Conventional economic analyses of stringent climate change mitigation have generally concluded that economic austerity would result from carbon austerity. These analyses however rely critically on the assumption of an economic equilibrium, which dismisses established notions on behavioural heterogeneity, path dependence and technology transitions. Here we show that on the contrary, the decarbonisation of the electricity sector globally can lead to improvements in economic performance. By modelling the process of innovation-diffusion and  non-equilibrium dynamics, we establish how climate policy instruments for emissions reductions alter economic activity through energy prices, government spending, enhanced investment and tax revenues. While higher electricity prices reduce income and output, this is over-compensated by enhanced employment generated by investments in new technology. We stress that the current dialogue on the impacts of climate policies must be revisited to reflect the real complex dynamics involved in the global economy, not captured by conventional models .
Conventional economic analysis of stringent climate change mitigation policy generally concludes various levels of economic slowdown as a result of substantial spending on low carbon technology. Equilibrium economics however could not explain or predict the current economic crisis, which is of financial nature. Meanwhile the economic impacts of climate policy find their source through investments for the diffusion of environmental innovations, in parts a financial problem. Here, we expose how results of economic analysis of climate change mitigation policy depend entirely on assumptions and theory concerning the finance of the diffusion of innovations, and that in many cases, results are simply re-iterations of model assumptions. We show that, while equilibrium economics always predict economic slowdown, methods using non-equilibrium approaches suggest the opposite could occur. We show that the solution to understanding the economic impacts of reducing greenhouse gas emissions lies with research on the dynamics of the financial sector interacting with innovation and technology developments, economic history providing powerful insights through important analogies with previous historical waves of innovation .
R
analyses
analysis
R
have generally concluded that economic austerity would result from carbon austerity. These analyses however rely critically on the assumption of an economic equilibrium, which dismisses established notions on behavioural heterogeneity, path dependence and technology transitions. Here we show that on the contrary, the decarbonisation of the electricity sector globally can lead to improvements in economic performance. By modelling the process of innovation-diffusion
policy generally concludes various levels of economic slowdown as a result of substantial spending on low carbon technology. Equilibrium economics however could not explain or predict the current economic crisis, which is of financial nature. Meanwhile the economic impacts of climate policy find their source through investments for the diffusion of environmental innovations, in parts a financial problem. Here, we expose how results of economic analysis of climate change mitigation policy depend entirely on assumptions and theory concerning the finance of the diffusion of innovations,
A
that in many cases, results are simply re-iterations of model assumptions. We show that, while equilibrium economics always predict economic slowdown, methods using
R
dynamics, we establish how climate policy instruments for emissions reductions alter economic activity through energy prices, government spending, enhanced investment and tax revenues. While higher electricity prices reduce income and output, this is over-compensated by enhanced employment generated by investments in new technology. We stress that the current dialogue on the impacts of climate policies must be revisited to reflect the real complex dynamics involved in the global economy, not captured by conventional models
approaches suggest the opposite could occur. We show that the solution to understanding the economic impacts of reducing greenhouse gas emissions lies with research on the dynamics of the financial sector interacting with innovation and technology developments, economic history providing powerful insights through important analogies with previous historical waves of innovation