Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper develops a principal-agent model with adverse selection to analyse firms’ decisions between an existing carbon-intensive technology and a new low-carbon technology requiring an externally funded initial investment. We find that a Pigouvian emission tax alone may result in credit rationing and under-investment in low-carbon technologies. Combining the Pigouvian tax with interest subsidies or loan guarantees resolves credit rationing and yields a first-best outcome. An emission tax set above the Pigouvian level can also resolve credit rationing and, in some cases, yields a first-best outcome. If a carbon price is (politically) not feasible, intervention on the credit market alone can promote low-carbon development. However, such a policy yields a second-best outcome. The issue of credit rationing is temporary if the risks of low-carbon technologies decline. However, there are social costs of delay if credit rationing is not addressed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haas et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: