Technology Diffusion, Product Differentiation and Environmental Subsidies

Abstract This paper explores the relationship between environmental subsidies, the diffusion of a clean technology, and the degree of product differentiation in an imperfectly competitive market. Like others, we show that the subsidy succeeds in reducing environmental damage only when the substitution effect (the reduction in pollution associated with the clean technology) exceeds the output effect (the extent that the subsidy increases output). Here, we add product differentiation and diffusion dynamics. When the substitution effect dominates, environmental damage decreases monotonically during the diffusion process. The extent of technology diffusion (the degree to which clean technology replaces dirty) is decreasing in the degree of product differentiation. Further, as products become closer substitutes, it is more likely that the subsidy will reduce environmental damage. Finally, the subsidy for clean technology will spill over to the remaining dirty producers, increasing their profit as well. In a free-entry equilibrium, the subsidy decreases pollution when product differentiation is low compared to the relative pollution intensity of the clean technology.

[1]  Wallace E. Oates,et al.  The theory of environmental policy , 1976 .

[2]  Avinash Dixit,et al.  A MODEL OF DUOPOLY SUGGESTING A THEORY OF ENTRY BARRIERS , 1978 .

[3]  Jennifer F. Reinganum Market Structure and the Diffusion of New Technology , 1981 .

[4]  D. Friedman EVOLUTIONARY GAMES IN ECONOMICS , 1991 .

[5]  Frances Cairncross,et al.  Costing the Earth , 1991 .

[6]  Paul Stoneman,et al.  Technology Diffusion and Public Policy , 1994 .

[7]  A. Jaffe,et al.  The energy paradox and the diffusion of conservation technology , 1994 .

[8]  Adam B. Jaffe,et al.  Dynamic Incentives of Environmental Regulations: The Effects of Alternative Policy Instruments on Te , 1995 .

[9]  R. Kemp,et al.  Environmental policy and technical change : a comparison of the technological impact of policy instruments , 1995 .

[10]  D. Friedman On economic applications of evolutionary game theory , 1998 .

[11]  P. Stoneman,et al.  The Economics of Technological Diffusion , 2001 .

[12]  A. Jaffe,et al.  Environmental Policy and Technological Change , 2002 .

[13]  J. Moraga-González,et al.  Environmental Policy in a Green Market , 2002 .

[14]  P. Nijkamp,et al.  The adoption of energy-efficiency enhancing technologies.: Market performance and policy strategies in case of heterogeneous firms , 2003 .

[15]  S. Bansal,et al.  Tax/subsidy policies in the presence of environmentally aware consumers , 2003 .

[16]  Till Requate,et al.  Environmental policy incentives to adopt advanced abatement technology:: Will the true ranking please stand up? , 2003 .

[17]  Klaus Conrad,et al.  Price Competition and Product Differentiation When Consumers Care for the Environment , 2005 .

[18]  Till Requate,et al.  Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments—a survey , 2005 .

[19]  M. Kuhn The Greening of Markets: Product Competition, Pollution And Policy Making in a Duopoly , 2005 .

[20]  Roberto M. Samaniego Industrial subsidies and technology adoption in general equilibrium , 2006 .

[21]  Roberto Rodríguez-Ibeas,et al.  Environmental Product Differentiation and Environmental Awareness , 2007 .

[22]  A. Yiannaka,et al.  Market and Welfare Effects of Second‐Generation, Consumer‐Oriented GM Products , 2008 .