Designing an effective climate-policy mix: accounting for instrument synergy

References

• Abrahamse, W., & Steg, L. (2013). Social influence approaches to encourage resource conservation: A meta-analysis. Global Environmental Change, 23(6), 1773–1785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.07.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rothengatter, T. (2007). The effect of tailored information, goal setting, and tailored feedback on household energy use, energy-related behaviors, and behavioral antecedents. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(4), 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aghion, P., Dechezleprêtre, A., Hémous, D., Martin, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2016). Carbon taxes, path dependency, and directed technical change: Evidence from the auto industry. Journal of Political Economy, 124(1), 1–51. https://doi.org/10.1086/684581
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldy, J., Krupnick, A., Newell, R., Parry, I., & Pizer, W. (2010). Designing climate mitigation policy. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(4), 903–934. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.48.4.903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldy, J. E., & Pizer, W. A. (2015). The competitiveness impacts of climate change mitigation policies. Journal of the Association of Environment and Resource Economists, 2(4), 565–595. https://doi.org/10.1086/683305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Khourdajiea, A., & Finus, M. (2020). Measures to enhance the effectiveness of international climate agreements: The case of border carbon adjustments. European Economic Review, 124, 103405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103405
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allcott, H., Knittel, C., & Taubinsky, D. (2015). Tagging and targeting of energy efficiency subsidies. American Economic Review, 105(5), 187–191. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambac, S., & Coria, J. (2013). Prices vs quantities with multiple pollutants. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 66(1), 123–140.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andor, M. A., & Fels, K. M. (2018). Behavioral economics and energy conservation – A systematic review of non-price interventions and their causal effects. Ecological Economics, 148, 178–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.01.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arthur, B. (1989). Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99(394), 116–131. https://doi.org/10.2307/2234208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Axsen, J., Plötz, P., & Wolinetz, M. (2020). Crafting strong, integrated policy mixes for deep CO2 mitigation in road transport. Nature Climate Change, 10(9), 809–818. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0877-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beckenbach, F., Daskalakis, M., & Hofmann, D. (2018). Agent-based analysis of industrial dynamics and paths of environmental policy: The case of non-renewable energy production in Germany. Computational Economics, 52(3), 953–994. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-017-9773-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennear, L. S., & Stavins, R. N. (2007). Second-best theory and the use of multiple policy instruments. Environmental and Resource Economics, 37(1), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-007-9110-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernstein, S., & Hoffmann, M. (2019). Climate politics, metaphors and the fractal carbon trap. Nature Climate Change, 9(12), 919–925. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0618-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Böhringer, C., & Rosendahl, K. E. (2011). Greening electricity more than necessary: On the cost implications of overlapping regulation in EU climate policy. Schmollers Jahrbuch: Journal of Contextual Economics, 131(3), 469–492. https://doi.org/10.3790/schm.131.3.469
   Google Scholar
• Bollinger, B., & Gillingham, K. (2012). Peer effects in the diffusion of solar photovoltaic panels. Marketing Science, 31(6), 900–912. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.1120.0727
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boonekamp, P. (2006). Actual interaction effects between policy measures for energy efficiency—a qualitative matrix method and quantitative simulation results for households. Energy, 31(14), 2848–2873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2006.01.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borrás, S., & Edquist, C. (2013). The choice of innovation policy instruments. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1513–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouma, J. A., Verbraak, M., Dietz, F., & Brouwer, R. (2018). Policy mix: Mess or merit? Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, 8(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2018.1494636
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowles, S. (2016). The moral economy: Why good incentives are no substitute for good citizens. Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4-5), 627–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00093-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braathen, N. A. (2007). Instrument mixes for environmental policy: How many stones should be used to kill a bird? International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, 1(2), 185–235. https://doi.org/10.1561/101.00000005
   Google Scholar
