Journal Article - Nature Energy
Policy Sequencing toward Decarbonization
Abstract
Many economists have long held that carbon pricing—either through a carbon tax or cap-and-trade—is the most cost-effective way to decarbonize energy systems, along with subsidies for basic research and development. Meanwhile, green innovation and industrial policies aimed at fostering low-carbon energy technologies have proliferated widely. Most of these predate direct carbon pricing. Low-carbon leaders such as California and the European Union (EU) have followed a distinct policy sequence that helps overcome some of the political challenges facing low-carbon policy by building economic interest groups in support of decarbonization and reducing the cost of technologies required for emissions reductions. However, while politically effective, this policy pathway faces significant challenges to environmental and cost effectiveness, including excess rent capture and lock-in. Here we discuss options for addressing these challenges under political constraints. As countries move toward deeper emissions cuts, combining and sequencing policies will prove critical to avoid environmental, economic, and political dead-ends in decarbonizing energy systems.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.
For more information on this publication:
Please contact
Science, Technology, and Public Policy
For Academic Citation:
Meckling, Jonas, Thomas Sterner and Gernot Wagner. "Policy Sequencing toward Decarbonization." Nature Energy, vol. 2. (November 2017): 918–922.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Discussion Paper
- Harvard Project on Climate Agreements
Key Issues Facing California's GHG Cap-and-Trade System for 2021–2030
Discussion Paper
- Harvard Project on Climate Agreements
An Economic Anatomy of Optimal Climate Policy
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Blog Post
- Iran Matters
U.S.-Led Regime Change is not the Path
Policy Brief
- Harvard Initiative to Reduce Global Methane Emissions
Updating Estimates of Methane Emissions: The Case of China
Abstract
Many economists have long held that carbon pricing—either through a carbon tax or cap-and-trade—is the most cost-effective way to decarbonize energy systems, along with subsidies for basic research and development. Meanwhile, green innovation and industrial policies aimed at fostering low-carbon energy technologies have proliferated widely. Most of these predate direct carbon pricing. Low-carbon leaders such as California and the European Union (EU) have followed a distinct policy sequence that helps overcome some of the political challenges facing low-carbon policy by building economic interest groups in support of decarbonization and reducing the cost of technologies required for emissions reductions. However, while politically effective, this policy pathway faces significant challenges to environmental and cost effectiveness, including excess rent capture and lock-in. Here we discuss options for addressing these challenges under political constraints. As countries move toward deeper emissions cuts, combining and sequencing policies will prove critical to avoid environmental, economic, and political dead-ends in decarbonizing energy systems.
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.Meckling, Jonas, Thomas Sterner and Gernot Wagner. "Policy Sequencing toward Decarbonization." Nature Energy, vol. 2. (November 2017): 918–922.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Discussion Paper - Harvard Project on Climate Agreements
Key Issues Facing California's GHG Cap-and-Trade System for 2021–2030
Discussion Paper - Harvard Project on Climate Agreements
An Economic Anatomy of Optimal Climate Policy
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Blog Post - Iran Matters
U.S.-Led Regime Change is not the Path
Policy Brief - Harvard Initiative to Reduce Global Methane Emissions
Updating Estimates of Methane Emissions: The Case of China