| 来源类型 | Article |
| 规范类型 | 评论 |
| R&D Policy | |
| Lee Lane; David Montgomery; Anne Smith | |
| 发表日期 | 2009-08-01 |
| 出版年 | 2009 |
| 语种 | 英语 |
| 摘要 | Introduction A critical step in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is the introduction of new technologies for energy supply and use. This chapter deals with the question of what policies would be required to stimulate the kinds of R&D that would raise the odds of developing these technologies. This question is not as simple as it appears. ‘Getting the price right’ on GHG emissions is a necessary condition. Doing so provides a broad and appropriate incentive for reducing emissions, and adopting available technologies that are neglected because their ability to reduce emissions is only valuable when emissions are priced. Thus a price on emissions can correct what we may call the ‘climate change market failure’. However, R&D is itself subject to market failure in that it is impossible for researchers and innovators to capture themselves the full value of the information that their activities provide to society. This spillover effect is a positive externality, but it also implies that without active government intervention there will be less R&D than is socially optimal. R&D is a critical part of climate policy because of the nature of the climate change phenomenon and the radical transformation of the energy system required to stabilise global temperatures. Climate change is driven by the concentration of GHG in the atmosphere, making climate change what economists call a ‘stock externality’. Concentrations of GHG do not respond to changes in emissions over short periods of time, but depend mostly on cumulative emissions over long time periods. Therefore, there is a choice of many different paths for emissions over time and can lead to identical outcomes in global average temperatures. If R&D can reduce the cost of technologies that replace fossil fuels and other sources of GHG emissions, then timing emissions reductions in order to take advantage of innovations that lower cost and introduce new opportunities can reduce the cost of meeting climate goals. By reducing the cost of moving to a low or zero carbon economy a worldwide agreement to reduce GHG emissions can become more likely. Although these propositions about the nature of the climate problem are widely accepted, relationships between concentrations and temperature increases, and the powerful consequences of increased temperatures are highly uncertain. Therefore the amount of action required to avoid temperature increases above some level, for example 2 degrees C, is also highly uncertain. This leads many to characterise climate policy as an exercise in risk management rather than straightforward planning or cost-benefit analysis. The need to develop and adopt new technologies as part of the risk management process is widely accepted. The policy problem is how to create incentives for the appropriate kind of innovation, and how much and what kinds of R&D to support. Answering these questions begins with an appreciation for the scale of emissions reductions required over time, and the radical changes in energy supply and use that this entails. Fundamental breakthroughs to make the use of new energy sources feasible, both technically and economically, are necessary to achieve changes of this scale at costs that are acceptable globally. Achieving these breakthroughs requires in turn a comprehensive and effective program of support and incentives for R&D, invention and innovation. Designing such a program will be very difficult, both because of the complex and unpredictable nature of the R&D process, and the political economy of support for new technologies. Nevertheless, failure to embark rapidly on such a program could leave the costs of stabilising GHG concentrations prohibitively high and make adaptation or geoengineering a much larger part of the risk management strategy. Click here to read the rest of this article as an Adobe Acrobat PDF. Lee Lane is a resident fellow at AEI, David W. Montgomery and Anne Smith are vice presidents of CRA International. This is section 1.5 of CEDA Growth No. 61–“A Taxing Debate: Climate Policy Beyond Copenhagen.” |
| 主题 | Economics ; US Economy |
| 标签 | Australia ; Climate change ; Copenhagen ; debate ; development ; R&D ; research ; Tax reform |
| URL | https://www.aei.org/articles/rd-policy/ |
| 来源智库 | American Enterprise Institute (United States) |
| 资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
| 条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/247754 |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Lee Lane,David Montgomery,Anne Smith. R&D Policy. 2009. |
| 条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 | |||||
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
