Olmstead, Sheila M, and Robert N Stavins. “A Meaningful Second Commitment Period for the Kyoto Protocol.” The Economist's Voice (2007): 1–6. olmstead_stavins_for_economist_voice1.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Misconceptions About H2O Pricing.” The Environmental Forum 24 (2007): 18. column_20.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Policies Can Work in Strange Ways.” The Environmental Forum 24 (2007): 16. column_16.pdf


Bennear, Lori Snyder, and Robert N Stavins. “Second-Best Theory and the Use of Multiple Policy Instruments.” Environmental and Resource Economics 37 (2007): 111–129. bennear_stavins_for_ere_revisied.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “A Sensible Way to Cut CO2 Emissions.” The Environmental Forum 24 (2007): 18. column_21.pdf


Stavins, Robert, Judson Jaffe, and Todd Schatzki. “Too good to be true? An examination of three economic assessments of California climate change policy.” National Bureau of Economic Research, 2007. Publisher's Version too_good_to_be_true.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Tradable Permits: Fly in the Ointment?The Environmental Forum 24 (2007): 16. column_17.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “A U.S. Cap-and-Trade System to Address Global Climate Change.” Washington, D.C. The Hamilton Project, 2007. stavins_hp_discussion_paper_2007-13.pdf


Jaffe, Judson, and Robert N Stavins. “On the Value of Formal Assessment of Uncertainty in Regulatory Analysis.” Regulation & Governance 1 (2007): 154–171.Abstract

The US Office of Management and Budget introduced in 2003 a new requirement for the treatment of uncertainty in Regulatory Impact Analyses (RIAs) of proposed regulations, requiring agencies to carry out a formal quantitative uncertainty assessment regarding a regulation’s benefits and costs if either is expected to reach \$1 billion annually. Despite previous use in other contexts, such formal assessments of uncertainty have rarely been employed in RIAs or other regulatory analyses. We describe how formal quantitative assessments of uncertainty – in particular, Monte Carlo analyses – can be conducted, we examine the challenges and limitations of such analyses in the context of RIAs, and we assess how the resulting information can affect the evaluation of regulations. For illustrative purposes, we compare Monte Carlo analysis with methods typically used in RIAs to evaluate uncertainty in the context of economic analyses carried out for the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Nonroad Diesel Rule, which became effective in 2004. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Regulation & Governance is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)



Olmstead, Sheila M, W Michael Hanemann, and Robert N Stavins. “Water Demand Under Alternative Price Structures.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 54 (2007): 181–198. Publisher's VersionAbstract

We estimate the price elasticity of water demand with household-level data, structurally modeling the piecewise-linear budget constraints imposed by increasing block pricing. We develop a mathematical expression for the unconditional price elasticity of demand under increasing block prices and compare conditional and unconditional elasticities analytically and empirically. We test the hypothesis that price elasticity may depend on price structure, beyond technical differences in elasticity concepts. Due to the possibility of endogenous utility price structure choice, observed differences in elasticity across price structures may be due either to a behavioral response to price structure, or to underlying heterogeneity among water utility service areas.



Stavins, Robert N. “What Is the Future of U.S. Coal?The Environmental Forum 24 (2007): 16. column_19.pdf


Anderson, Kym, V Ashenfelter, Victor Ginsburgh, and Robert N Stavins. “Editorial Welcome.” Journal of Wine Economics 1 (2006). Publisher's Version
Stavins, Robert N. “As Reservoirs Fall, Prices Should Rise.” The Environmental Forum 23 (2006): 14. column_15.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Is Benefit-Cost Analysis Helpful? (usage of Economic Analysis in Evaluation of Environmental Regulations).” The Environmental Forum 23 (2006): 14. column_13.pdf


Newell, Richard G, Adam B Jaffe, and Robert N Stavins. “The Effects of Economic and Policy Incentives on Carbon Mitigation Technologies.” Energy Economics 28 (2006): 563–578. Publisher's Version energy_economics_newell_jaffe_stavins.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Film Review: Alexander Payne, Sideways.” Journal of Wine Economics 1 (2006): 91–93. Publisher's Version sideways_review_jwe.pdf


Olmstead, Sheila M, and Robert N Stavins. “An International Policy Architecture for the Post-Kyoto Era.” American Economic Review 96 (2006): 35–38. olmstead_stavins_aer_2006.pdf


Lubowski, Ruben N, Andrew J Plantinga, and Robert N Stavins. “Land-Use Change and Carbon Sinks: Econometric Estimation of the Carbon Sequestration Supply Function.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 51 (2006): 135–152. Publisher's VersionAbstract

If the United States chooses to implement a greenhouse gas reduction program, it would be necessary to decide whether to include carbon sequestration policies—such as those that promote forestation and discourage deforestation—as part of the domestic portfolio of compliance activities. We investigate the cost of forest-based carbon sequestration by analyzing econometrically micro-data on revealed landowner preferences, modeling six major private land uses in a comprehensive analysis of the contiguous United States. The econometric estimates are used to simulate landowner responses to sequestration policies. We treat key commodity prices as endogenous and predict carbon storage changes with a carbon sink model. Our estimated sequestration costs exceed those from previous engineering cost analyses and sectoral optimization models. Our estimated sequestration supply function is similar to the carbon abatement supply function from energy-based analyses, suggesting that forest-based carbon sequestration merits consideration in a cost-effective portfolio of domestic US climate change strategies.



Stavins, Robert N. “Review of The Market for Virtue: The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility, by David Vogel.Environment (2006): 43. environment_vogel_review_2006.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Some Straight Talk Needed About CSR.” The Environmental Forum 23 (2006): 14. column_11.pdf