case in which free trade is preferable to a tariff policy for both countries when there is no commitment to a tariff level. Third, free trade is not Pareto-preferred to a tariff policy when there is a commitment.     

The Timing and Strategic Role of Self-Protection

Self-protection has private goods characteristics as it reduces own exposure to pollution given a certain level of pollution. We study the effect of timing self-protection before, after or simultaneously with abatement. We find that self-protection when timed before abatements has strategic effects. In this case self-protection, shifts the second stage subgame perfect Nash equilibrium of abatements such that own contributions of abatement are decreased and those of the other country are increased. Thereby shifting future abatement costs to the other country. When countries cooperate only on abatement, the incentives to shift future abatement costs are greater. Contrary to, intention, cooperation on abatement may in fact worsen environmental quality if it does not include self-protection.     

Bottom‐up world climate policies: Preserving fossil fuel deposits vs. capping fuel consumption

The policy of purchasing fossil fuel deposits for preservation is an alternative to the demand‐side climate policies that predominate in practice and in professional studies. This paper analyzes the deposit purchase approach and compares it to the standard demand‐side policy in a model with international trade and non‐cooperative governments that account for the effects of their policies on equilibrium prices. We investigate how the two regimes differ with respect to their equilibrium allocations and, in particular, with respect to the countries’ mitigation effort and welfare. If countries are symmetric, mitigation is stronger in the demand‐side than in the supply‐side regime and the transition from the latter to the former is welfare enhancing for all countries. If countries have different endowments of deposits in a two‐country economy, the country with higher extraction costs does not purchase deposits for preservation, and the country with lower extraction costs is better off with the supply‐side than with the demand‐side policy. Finally, we consider the case of combined policies and find surprisingly that no equilibrium in pure strategies exists, when heterogeneous countries apply both policy instruments.     

Research cooperation and international standards in a model of coalition stability

Suggestions on international cooperation in climate policy beyond 2012 include substituting or complementing international environmental agreements (IEA) with technology-oriented agreements (TOA). We look at the impact of TOA on environmental cooperation in a framework of coalition stability. Using a numerical model, we analyze the differences of several TOA and how they interact. We find that participation in and environmental effectiveness of the IEA are raised less effectively when the TOA focuses on research cooperation in mitigation technology rather than cooperation on augmenting productivity in the private good sector. This is due to the former having an effect on all actors via emissions, whereas effects of the latter are exclusive to research partners. For the same reason, we find that restricting research cooperation to the coalition is only credible when it focuses on productivity. Technology standards that reduce the emission intensity of production are unlikely to raise participation by themselves and may suffer from inefficiencies. However, these disadvantages do not apply when standards are implemented as a complementary instrument. Separately negotiated technology standards may hence facilitate participation in an IEA without adding to its complexity.     

Cooperation and Competition in Climate Change Policies: Mitigation and Climate Engineering when Countries are Asymmetric

We study a dynamic game of climate policy design in terms of emissions and solar radiation management (SRM) involving two heterogeneous countries or group of countries. Countries emit greenhouse gasses (GHGs), and can block incoming radiation by unilateral SRM activities, thus reducing global temperature. Heterogeneity is modelled in terms of the social cost of SRM, the environmental damages due to global warming, the productivity of emissions in terms of generating private benefits, the rate of impatience, and the private cost of geoengineering. We determine the impact of asymmetry on mitigation and SRM activities, concentration of GHGs, and global temperature, and we examine whether a tradeoff actually emerges between mitigation and SRM. Our results could provide some insights into a currently emerging debate regarding mitigation and SRM methods to control climate change, especially since asymmetries seem to play an important role in affecting incentives for cooperation or unilateral actions.     

The importance of government commitment in attracting firms: A dynamic analysis of tax competition in an agglomeration economy

Agglomeration tendencies of industrial firms significantly affect the nature of tax competition. This paper analyzes tax competition between two countries over an infinite time horizon in an economy with trade costs and internationally mobile industrial firms. Most of the previous studies on tax competition in the ‘new economic geography’ framework employ static models. In this study, two governments dynamically compete with each other to attract firms through their choices of taxes and subsidies. It is shown that the commitment of the governments to their policies is crucial in determining the distribution of firms in the long run. Specifically, if governments find each others׳ tax policies credible, then one country will attract all the firms when trade costs are low enough to make agglomeration forces dominant. If policies are not credible, both countries may attract an equal share of firms even when trade costs are low, as the lack of commitment by governments acts as a dispersion force.     

