Emissions Targets and the Real Business Cycle: Intensity Targets Versus Caps or Taxes
Resources for the Future Discussion Paper RFF DP 09-47-REV
34 Pages Posted: 15 Nov 2009 Last revised: 7 May 2011
Date Written: April 2011
Abstract
For reducing greenhouse gas emissions, intensity targets are attracting interest as a flexible mechanism that would better allow for economic growth than emissions caps. For the same expected emissions, however, the economic responses to unexpected productivity shocks differ. Using a real business cycle model, we find that a cap dampens the effects of productivity shocks in the economy on all variables except for the shadow value of the emissions constraint. An emissions tax leads to the same expected outcomes as a cap but with greater volatility. Certainty-equivalent intensity targets maintain higher levels of labor, capital, and output than other policies, with lower expected costs and no more volatility than with no policy.
Keywords: emissions tax, cap-and-trade, intensity target, business cycle
JEL Classification: Q2, Q43, Q52, H2, E32
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
Using Asset Prices to Measure the Cost of Business Cycles
By Fernando Alvarez and Urban J. Jermann
-
Evaluating Risky Consumption Paths: the Role of Intertemporal Substitutability
-
The Cost of Business Cycles Under Endogenous Growth
By Gadi Barlevy
-
The Cost of Business Cycles Under Endogenous Growth
By Gadi Barlevy
-
Reconsidering the Costs of Business Cycles with Incomplete Markets
By Andrew Atkeson and Christopher Phelan
-
By Kjetil Storesletten, Chris Telmer, ...
-
Technology (and Policy) Shocks in Models of Endogenous Growth
By Larry Jones, Rody Manuelli, ...
-
Recursive Utility, Endogenous Growth, and the Welfare Cost of Volatility
By Anne Epaulard and Aude Pommeret
-
Technology Commitment and the Cost of Economic Fluctuations
By Garey Ramey and Valerie A. Ramey