Latest News

Bill Hogan

Harvard Kennedy School Professor William Hogan Outlines Causes and Consequences of the 'Texas Energy Crisis' in Latest Episode of "Environmental Insights"

March 5, 2021

Author: Doug Gavel

CAMBRIDGE MA. – William Hogan, the Raymond Plank Research Professor of Global Energy Policy at Harvard Kennedy School and director of the Harvard Electricity Policy Group, outlined the causes and consequences of the recent Texas energy crisis in the latest episode of “...

Read more about Harvard Kennedy School Professor William Hogan Outlines Causes and Consequences of the 'Texas Energy Crisis' in Latest Episode of "Environmental Insights"
Dan Esty

Yale University Professor Daniel Esty Expresses Optimism for Climate Change Policy in the Biden Administration in Latest Episode of "Environmental Insights"

February 8, 2021

Author: Doug Gavel

CAMBRIDGE MA. – Daniel Esty, the Hillhouse Professor of Environmental Law and Policy at Yale University and author of the new book, “Values at Work: Sustainable Investing and ESG Reporting,” expressed his optimism for the prospects for climate policy in the Biden Administration in...

Read more about Yale University Professor Daniel Esty Expresses Optimism for Climate Change Policy in the Biden Administration in Latest Episode of "Environmental Insights"
More

Learn about HEEP

HEEP is a university-wide initiative addressing today's complex environmental challenges and is based in the Harvard Kennedy School’s Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government. Learn more by reading director Robert Stavins' welcome message.

Environmental Insights Podcast

Environmental Insights Podcast on Soundcloud

Recent Publications

Aldy, Joseph E., Giles Atkinson, and Matthew Kotchen. “Environmental Benefit-Cost Analysis: A Comparative Analysis Between the United States and the United Kingdom.” Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: Harvard Environmental Economics Program, 2021.Abstract
The United States and United Kingdom have longstanding traditions in use of environmental benefit-cost analysis (E-BCA). While there are similarities between how E-BCA is utilized, there are significant differences too, many of which mirror ongoing debates and recent developments in the literature on environmental and natural resource economics. We review the use of E-BCA in both countries across three themes: (a) the role of long-term discounting; (b) the estimation and use of carbon valuation; and, (c) the estimation and use of the value of a statistical life. In each case, we discuss how academic developments are (and are not) translated into use and draw comparative lessons. We find that, in some cases, practical differences in E-BCA can be overstated, although in others these seem more substantive. Advances in the academic frontier also raise the question of when and how to update practical E-BCA, with very different answers across our themes.
Aldy, Joseph, Matthew Kotchen, Mary Evans, Meredith Fowlie, Arik Levinson, and Karen Palmer. “Co-Benefits and Regulatory Impact Analysis: Theory and Evidence from Federal Air Quality Regulations.” Discussion Paper (2021): 45.Abstract
This paper considers the treatment of co-benefits in benefit-cost analysis of federal air quality regulations. Using a comprehensive data set on all major Clean Air Act rules issued by the Environmental Protection Agency over the period 1997-2019, we show that (1) co-benefits make up a significant share of the monetized benefits; (2) among the categories of co-benefits, those associated with reductions in fine particulate matter are the most significant; and (3) co-benefits have been pivotal to the quantified net benefit calculation in nearly half of cases. Motivated by these trends, we develop a simple conceptual framework that illustrates a critical point: co-benefits are simply a semantic category of benefits that should be included in benefit-cost analyses. We also address common concerns about whether the inclusion of co-benefits is problematic because of alternative regulatory approaches that may be more cost-effective and the possibility for double counting.
Evans, Mary, Karen Palmer, Joseph Aldy, Meredith Fowlie, Matthew Kotchen, and Arik Levinson. “The Role of Retrospective Analysis in an Era of Deregulation: Lessons from the U.S. Mercury Air Toxic Standards.” Harvard Environmental Economics Program, 2021.Abstract
As of late 2020, the Trump administration had initiated almost one hundred rollbacks of U.S. environmental regulations. A careful assessment of the benefits and costs of rolling back an existing regulation can and should inform such decisions. When assessing the potential rollback of an existing regulation, analysts can often learn from the regulation’s implementation through retrospective analysis as well as from advances in scientific knowledge. We discuss recent actions concerning the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) to illustrate the potential lessons from doing so. In the case of MATS, advances in science have shed light on broader exposure pathways and previously unquantified health effects, suggesting that the benefits of reducing mercury emissions may exceed previous estimates. At the same time, changes in the energy sector have altered the mix of fuels used to produce electricity, which impacts both the benefits and costs of the regulation.
More

News from the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements

Upcoming Events

More

HPCA Conversations on Climate Change and Energy Policy

The Harvard Project on Climate Agreements is conducting a series of virtual forums addressing key issues in climate-change and related energy policy. Each forum will feature an expert guest and will be moderated by Robert Stavins, Director of the Harvard Project. 

We hope you can join us!

Next Scheduled Event: 

To be determined. 

To access recordings and transcripts of past events, please go to the HPCA Conversations Series webpage.

 

<embed>
Copy and paste this code to your website.
Copy and paste this code to your website.