A Public Choice Approach to Strategic and Nonstrategic Environmental Policy

In this paper we take a public choice perspective on strategic environmental policy and international environmental agreements. We examine cooperative and noncooperative environmental policies under governments that are either welfare maximizers (“good dictators”) or tax revenue maximizers (“Leviathans”). We show that Leviathans can perform better in terms of welfare and that good dictators can set higher taxes. We then analyze international environmental agreements and show that the breakdown of environmental cooperation can indeed lead to a welfare gain for all signatory countries. Considering a delegation game between governments, we find that a Pareto‐superior Leviathan outcome can be the unique Nash equilibrium.     

核心企业领导风格、网络承诺对网络绩效的影响

核心企业对于网络的运行与发展起着决定性作用,而网络承诺作为维系网络合作的一个重要变量,逐渐引起了学者们的关注。梳理了核心企业领导风格的相关研究,界定了网络承诺的概念内涵,建立了核心企业领导风格、网络承诺与网络绩效之间的理论模型并提出相关假设,通过问卷收集数据进行了验证。研究结果表明：核心企业的变革型领导风格和交易型领导风格对网络承诺有正向影响;网络承诺对网络关系绩效和创新绩效都有积极影响;核心企业交易型领导风格对网络创新绩效有正向影响,对网络关系绩效有倒U型影响;核心企业变革型领导风格对网络关系绩效有正向影响;对创新绩效的倒U型影响则没有得到验证。     

Uncertainty and climate treaties: Does ignorance pay?

Uncertainty and learning play an important role in the management of many environmental and resource problems and in particular in climate change. In stylized game-theoretic models of international environmental treaty formation, which capture the strategic interactions between nations, learning usually has a negative impact on the success of cooperation. We use a richer climate model that captures the large heterogeneity between different world regions and considers uncertainty about the benefits and costs from climate mitigation. By explicitly exploiting differences between regions and allowing transfers to mitigate free-rider incentives, we derive much more positive conclusions about the role of learning.     

The Challenges of Climate Policy

Climate policy planners and the public should be aware of both economic challenges and arguments that may influence the intensity of the climate policies with which they have to cope. This article examines six economic challenges: cap‐and‐trade versus taxes, non‐price regulations, energy efficiency policies, mitigation versus adaptation, trade effects, and transmission planning. Three additional challenges affect the end itself: ‘fat tails’, discount rates, and whether environmental protection should be evaluated by willingness to pay. If future generations cannot compensate the present for climate policy costs, climate policy is inherently redistributive and cannot be evaluated through cost–benefit analysis alone.     

A Good Opening: The Key to Make the Most of Unilateral Climate Action

In this paper we argue that when a subgroup of countries cooperate on emission reduction, the optimal response of non-signatory countries reflects the interaction between three potentially opposing factors, the incentive to free-ride on the environmental benefits of cooperation, the incentive to expand energy consumption, and the incentive to adopt the cleaner technologies introduced by the coalition. Using an Integrated Assessment Model with a game-theoretic structure we find that the equilibrium abatement of the coalition composed by OECD countries would be moderate, in line with the Pledges subscribed in Copenhagen, but increasing. The mitigation strategy would consist of investments in energy R&D and deployment of cleaner technologies with high learning potentials. International knowledge and technology externalities would facilitate the diffusion of cleaner technologies in non-signatory countries, offsetting the free-riding incentive and reducing their emissions. If the OECD group curbs emissions beyond the optimal equilibrium level, reaching reduction rates between 40 and 45 % below 2005 levels in 2050, the benefits of technology externalities would no longer compensate the effect of lower fossil fuel prices. Our results suggest that a moderate unilateral climate policy could induce a virtuous behaviour in non-signatory countries and that policies promoting the international transfer of technologies and knowledge could represent an effective complement to mitigation targets.     

Irreversibilities and the timing of environmental policy

The standard framework in which economists evaluate environmental policies is cost–benefit analysis, so policy debates usually focus on the expected flows of costs and benefits, or on the choice of discount rate. But this can be misleading when there is uncertainty over future outcomes, when there are irreversibilities, and when policy adoption can be delayed. This paper shows how two kinds of uncertainty — over the future costs and benefits of reduced environmental degradation, and over the evolution of an ecosystem — interact with two kinds of irreversibilities — sunk costs associated with an environmental regulation, and sunk benefits of avoided environmental degradation — to affect optimal policy timing and design.     

