The international economics of resources and resource ... - Index of

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Global economic sustainability indicator 167 Since the global warming problem refers to CO2 emissions and other greenhouse gases from a worldwide perspective, it is not efficient to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases in particular countries through particular national subsidies. A global approach to establishing an ETS would be useful. However, one may emphasize that stabilization of financial markets should be achieved first since otherwise a very high volatility of certificate prices is to be expected; future markets for such certificates also should be developed carefully and it is not obvious such markets necessarily will be in the US; the EU has a certain advantage here as the EU has taken a lead in the trading of emission certificates. There are policy pitfalls which one should avoid in setting up ETS; e.g the German government has largely exempted the most energy-intensive sectors in the first allocation period—those sectors would normally have rather big opportunities to achieve cuts in energy intensity and CO2 emissions, respectively; Klepper and Peterson (2006) have calculated that the welfare loss of emission trading could have been 0.7% of GDP in the first German National Allocation Plan while in reality the welfare amounted to 2.5% of GDP. Government incentives on renewables could be a useful element of environmental modernization. As regards the share of renewable in the use of energy generation the following tables show that there are large differences across countries. Following the general approach presented here—with the world average set at zero (and the indicator normalized in a way that it falls in the range (−1, 1)—we can see that there are some countries which are positively specialized in renewable energy: Austria, Brazil, Finland India, Italy, Latvia, Philippines, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey have positive indicators. It is noteworthy, that the position of Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Netherlands, Russia and the UK are clearly negative. Comparing 2000 and 2007 the worsening position of China is remarkable, at the same time the UK has slightly and Germany has strongly improved its respective position. There is no doubt that countries such as Russia and China could do much better in the field of renewable provided that government encourages innovative firms and innovations in the renewable sector on a broader scale (Fig. 3). 3.1 Basic reflections on constructing a comprehensive composite indicator In the following analysis, a composite indicator measuring global sustainability in energy consumption is presented. In the first step, the influence of different partial indicators on the composite indicator is discussed by analysing sets of composite indicators with fixed identical weights. In the second step, the weights are allowed to be flexible/different and are estimated using factor analysis. Building on the insights gained in these two steps, a specific composite indicator is developed. However, to begin with, the partial indicators will be introduced and it will be argued in how far they differ from the standard approaches in the literature. Additionally, the modes in which the partial indicators are transformed into centralized and normalized versions are presented. 3.1.1 Points of departure: revealed comparative advantage There is a long history of using the revealed comparative advantage (RCA) as an indicator of international competitiveness, which can also be an indicator for
168 P.J.J. Welfens et al. 1 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0 -0,2 -0,4 -0,6 -0,8 -1 1 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0 -0,2 -0,4 -0,6 -0,8 -1 Comparative Share of Renewable Energy, (2000); (Benchmark=World average) CompShareRE=TANHYPLN ((RE Country /TotalEnergy Country )/ (RE world /TotalEnergy world )) Argentina Australia Austria Azerbaijan Belgium Brazil Bulgaria Canada China Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary India Indonesia Iran Ireland Israel Italy Japan Kazakhstan Latvia Lithuania Mexico Netherlands Norway Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Russia Saudi Arabia Slovak Republic Slovenia South Africa South Korea Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom United States Country Comparative Share of Renewable