Explaining differences in sub-national patterns of clean technology transfer to China and India

被引:6
作者
Bayer, Patrick [1 ]
Urpelainen, Johannes [2 ]
Xu, Alice [3 ]
机构
[1] Washington Univ, Dept Polit Sci, Program Int & Area Studies, One Brookings Dr, St Louis, MO 63130 USA
[2] Columbia Univ, Dept Polit Sci, 420 W 118th St,712 IAB, New York, NY 10027 USA
[3] Harvard Univ, Dept Govt, 1737 Cambridge St, Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
关键词
Technology transfer; CDM; China; India; Sustainable development; Subnational variation; DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM; CLIMATE-CHANGE; CDM; ENERGY;
D O I
10.1007/s10784-014-9257-2
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
020101 [政治经济学];
摘要
The Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has the capacity to incentivize the international transfer of environmentally sound technologies. Given that both countries are expected to have similar incentives when managing the distribution of technology transfer within the country, why do sub-national patterns in the allocation of projects with technology transfer differ? Using comparable political-economic data compiled for China and India, we offer an explanation for these differences. In China, where the government regards the CDM as a tool for achieving sustainable development, technology transfer is concentrated in provinces that need it the most and that are most conducive to receiving transfers (i.e., economically less developed, yet heavily industrialized provinces). In India, where the government takes on a "laissez-faire" approach to the CDM, neither level of economic development nor that of industrialization affects clean technology transfer. In this regard, although the incentives are similar, the capacity to pursue them is not comparable. We test these hypotheses using data on CDM technology transfer across Chinese provinces and Indian states during the 6-year period from 2004 to 2010.
引用
收藏
页码:261 / 283
页数:23
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]
Interaction terms in logit and probit models [J].
Ai, CR ;
Norton, EC .
ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2003, 80 (01) :123-129
[2]
[Anonymous], 2008, POLICY RES WORKING P
[3]
[Anonymous], 2008, CDM4412
[4]
[Anonymous], 2006, CDM0472
[5]
Babu N., 2003, 237 HWWA HAMB I INT
[6]
Laissez faire and the Clean Development Mechanism: determinants of project implementation in Indian states, 2003-2011 [J].
Bayer, Patrick ;
Urpelainen, Johannes ;
Xu, Alice .
CLEAN TECHNOLOGIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY, 2014, 16 (08) :1687-1701
[7]
Who uses the Clean Development Mechanism? An empirical analysis of projects in Chinese provinces [J].
Bayer, Patrick ;
Urpelainen, Johannes ;
Wallace, Jeremy .
GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE-HUMAN AND POLICY DIMENSIONS, 2013, 23 (02) :512-521
[8]
External sources of clean technology: Evidence from the Clean Development Mechanism [J].
Bayer, Patrick ;
Urpelainen, Johannes .
REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS, 2013, 8 (01) :81-109
[9]
Benecke G., 2009, Journal of Environment & Development, V18, P346, DOI 10.1177/1070496509347085
[10]
Understanding interaction models: Improving empirical analyses [J].
Brambor, T ;
Clark, WR ;
Golder, M .
POLITICAL ANALYSIS, 2006, 14 (01) :63-82