Domestic environmental policy and international cooperation for global commons

The paper analyzes the strategic behavior of several countries engaged in capital accumulation, pollution mitigation, and environmental adaptation in the context of an environmental common good. Both cooperative and non-cooperative strategies are discussed. The non-cooperative strategy is a dynamic game in which each country makes its own environmental decision following the open-loop Nash equilibrium. The cooperative social planner problem assumes an international environmental agreement in force. The non-cooperative and cooperative solutions are compared in the symmetric case of two countries and extended to several identical countries. It is shown that the non-cooperative strategy in multi-country world leads to over-production, over-consumption, over-pollution, and over-adaptation.     

Endogenous timing in private and mixed duopolies with emission taxes

This paper examines an endogenous timing game in product differentiated duopolies under price competition when emission tax is imposed on environmental externality. We show that a simultaneous-move (sequential-move) outcome can be an equilibrium outcome in a private duopoly under significant (insignificant) environmental externality, but this result can be reversed in a mixed duopoly. We also show that when environmental externalities are significant, public leadership yields greater welfare than private leadership, and that public leadership is more robust than private leadership as an equilibrium outcome. Finally, we find that privatization can result in a public leader becoming a private leader, but this worsens welfare.     

Multilateral tariff cooperation under fairness and reciprocity

Abstract This paper explores the impact of fairness and reciprocity on multilateral tariff cooperation. Reciprocal countries reward kind behaviour (positive reciprocity), but retaliate against countries behaving unkindly (negative reciprocity). We demonstrate that reciprocal countries that are moderately demanding from their trading partners regarding their commercial policy can support a greater degree of cooperation than self‐interested ones. However, when only very liberal import policies are considered fair, then reciprocity could have a detrimental effect on multilateral tariff cooperation.Thus, our model provides a novel perspective on the role of expectations in trade negotiations.     

Timing and Commitment of Environmental Policy,Adoption of New Technology,and Repercussions on R&;D

We investigate the interplay between environmental policy, incentives to adoptnew technology, and repercussions on R&D. We study a model where a monopolistic upstream firm engages in R&D and sells advanced abatement technology to polluting downstream firms. We consider four different timing and commitment regimes of environmental tax and permit policies: ex post taxation (or issuing permits), interim commitment to a tax rate (a quota of permits) after observing R&D success but before adoption, and finally two types of ex antecommitment before R&D activity, one with a unique tax rate (quota of permits), the other one with a menu of tax rates (permit quotas). We study the second best tax and permit policies and rank these with respect to welfare. In particular, we find that commitment to a menu of tax rate dominates all other policy regimes.     

Mitigation and adaptation strategies for the control of biological invasions

Biological invasions are recognised to be a problem of growing severity. Human pathogens, weeds or pests in terrestrial systems and dominant alien species in freshwater or marine aquatic systems all impose significant costs in terms of forgone output or costs of control in every major system. Like many of the other environmental consequences of globalisation, biological invasions require that decisions be taken under uncertainty. Decision-makers in such circumstances have to choose between two main strategies: mitigation and adaptation. This paper characterises invasive species problems in terms of the properties of the stochastic processes they induce. It considers how mitigation and adaptation strategies may be modelled, and identifies the conditions in which each approach may be efficient and effective.     

MONETARY–FISCAL INTERACTIONS WITH A CONSERVATIVE CENTRAL BANK

We study macroeconomic stabilization when monetary and fiscal policies interact via their effects on output and inflation and the monetary authority is more conservative than the fiscal. We find that monetary–fiscal interactions result in poor macroeconomic stabilization. With both policies discretionary, the Nash equilibrium is suboptimal with higher output and lower inflation than optimal; the Nash equilibrium may be extreme with output higher and inflation lower than either authority want. Leadership equilibria are not second best. Monetary commitment is completely negated by fiscal discretion and yields the same outcome as discretionary monetary leadership for all realizations of shocks. But fiscal commitment is not similarly negated by monetary discretion. Optimal macroeconomic stabilization requires either commitment of both monetary and fiscal policies, or identical targets for both authorities – output socially optimal and inflation appropriately conservative – or complete separation of tasks.