Energy, (2007); (Benchmark=World average) CompShareRE= TANHYPLN ((RE Country /TotalEnergy Country )/ (REworld/TotalEnergyworld)) Argentina Australia Austria Azerbaijan Belgium Brazil Bulgaria Canada China Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary India Indonesia Iran Ireland Israel Italy Japan Kazakhstan Latvia Lithuania Mexico Netherlands Norway Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Russia Saudi Arabia Slovak Republic Slovenia South Africa South Korea Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey United Kingdom United States Source: IEA Database, EIIW calculations Country Fig. 3 Normalized indicator on the share of renewables in selected countries: 2000 vs. 2007 assessing the specialization in green environmental goods. The standard Balassa indicator considers the sectoral export–import ratio (x/j) of sector i relative to the total export–import ratio (X/J) and concludes that an indicator above unity stands for international competitiveness in the respective sector. It is useful to take logarithms so that one can calculate ln(x/j)/ln(X/J): If the indicator exceeds zero, there is a
Page 1 and 2: Int Econ Econ Policy (2010) 7:147-1
Page 3 and 4: The international economics of reso
Page 5 and 6: The international economics of reso
Page 7 and 8: 154 P.J.J. Welfens et al. Keywords
Page 9 and 10: 156 P.J.J. Welfens et al. developme
Page 11 and 12: 158 P.J.J. Welfens et al. In the su
Page 13 and 14: 160 P.J.J. Welfens et al. genuine s
Page 15 and 16: 162 P.J.J. Welfens et al. pt p0 1 p
Page 17 and 18: 164 P.J.J. Welfens et al. A synthet
Page 19: 166 P.J.J. Welfens et al. ecologica
Page 23 and 24: 170 P.J.J. Welfens et al. In additi
Page 25 and 26: 172 P.J.J. Welfens et al. Fig. 5 Pa
Page 27 and 28: 174 P.J.J. Welfens et al. 1.0 0.5 0
Page 29 and 30: 176 P.J.J. Welfens et al. 2007: 1.0
Page 31 and 32: 178 P.J.J. Welfens et al. weak in t
Page 33 and 34: 180 P.J.J. Welfens et al. Fig. 10 T
Page 35 and 36: 182 P.J.J. Welfens et al. pessimist
Page 37 and 38: 184 P.J.J. Welfens et al. Reference
Page 41 and 42: Sustainability economics, resource
Page 57 and 58: The U.S. proposed carbon tariffs, W
Page 71 and 72:
The U.S. proposed carbon tariffs, W
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
228 R. Bleischwitz economics and po
Page 81 and 82:
230 R. Bleischwitz Fig. 1 Global re
Page 83 and 84:
232 R. Bleischwitz demand is estima
Page 85 and 86:
234 R. Bleischwitz the ‘socio-ind
Page 87 and 88:
236 R. Bleischwitz Fig. 4 Productiv
Page 89 and 90:
238 R. Bleischwitz 5 Resource produ
Page 91 and 92:
240 R. Bleischwitz The vast majorit
Page 93 and 94:
242 R. Bleischwitz Fig. 6 Resource
Page 95 and 96:
244 R. Bleischwitz Ericsson M (2009
Page 97 and 98:
246 R. Walz 1 Introduction Competen
Page 99 and 100:
248 R. Walz Based on the pollution
Page 101 and 102:
250 R. Walz procedures. However, ev
Page 103 and 104:
252 R. Walz In addition to exports,
Page 105 and 106:
254 R. Walz 4 Technological capabil
Page 107 and 108:
256 R. Walz 4.2 Analysis of patents
Page 109 and 110:
258 R. Walz recycling (e.g. shiftab
Page 111 and 112:
260 R. Walz Fig. 10 Specialization
Page 113 and 114:
262 R. Walz Table 1 Overview of ind
Page 115 and 116:
264 R. Walz questions alone. Clearl
Page 117 and 118:
Int Econ Econ Policy (2010) 7:267-2
Page 119 and 120:
Eco-innovation for environmental su
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
The Dutch energy transition approac
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Multi-agent modeling of economic in
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
344 C. Lutz 1 Introduction This cha
Page 195 and 196:
346 C. Lutz The scenario analysis a
Page 197 and 198:
348 C. Lutz is designed to reduce g
Page 199 and 200:
350 C. Lutz 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 C
Page 201 and 202:
352 C. Lutz Table 2 EU27 productivi
Page 203 and 204:
354 C. Lutz material-intensive to l
Page 205 and 206:
356 C. Lutz Giljum S, Behrens A, Hi
Page 207 and 208:
358 T. Machiba While industries are
Page 209 and 210:
360 T. Machiba Field Target Technol
Page 211 and 212:
362 T. Machiba 3 Understanding sust
Page 213 and 214:
364 T. Machiba The automotive and t
Page 215 and 216:
366 T. Machiba Air conditioners fun
Page 217 and 218:
368 T. Machiba Table 2 Application
Page 219:
370 T. Machiba Charter M, Clark T (
show all

The international economics of resources and resource ... - Index of

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?