• Brandon, A., List, J. A., Metcalfe, R. D., Price, M. K., & Rundhammer, F. (2019). Testing for crowd out in social nudges: Evidence from a natural field experiment in the market for electricity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(12), 5293–5298. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1802874115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulkeley, H., & Kern, K. (2006). Local government and the governing of climate change in Germany and the UK. Urban Studies, 43(12), 2237–2259. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980600936491
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christiansen, V., & Smith, S. (2012). Externality-correcting taxes and regulation. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 114(2), 358–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9442.2012.01701.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christiansen, V., & Smith, S. (2015). Emissions taxes and abatement regulation under uncertainty. Environmental and Resource Economics, 60(1), 17–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-013-9755-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cowan, R., & Hulten, S. (1996). Escaping lock-in: The case of the electric vehicle. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 53(1), 61–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-1625(96)00059-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• David, P. A. (1985). Clio and the economics of QWERTY. American Economic Review, 75(2), 332–337. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1805621?seq=1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delarue, E., & Van den Bergh, K. (2016). Carbon mitigation in the electric power sector under cap-and-trade and renewables policies. Energy Policy, 92, 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.01.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delmas, M., Fischlein, M., & Asensio, O. (2013). Information strategies and energy conservation behavior: A meta-analysis of experimental studies from 1975 to 2012. Energy Policy, 61(C), 729–739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.109
   Google Scholar
• del Río, P. (2011). Interactions between climate and energy policies: The case of Spain. Climate Policy, 9(2), 119–138. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2007.0424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• del Río, P. (2014). On evaluating success in complex policy mixes: The case of renewable energy support schemes. Policy Sciences, 47(3), 267–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-013-9189-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• del Río, P. (2017). Why does the combination of the European Union emissions trading scheme and a renewable energy target makes economic sense? Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 74, 824–834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.122
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Stefano, G., Gambardella, A., & Verona, G. (2012). Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions. Research Policy, 41(8), 1283–1295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolan, P., & Metcalfe, R. (2015). Neighbors, knowledge, and nuggets: Two natural field experiments on the role of incentives on energy conservation. SSRN paper. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2589269
   Google Scholar
• Dolfsma, W., & Dongback, S. (2013). Government policy and technological innovation—a suggested typology. Technovation, 33(6-7), 173–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2013.03.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drews, S., Exadaktylos, F., & van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2020). Assessing synergy of incentives and nudges in the energy policy mix. Energy Policy, 144, 111605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duan, M., Tian, Z., Zhao, Y., & Li, M. (2017). Interactions and coordination between carbon emissions trading and other direct carbon mitigation policies in China. Energy Research & Social Science, 33, 59–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durrmeyer, I. (2018). Winners and losers: The distributional effects of the French Feebate on the automobile market (TSE Working Papers 18-950). Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
   Google Scholar
• Edmondson, D. L., Kern, F., & Rogge, K. (2019). The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions. Research Policy, 48(10), 103555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ergas, H. (1987). The importance of technology policy. In P. Dasgupta & P. Stoneman (Eds.), Economic policy and technological performance (pp. 51–96). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fagiani, R., Richstein, J. C., Hakvoort, R., & De Vries, L. (2014). The dynamic impact of carbon reduction and renewable support policies on the electricity sector. Utilities Policy, 28, 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2013.11.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fais, B., Blesl, M., Fahl, U., & Voß, A. (2015). Analysing the interaction between emission trading and renewable electricity support in TIMES. Climate Policy, 15(3), 355–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2014.927749
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fankhauser, S., Hepburn, C., & Park, J. (2010). Combining multiple climate policy instruments: How not to do it. Climate Change Economics, 1(3), 209–225. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010007810000169
   Google Scholar
• Finch, A., & van den Bergh, J. (2020). Assessing the authenticity of national carbon prices. Unpublished working paper, ICTA-UAB.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, C., & Fox, A. K. (2012). Comparing policies to combat emissions leakage: Border carbon adjustments versus rebates. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 64(2), 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2012.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flachsland, C., Pahle, M., Burtraw, D., Edenhofer, O., Elkerbout, M., Fischer, C., Tietjen, O., & Zetterberg, L. (2020). How to avoid history repeating itself: The case for an EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) price floor revisited. Climate Policy, 20(1), 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2019.1682494
