HOME / SEARCH /

Search

Search results

    Plantinga, Andrew J, Ruben N Lubowski, and Robert N Stavins. “The Effects of Potential Land Development on Agricultural Land Prices.” Journal of Urban Economics 52 (2002): 561–581. Publisher's VersionAbstract
    journal_of_urban_economics_2002.pdf

    We conduct a national-scale analysis of the determinants of agricultural land values. The theoretical basis for the study is a spatial city model with stochastic returns to future land development. The empirical model of agricultural land prices is estimated with a cross-section on approximately three thousand counties in the contiguous US. The results provide evidence that option values associated with irreversible and uncertain land development are capitalized into current farmland values. For each county, we decompose the current agricultural land value into components measuring rents from agricultural production and rents from future land development.

    A-33

    Jaffe, Adam B, and Robert N Stavins. “The Energy Paradox and the Diffusion of Conservation Technology.” Resource and Energy Economics 16 (1994): 91–122. Publisher's VersionAbstract
    theenergyparadox.ree1994.pdf

    We develop a framework for thinking about the 'paradox' of very gradual diffusion of apparently cost-effective energy-conservation technologies. Our analysis provides some keys to understanding why this technology-diffusion process i.s gradual, and focuses attention on the factors that cause this to be the case, including those associated with potential market failures - information problems, principal/agent slippage, and unobserved costs - and those explanations that do not represent market failures - private information costs, high discount rates, and heterogeneity among potential adopters. Additionally, our analysis indicates how alternative policy instruments - both economic incentives and direct regulations can hasten the diffusion of energy-conserving technologies.

    A-13

    Jaffe, Adam B, and Robert N Stavins. “The Energy-Efficiency Gap: What Does It Mean?” Energy Policy 22 (1994): 804–810. Publisher's VersionAbstract
    the_energy_efficiency_gap.pdf

    As renewed attention has been given by policy makers to energy conservation issues, it has frequently been asserted that an energy-efficiency gap exists between actual and optimal energy use. The critical questions is how to define the optimal level of energy efficiency. This paper seeks to disentangle some confusing strands of argument that are frequently brought to bear on this question, by identifying the major conceptual issues that determine the set of feasible answers. We identify five separate and distinct notions of optimality: the economists' economic potential, the technologists' economic potential, hypothetical potential, the narrow social optimum and the true social optimum. Each of these has associated with it a corresponding definition of the energy-efficiency gap. Our analysis demonstrates that necessary preconditions for identifying the right measure of the energy-efficiency gap include understanding and disentangling market failure and non-market failure explanations for the gradual diffusion of energy-efficient technologies.

    A-14

    Newell, Richard G, Adam B Jaffe, and Robert N Stavins. “The Induced Innovation Hypothesis and Energy-Saving Technological Change.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 114 (1999): 941 –975. Publisher's VersionAbstract
    rff-dp-98-12-rev.pdf

    We develop a methodology for testing Hicks's induced innovation hypothesis by estimating a product-characteristics model of energy-using consumer durables, augmenting the hypothesis to allow for the influence of government regulations. For the products we explored, the evidence suggests that (i) the rate of overall innovation was independent of energy prices and regulations; (ii) the direction of innovation was responsive to energy price changes for some products but not for others; (iii) energy price changes induced changes in the subset of technically feasible models that were offered for sale; (iv) this responsiveness increased substantially during the period after energy-efficiency product labeling was required; and (v) nonetheless, a sizable portion of efficiency improvements were autonomous.

    A-28

    Aldy, Joseph E, and Robert N Stavins. “The Promise and Problems of Pricing Carbon Theory and Experience.” The Journal of Environment & Development 21 (2012): 152–180. Publisher's VersionAbstract
    aldy_stavins_pricing_carbon_in_jed.pdf

    Because of the global commons nature of climate change, international cooperation among nations will likely be necessary for meaningful action at the global level. At the same time, it will inevitably be up to the actions of sovereign nations to put in place policies that bring about meaningful reductions in the emissions of greenhouse gases. Due to the ubiquity and diversity of emissions of greenhouse gases in most economies, as well as the variation in abatement costs among individual sources, conventional environmental policy approaches, such as uniform technology and performance standards, are unlikely to be sufficient to the task. Therefore, attention has increasingly turned to market-based instruments in the form of carbon-pricing mechanisms. We examine the opportunities and challenges associated with the major options for carbon pricing—carbon taxes, cap-and-trade, emission reduction credits, clean energy standards, and fossil fuel subsidy reductions—and provide a review of the experiences, drawn primarily from developed countries, in implementing these instruments. Our summary of relevant theory and survey of experience from industrialized nations may be helpful to those who wish to examine the potential applicability of carbon pricing in the context of developing countries.

    A-71

    Chan, Gabriel, Robert Stavins, Robert Stowe, and Richard Sweeney. “The SO2 Allowance-Trading System and the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990: Reflections on 20 Years of Policy Innovation.” National Tax Journal 65 (2012): 419–52. Publisher's VersionAbstract
    chan_et_al_so2_article_national_tax_journal_2012.pdf

    The introduction of the U.S. SO2 allowance-trading program to address the threat of acid rain as part of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 is a landmark event in the history of environmental regulation. The program was a great success by almost all measures. This paper, which draws upon a research workshop and a policy roundtable held at Harvard in May 2011, investigates critically the design, enactment, implementation, performance, and implications of this path-breaking application of economic thinking to environmental regulation. Ironically, cap-and-trade seems especially well suited to addressing the problem of climate change, in that emitted greenhouse gases are evenly distributed throughout the world’s atmosphere. Recent hostility toward cap-and-trade in debates about U.S. climate legislation may reflect the broader political environment of the climate debate more than the substantive merits of market-based regulation.

    A-72

Pages