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


Stavins, Robert N. “The Utility Safety Valve for Cutting CO2.” The Environmental Forum 23 (2006): 14. column_12.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Vintage-Differentiated Environmental Regulation.” Stanford Environmental Law Journal 25 (2006): 29–63. Publisher's Version vintage_differentiated_regulation_by_stavins.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “What Role for U.S. CO2 Sequestration?The Environmental Forum 23 (2006): 16. column_14.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “A Better Climate Change Agreement.” The Environmental Forum 22 (2005): 12. column_5.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Beyond Kyoto: Getting Serious About Climate Change.” The Milken Institute Review 7 (2005): 28–37. milken_institute_review_article_on_climate_policy.pdf


Richards, Kenneth R, and Robert N Stavins. “The Cost of U.S. Forest-Based Carbon Sequestration.” Arlington, Virginia: Pew Center on Global Climate Change, 2005. richards_stavins_final_pew_report.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Does Econ Analysis Shortchange Future.” The Environmental Forum 22 (2005): 14. column_10.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Don't Blame Romney: Support the Safety-Valve for the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.” The Boston Globe (2005). op-ed_boston_globe_dec12_2005.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “The Effects of Vintage-Differentiated Environmental Regulation.” Washington, D.C. AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, 2005. vintage_differentiated_regulation.pdf


Environmental Protection and the Social Responsibility of Firms: Perspectives from Law, Economics, and Business
Hay, Bruce L, Robert N Stavins, and Richard HK Vietor. Environmental Protection and the Social Responsibility of Firms: Perspectives from Law, Economics, and Business. Washington, D.C. Resources for the Future, 2005.Abstract

Everyone agrees that firms should obey the law. But beyond what the law requires-beyond bare compliance with regulations-do firms have additional social responsibilities to commit resources voluntarily to environmental protection? How should we think about firms sacrificing profits in the social interest? Are they permitted to do so, given their fiduciary responsibilities to their shareholders? Even if permissible, is the practice sustainable, or will the competitive marketplace render such efforts and their impacts transient at best? Furthermore, is the practice, however well intended, an efficient use of social and economic resources? And, as an empirical matter, to what extent do firms already behave this way? Until now, public discussion has generated more heat than light on both the normative and positive questions surrounding corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the environmental realm. In Environmental Protection and the Social Responsibility of Firms, some of the nation s leading scholars in law, economics, and business examine commonly accepted assumptions at the heart of current debates on corporate social responsibility and provide a foundation for future research and policymaking.


Stavins, Robert N. “Global Warming.” Letters & Notes 1 (2005). american_interest.pdf


Stavins, Robert N. “Implications of the U.S. Experience with Market-Based Environment Strategies for Future Climate Policy.” In Emissions Trading for Climate Policy: US and European Perspectives, edited by Bernd Hansjürgens, 63–77. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.Abstract

Review: "The 1997 Kyoto Conference introduced emissions trading as a new policy instrument for climate protection. Bringing together scholars in the fields of economics, political science, and law, this book provides a description, analysis, and evaluation of different aspects of emissions trading as an instrument to control greenhouse gases. The authors analyse theoretical aspects of regulatory instruments for climate policy, provide an overview of US experience with market-based instruments, draw lessons from existing trading schemes for the control of greenhouse gases, and discuss options for emissions trading in climate policy. They also highlight the background of climate policy and instrument choice in the USA and Europe, and of the emerging new systems in Europe, particularly the new EU directive for a CO[subscript 2] emissions trading system."–Jacket.



Stavins, Robert N. “Lessons Learned from SO2 Allowance Trading.” Choices 20 (2005): 53–57. Publisher's Version choices.pdf