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Font Vivanco, D., Kemp, R., & van der Voet, E. (2016). How to deal with the rebound effect? A policy-oriented approach. Energy Policy, 94, 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.03.054
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foramitti, J., Savin, I., & van den Bergh, J. (2021). Emission tax vs. permit trading under bounded rationality and dynamic markets. Energy Policy, 148, 112009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.112009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fowlie, M. (2009). Incomplete environmental regulation, imperfect competition, and emissions leakage. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(2), 72–112. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.1.2.72
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freire-González, J. (2018). Environmental taxation and the double dividend hypothesis in CGE modelling literature: A critical review. Journal of Policy Modeling, 40(1), 194–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2017.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freire-González, J. (2020). Energy taxation policies can counteract the rebound effect: Analysis within a general equilibrium framework. Energy Efficiency, 13(1), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-019-09830-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geels, F., Sovacool, B. K., Schwanen, T., & Sorrell, S. (2017). Sociotechnical transitions for deep decarbonization. Science, 357(6357), 1242–1244. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao3760
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerlagh, R., Kverndokk, S., & Rosendahl, K. E. (2009). Optimal timing of climate change policy: Interaction between carbon taxes and innovation externalities. Environmental and Resource Economics, 43(3), 369–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-009-9271-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glaeser, E., & Ujhelyi, G. (2010). Regulating misinformation. Journal of Public Economics, 94(3-4), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2010.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Görlach, B. (2014). Emissions trading in the climate policy mix — understanding and managing interactions with other policy instruments. Energy & Environment, 25(3-4), 733–749. https://doi.org/10.1260/0958-305X.25.3-4.733
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goulder, L. H., & Parry, I. W. (2008). Instrument choice in environmental policy. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 2(2), 152–174. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/ren005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goulder, L. H., & Schein, A. R. (2013). Carbon taxes versus cap and trade: A critical review. Climate Change Economics, 04(03), 1350010. https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010007813500103
   Google Scholar
• Grülla, G., & Taschinibc, L. (2011). Cap-and-trade properties under different hybrid scheme designs. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 61(1), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2010.09.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gsottbauer, E., & van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2014). Environmental policy when pollutive consumption is sensitive to advertising: Norms versus status. Ecological Economics, 107, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hafstead, M. (2019). Carbon pricing 102: Revenue use options. Resources for the Future, September 26, 2019. https://media.rff.org/documents/Carbon_Pricing_Explainer_102.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Haites, E. (2018). Carbon taxes and greenhouse gas emissions trading systems: What have we learned? Climate Policy, 18(8), 955–966. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1492897
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Handgraaf, M. J. J., Van Lidth de Jeude, M. A., & Appelt, K. C. (2013). Public praise vs. private pay: Effects of rewards on energy conservation in the workplace. Ecological Economics, 86, 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.11.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haultfœuille, X., Givord, P., & Boutin, X. (2014). The environmental effect of green taxation: The case of the French bonus/malus. The Economic Journal, 124(578), F444–F480. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12089
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hepburn, C. (2006). Regulating by prices, quantities or both: An update and an overview. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22(2), 226–247. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/grj014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrmann, J. K., & Savin, I. (2017). Optimal policy identification: Insights from the German electricity market. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 122(C), 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.04.014
   Google Scholar
• Hilton, D., Charalambides, L., Demarque, C., Waroquier, L., & Raux, C. (2014). A tax can nudge: The impact of an environmentally motivated bonus/malus fiscal system on transport preferences. Journal of Economic Psychology, 42, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2014.02.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HLCCP. (2017). Report of the high-level commission on carbon prices. World Bank.
   Google Scholar
• Hood, C. (2013). Managing interactions between carbon pricing and existing energy policies: Guidance for policymakers. http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/ManagingInteractionsCarbonPricing_FINAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Hoppmann, J., Peters, M., Schneider, M., & Hoffmann, V. H. (2013). The two faces of market support—how deployment policies affect technological exploration and exploitation in the solar photovoltaic industry. Research Policy, 42(4), 989–1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.01.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., & Rayner, J. (2007). Design principles for policy mixes: Cohesion and coherence in ‘new governance arrangements. Policy and Society, 26(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1449-4035(07)70118-2
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., Vince, J., & del Rio, P. (2017). Policy integration and multi-level governance: Dealing with the vertical dimension of policy mix designs. Politics and Governance, 5(2), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v5i2.928
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IMF. (2019). Fiscal policies for Paris climate strategies—from principle to practice. Fiscal Affairs Department, International Monetary Fund.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobsson, S., Bergek, A., & Sandén, B. (2017). Improving the European Commission’s analytical base for designing instrument mixes in the energy sector: Market failures versus system weaknesses. Energy Research & Social Science, 33, 11–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacoby, H. D., & Ellerman, A. D. (2004). The safety valve and climate policy. Energy Policy, 32(4), 481–491. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4215(03)00150-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaffe, A., Newell, R. G., & Stavins, R. N. (2005). A tale of two market failures: Technology and environmental policy. Ecological Economics, 54(2), 164–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.12.027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenn, A., Azevedo, I. L., & Michalek, J. J. (2016). Alternative fuel vehicle adoption increases fleet gasoline consumption and greenhouse gas emissions under United States corporate average fuel economy policy and greenhouse gas emission standards. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(5), 2165–2174. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b02842
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenn, A., Azevedo, I. L., & Michalek, J. J. (2019). Alternative-fuel-vehicle policy interactions increase U.S. Greenhouse gas emissions. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 124, 396–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, A., Huitema, D., van Asselt, H., & Forster, J. (Eds.). (2018). Governing climate change: Polycentricity in action? Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jordan, A., & Lenschow, A. (2010). Environmental policy integration: A state of the art review. Environmental Policy and Governance, 20(3), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.539
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klenert, D., Mattauch, L., Combet, E., Edenhofer, O., Hepburn, C., Rafaty, R., & Stern, N. (2018). Making carbon pricing work for citizens. Nature Climate Change, 8(8), 669–677. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0201-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konc, T., Savin, I., & van den Bergh, J. (2021). The social multiplier of environmental policy: Application to carbon taxation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 105, 102396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2020.102396
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lecuyer, O., & Quirion, P. (2013). Can uncertainty justify overlapping policy instruments to mitigate emissions? Ecological Economics, 93, 177–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.05.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehmann, P. (2012). Justifying a policy mix for pollution control: A review of economic literature. Journal of Economic Surveys, 26(1), 71–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2010.00628.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lehmann, P., & Gawel, E. (2013). Why should support schemes for renewable electricity complement the EU emissions trading scheme? Energy Policy, 52, 597–607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.10.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, S., Linn, J., & Muehlegger, E. (2014). Gasoline taxes and consumer behavior. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 6(4), 302–342. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.6.4.302
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindman, Å, & Söderholm, P. (2016). Wind energy and green economy in Europe: Measuring policy-induced innovation using patent data. Applied Energy, 179, 1351–1359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.10.128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• List, J. A., Metcalfe, R. D., Price, M. K., & Rundhammer, F. (2017). Harnessing policy complementarities to conserve energy: evidence from a natural field experiment (NBER Working Paper No. 23355). doi:10.3386/w23355
   Google Scholar
• Martin, B. R. (2012). The evolution of science policy and innovation studies. Research Policy, 41(7), 1219–1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masson-Delmotte, V., Zhai, P., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D., Skea, J., Shukla, P. R., Pirani, A., Moufouma-Okia, W., Péan, C., Pidcock, R., Connors, S., Matthews, J. B. R., Chen, Y., Zhou, X., Gomis, M. I., Lonnoy, E., Maycock, T., Tignor, M., & Waterfield, T. (Eds.). (2018). Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. Geneva: IPCC.
   Google Scholar
• Matthies, E., Kastner, I., Klesse, A., & Wagner, H. J. (2011). High reduction potentials for energy user behavior in public buildings: How much can psychology-based interventions achieve? Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 1(3), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-011-0024-1
   Google Scholar
• Meckling, J., Kelsey, N., Biber, E., & Zysman, E. J. (2015). Winning coalitions for climate policy. Science, 349(6253), 1170–1171. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab1336
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercure, J.-F., Pollitt, H., Chewpreecha, U., Salas, P., Foley, A. M., Holden, P. B., & Edwards, N. R. (2014). The dynamics of technology diffusion and the impacts of climate policy instruments in the decarbonisation of the global electricity sector. Energy Policy, 73, 686–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.06.029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mizobuchi, K., & Takeuchi, K. (2013). The influences of financial and non-financial factors on energy-saving behaviour: A field experiment in Japan. Energy Policy, 63, 775–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.064
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mundaca, L., Sonnenschein, J., Steg, L., Höhne, N., & Ürge-Vorsatz, D. (2019). The global expansion of climate mitigation policy interventions, the Talanoa dialogue and the role of behavioural insights. Environmental Research Communications, 1(6), 061001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ab26d6
   Google Scholar
• Murray, B. C., Cropper, M. L., de la Chesnaye, F. C., & Reilly, J. M. (2014). How effective are US renewable energy subsidies in cutting greenhouse gases? American Economic Review, 104(5), 569–574. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.5.569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nisa, C. F., Bélanger, J. J., Schumpe, B. M., & Faller, D. G. (2019). Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials testing behavioural interventions to promote household action on climate change. Nature Communications, 10(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07882-8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nyborg, K., Howarth, R. B., & Brekke, A. (2006). Green consumers and public policy: On socially contingent moral motivation. Resource and Energy Economics, 28(4), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2006.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. (2011). Interactions between emission trading systems and other overlapping policy instruments. General Distribution Document, Environment Directorate. Paris: OECD, www.oecd.org/env/taxes
   Google Scholar
• Oikonomou, V., Flamos, A., & Grafakos, S. (2010). Is blending of energy and climate policy instruments always desirable? Energy Policy, 38(2010), 4186–4195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.046
   Google Scholar
• Oikonomou, V., & Jepma, C. (2007). A framework on interactions of climate and energy policy instruments. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 13(2), 131–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-007-9082-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osorio, S., Pietzcker, R. C., Pahle, M., & Edenhofer, O. (2020). How to deal with the risks of phasing out coal in Germany. Energy Economics, 87, 104730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palage, K., Lundmark, R., & Söderholm, P. (2019). The innovation effects of renewable energy policies and their interaction: The case of solar photovoltaics. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, 21, 217–254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panzone, L. A., Ulph, A., Zizzo, D. J., Hilton, D., & Clear, A. (2018). The impact of environmental recall and carbon taxation on the carbon footprint of supermarket shopping. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2018.06.002
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pellerano, J. A., Price, M. K., Puller, S. L., & Sánchez, G. E. (2017). Do extrinsic incentives undermine social norms? Evidence from a field experiment in energy conservation. Environmental and. Resource Economics, 67(3), 413–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-016-0094-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perino, G. (2018). New EU ETS phase 4 rules temporarily puncture waterbed. Nature Climate Change, 8(20), 262–264. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0120-2
   Google Scholar
• Perino, G., Panzone, L. A., & Swanson, T. (2014). Motivation crowding in real consumption decisions: Who is messing with my groceries? Economic Inquiry, 52(2), 592–607. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perino, G., Ritz, R. A., & van Benthem, A. (2019). Understanding overlapping policies: Internal carbon leakage and the punctured waterbed (NBER Working Paper No. 25643).
   Google Scholar
• Philibert, C. (2009). Assessing the value of price caps and floors. Climate Policy, 9(6), 612–633. https://doi.org/10.3763/cpol.2008.0586
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pitelis, A. T. (2018). Industrial policy for renewable energy: The innovation impact of European policy instruments and their interactions. Competition and Change, 22(3), 227–254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pizer, W. A. (1997). Prices vs. quantities revisited: The case of climate change (Discussion paper 98-02). Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Popp, D. (2002). Induced innovation and energy prices. The American Economic Review, 92(1), 160–180. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282802760015658
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richstein, J. C., Chappin, ÉJL, & de Vries, L. J. (2015). Adjusting the CO2 cap to subsidised RES generation: Can CO2 prices be decoupled from renewable policy? Applied Energy, 156, 693–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.07.024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts, M. J., & Spence, M. (1976). Effluent charges and licenses under uncertainty. Journal of Public Economics, 5(3-4), 193–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0047-2727(76)90014-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogge, K. S., Kern, F., & Howlett, M. (2017). Conceptual and empirical advances in analysing policy mixes for energy transitions. Energy Research & Social Science, 33, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogge, K. S., & Reichardt, K. (2016). Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis. Research Policy, 45(8), 1620–1635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenow, J., Kern, F., & Rogge, K. (2017). The need for comprehensive and well targeted instrument mixes to stimulate energy transitions: The case of energy efficiency policy. Energy Research & Social Science, 33, 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.09.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schall, D. L., Wolf, M., & Mohnen, A. (2016). Do effects of theoretical training and rewards for energy-efficient behavior persist over time and interact? A natural field experiment on eco-driving in a company fleet. Energy Policy, 97, 291–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.07.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T., & Stavins, R. N. (2012). Implications of policy interactions for California’s climate policy. 23 pp. https://www.analysisgroup.com/globalassets/content/insights/publishing/implications_policy_interactions_california_climate_policy.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Schmidt, T. S., & Sewerin, S. (2019). Measuring the temporal dynamics of policy mixes – an empirical analysis of renewable energy policy mixes’ balance and design features in nine countries. Research Policy, 48(10), 103557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.03.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schubert, C. (2017). Green nudges: Do they work? Are they ethical? Ecological Economics, 132, 329–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.11.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seto, K. C., Davis, S. J., Mitchell, R. B., Stokes, E. C., Unruh, G., & Ürge-Vorsatz, D. (2016). Carbon lock-in: Types, causes, and policy implications. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41(1), 425–452. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085934
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sijm, J. (2005). The interaction between the EU emission trading scheme and national energy policy schemes. Climate Policy, 5(1), 79–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2005.9685542
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silvia, C., & Krause, R. M. (2016). Assessing the impact of policy interventions on the adoption of plug-in electric vehicles: An agent-based model. Energy Policy, 96, 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.05.039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinn, H. W. (2015). Introductory comment–the green paradox: A supply-side view of the climate problem. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 9(2), 239–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/rev011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skovsgaard Aidta, T., & Duttab, J. (2004). Transitional politics: Emerging incentive-based instruments in environmental regulation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 47(3), 458–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2003.07.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Somanathan, E., Sterner, T., Sugiyama, T., Chimanikire, D., Dubash, N. K., Essandoh-Yeddu, J., Fifita, S., Goulder, L., Jaffe, A., Labandeira, X., Managi, S., Mitchell, C., Montero, J. P., Teng, F., & Zylicz, T. (2014). National and Subnational Policies and Institutions. Chapter 15 In Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Edenhofer, O., R. Pichs-Madruga, Y. Sokona, E. Farahani, S. Kadner, K. Seyboth, A. Adler, I. Baum, S. Brunner, P. Eickemeier, B. Kriemann, J. Savolainen, S. Schlömer, C. von Stechow, T. Zwickel and J.C. Minx (Eds.)]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sorrell, S., Harrison, D., Radov, D., Klevnas, P., & Foss, A. (2009). White certificate schemes: Economic analysis and interactions with the EU ETS. Energy Policy, 37(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2008.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorrell, S., & Sijm, J. (2003). Carbon trading in the policy mix. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 19(3), 420–437. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/19.3.420
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stern, P. C. (1999). Information, incentives, and proenvironmental consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Policy, 22(4), 461–478. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006211709570
   Google Scholar
• Stern, P. C. (2020). A reexamination on how behavioral interventions can promote household action to limit climate change. Nature Communications, 11(1), 1–3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sterner, T. (2002). Policy instruments for environmental and natural resource management. RFF Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sterner, T., Barbier, E. B., Bateman, I., van den Bijgaart, I., Crépin, A.-S., Edenhofer, O., Fischer, C., Habla, W., Hassler, J., Johansson-Stenman, O., Lange, A., Polasky, S., Rockström, J., Smith, H. G., Steffen, W., Wagner, G., Wilen, J. E., Alpízar, F., Azar, C., …  Robinson, A. (2019). Policy design for the anthropocene. Nature Sustainability, 2(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0194-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiglitz, J. E. (2019). Addressing climate change through price and non-price interventions. European Economic Review, 119, 594–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2019.05.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stoneman, P., & David, P. A. (1986). Adoption subsidies vs. information provision as instruments of technology policy. The Economic Journal, 96(Supplement), I42–I5I.
   Google Scholar
• Sudarshan, A. (2017). Nudges in the marketplace: The response of household electricity consumption to information and monetary incentives. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 134, 320–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2016.12.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thurber, M. C., Davis, T. L., & Wolak, F. A. (2015). Simulating the interaction of a renewable portfolio standard with electricity and carbon markets. The Electricity Journal, 28(4), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tej.2015.04.007
   Google Scholar
• Tinbergen, J. (1952). On the theory of economic policy. North-Holland Publishing Company.
   Google Scholar
• Tørnblad, S. H., Kallbekken, S., Korneliussen, K., & Mideksa, T. K. (2014). Using mobility management to reduce private car use: Results from a natural field experiment in Norway. Transport Policy, 32, 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trencher, G., & van der Heijden, J. (2019). Instrument interactions and relationships in policy mixes: Achieving complementarity in building energy efficiency policies in New York, Sydney and Tokyo. Energy Research & Social Science, 54(2019), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.02.023
   Google Scholar
• Tu, Q., & Mo, J.-L. (2017). Coordinating carbon pricing policy and renewable energy policy with a case study in China. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 113, 294–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2017.09.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Twomey, P. (2012). Rationales for additional climate policy instruments under a carbon price. The Economic and Labour Relations Review, 23(1), 7–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/103530461202300102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2011). Energy conservation more effective with rebound policy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 48(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-010-9396-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2013a). Policies to enhance economic feasibility of a sustainable energy transition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(7), 2436–2437. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1221894110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2013b). Environmental and climate innovation: Limitations, policies and prices. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(1), 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.08.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bergh, J. C. J. M., Angelsen, A., Baranzini, A., Botzen, W. J. W., Carattini, S., Drews, S., Dunlop, T., Galbraith, E., Gsottbauer, E., Howarth, R. B., Padilla, E., Roca, J., & Schmidt, R. C. (2020). A dual-track transition to global carbon pricing. Climate Policy, 20(9), 1057–1069. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1797618
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Ploeg, R., & Withagen, C. (2015). Global warming and the green paradox: A review of adverse effects of climate policies. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, 9(2), 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/rev008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Venmans, F., Ellis, J., & Nachtigall, D. (2020). Carbon pricing and competitiveness: Are they at odds? Climate Policy, 20(9), 1070–1091. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1805291
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vilchez, J. J., Jochem, P., & Fichtnera, W. (2020). Interlinking major markets to explore electric car uptake. Energy Policy, 144, 111588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111588
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Way, R., Lafond, F., Lillo, F., Panchenko, V., & Farmer, D. (2019). Wright meets Markowitz: How standard portfolio theory changes when assets are technologies following experience curves. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 101, 211–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jedc.2018.10.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weitzman, M. L. (1974). Prices vs. quantities. The Review of Economic Studies, 41(4), 477–491. https://doi.org/10.2307/2296698
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weitzman, M. L. (2014). Can negotiating a uniform carbon price help to internalize the global warming externality? Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 1(1/2), 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1086/676039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weitzman, M. L. (2017). On a world climate assembly and the social cost of carbon. Economica, 84(336), 559–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecca.12248
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whistance, J., Thompson, W., & Meyer, S. (2017). Interactions between California’s low carbon fuel standard and the national renewable fuel standard. Energy Policy, 101, 447–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2016.10.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiese, C., Larsen, A., & Pade, L. L. (2018). Interaction effects of energy efficiency policies: A review. Energy Efficiency, 11(8), 2137–2156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-018-9659-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynes, S., Nicholas, K. A., Zhao, J., & Donner, S. D. (2018). Measuring what works: Quantifying greenhouse gas emission reductions of behavioural interventions to reduce driving, meat consumption, and household energy use. Environmental Research Letters, 13(11), 113002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aae5d7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeppini, P., & van den Bergh, J. (2020). Global competition dynamics of fossil fuels and renewable energy under climate policies and peak-oil: A behavioural model. Energy Policy, 136, 110907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.110907
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar