Energy research and R&D indicators: An LMDI decomposition analysis for the IEA Big 5 in energy research Roula Inglesi-Lotz.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Part 1: Resources and Sustainability Chapter 2: Governments, Markets and Economic Performance.
Advertisements

Neoclassical Growth Theory
MINISTRY OF ENERGY RUSSIAN FEDERATION Combined Heat and Power Technologies for Distributed Energy Systems.
1 Economic Growth and Rising Living Standards. Real GDP per Person, (in 2000 US $) 2.
Micro and Macro- the difference?
MACROECONOMICS AND THE GLOBAL BUSINESS ENVIRONMENT The Wealth of Nations The Supply Side.
Thursday, 16 July 2015 Macroeconomic Rebound Effect from the implementation of Energy Efficiency Policies at global level with E3MG Dr Athanasios Dagoumas.
Measuring Productivity in the Australian Mining Sector
Innovation Economics Class 3.
Green Economy Initiative Derek Eaton UNEP UNCEEA, June 2010.
Energy Efficiency: What the IEA calls “the first fuel” Workshop Session: Knowledge Mobilization Thursday May 14, 11: :30 am Four Seasons Hotel, Vancouver,
Trends of Science & Techn ology Potential and R esource in Japan Yuko NAGANO National Institute of Science and Technology Policy JAPAN Feb. 21 th 2010.
Environmental Data in the Developing World: differing expectations from the west Dr. Joy E. Hecht Consultant on Environmental Economics and Policy.
© OECD/IEA NATURAL GAS MARKEREVIEW 2008 Gas and the Sustainability Drive: what will it do the fuel mix? Ian Cronshaw, Head of Energy Diversification.
The UNECE Task Force : the approach towards the set of indicators Dr. Olivier Thunus UNECE Task Force Vice-Chair.
ICEG E uropean Center Factors and Impacts in the Information Society: Analysis of the New Member States and Associated Candidate Countries Pál Gáspár.
NS4053 Winter Term 2014 Latin American Growth Momentum.
A new start for the Lisbon Strategy Knowledge and innovation for growth.
Of 261 Chapter 26 Long-Run Economic Growth. of 262 Copyright © 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc. Learning Objectives 3. List the main elements of Neoclassical.
Interpretation of macro indicators of energy intensities Bruno Lapillonne, Vice President, Enerdata Reunión Técnica de Trabajo del Proyecto BIEE 24 – 26.
Economic growth Chapter 8 4/23/2017 4/23/
Chapter 3 Growth and Accumulation Item Etc. McGraw-Hill/Irwin Macroeconomics, 10e © 2008 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved.
Tenth Meeting of Working Groups on Macroeconomic Aspects of Intergenerational Transfer: International Symposium on Demographic Change and Policy Response.
Mikuláš Luptáčik Martin Lábaj Department of Economic Policy University of Economics in Bratislava June 8, 2012 Bratislava Economic Meeting 2012.
© OECD/IEA INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY Worldwide Trends in Energy Use and Efficiency Key Insights from IEA Indicator Analysis ENERGY INDICATORS.
HIGHER EDUCATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INDIA, CHINA, AND THE 21 ST CENTURY Martin Carnoy, Stanford University INDIA, CHINA, AND THE 21 ST CENTURY Martin.
Climate Action Meeting the EU’s Kyoto commitments & Avoiding a gap after 2012 Doha, 27 November 2012 Paolo CARIDI Policy Coordinator DG Climate Action.
Szilárd Árvay Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Hungary.
The Uptake of Management Accounting Practices Among Malaysian Firms in SMEs Sector HAU YIN TING A EPPA 2033 PERAKAUNAN KOS SEMESTER 1 SESI 2014/2015.
1 The role of innovation in climate change mitigation: new perspectives using the WITCH model V.Bosetti*, C.Carraro*, R.Duval**, M.Tavoni* * FEEM, ** OECD.
Pantelis Pantelidis, University of Piraeus Dimitrios Kyrkilis, University of Macedonia Efthymios Nikolopoulos, University of Macedonia February 2011 The.
1 Chapter 22 The Short – Run Macro Model. 2 The Short-Run Macro Model In short-run, spending depends on income, and income depends on spending –The more.
World Energy and Environmental Outlook to 2030
The economic implications of Brexit for Scotland
Energy Union: an integrated approach to R&I
Rising Living Standards
International Renewable Energy Agency
Population and Wellbeing
EU-KLEMS project: Progress in Economic Underpinnings and Measurement
NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY OF THE REPUBLIC OF TAJIKISTAN UNTIL 2030
Steve Sorrell SPRU, University of Sussex
The Short – Run Macro Model
Saving, Investment and the Financial System (Chapter 26 in the book)
Cost of Production: Uses and Users
19-21 June th IAEE Conference Singapore
Mr JH Malan, Dr EA Steenkamp, Prof R Rossouw and Prof W Viviers
1. Introduction Over the past decade, the tertiary industry (Service sector) has been the largest and the fastest growing sector in China The tertiary.
MBF 2263 Portfolio Management & Security Analysis
A joint survey effort between Duke University and CFO Magazine
Public Finance and Economic Development
The top 10 most competitive economies in Europe
Chairman OECD Working Party on SME and Entrepreneurship
Business Cycles STANDARD OA3
EU-RUSSIA Cooperation in Energy Efficiency
Capital structure, executive compensation, and investment efficiency
Energy research and R&D indicators: An LMDI decomposition analysis for the IEA Big 5 in energy research Roula Inglesi-Lotz.
“Post-crisis productivity: Lessons from the UK”
The long view: scenarios for the world economy to 2060
The Determinants of FDI Inflows to Greece
Tegemeo Institute of Agricultural Policy and Development,
Satellites and beyond GDP
NS4540 Winter Term 2019 Latin American Growth Momentum
SUSTAINABLE TOURISM HANDBOOK FOR EASTERN AFRICA: Aims and objectives
South Asia Challenges and benefits of research collaboration in a diverse region March 2019 Maria de Kleijn-Lloyd.
7th Environment Action Programme to 2020 Living well, within the limits of our planet Evaluation - COM (2019) May 2019.
Presented at the 5th World KLEMS Conference June 4, 2018
In the Eastern Partnership Index
South Asia Challenges and benefits of research collaboration in a diverse region March 2019 Maria de Kleijn-Lloyd.
Discussant Suresh Chand Aggarwal University of Delhi, India
Presentation transcript:

Energy research and R&D indicators: An LMDI decomposition analysis for the IEA Big 5 in energy research Roula Inglesi-Lotz

In a few words…. Energy sector: technology and link to R&D R&D indicators capturing productivity, priority, and intensity of the expenditure Measuring the research output Selection of countries to examine

Purpose and motivation The energy sector is in need of investment in R&D, taking into consideration the much-desired benefits from new ideas and technologies to future sustainability, security, efficiency and supply of energy (Inglesi-Lotz, 2017). Declining energy research budgets and the possible devastating effects on the sustainable, accessible and affordable global energy system (Bennet and Gigoux, 2017) Declining energy research budgets and the possible devastating effects on the sustainable, accessible and affordable global energy system (Bennet and Gigoux, 2017) de Corninck et al. (2008) discuss that long-term technology R&D is not panacea into tackling climate change and its environmental consequences through energy usage for example. Appropriate allocation of R&D and return on investment are as crucial as the implementation of the suggested solutions (invention to innovation). Wang et al. (2013), however, explain that increases in energy R&D will not necessarily have positive contributions to the economic growth of a country: increases in energy R&D result in improved production processes and hence higher productivity. On the other side, however, dedicating more financial resources on energy R&D might mean substitution from other production factors with negative results to economic growth.

Purpose and motivation Wang et al. (2013) and De Coninck et al. (2008) explain that R&D is not panacea to economic growth and climate change. Dedicating more financial resources on energy R&D might mean substitution from other production factors with negative results to economic growth (crowding-out effect). Appropriate allocation of R&D and return on investment are as crucial as the implementation of the suggested solutions (invention to innovation). Declining energy research budgets and the possible devastating effects on the sustainable, accessible and affordable global energy system (Bennet and Gigoux, 2017) de Corninck et al. (2008) discuss that long-term technology R&D is not panacea into tackling climate change and its environmental consequences through energy usage for example. Appropriate allocation of R&D and return on investment are as crucial as the implementation of the suggested solutions (invention to innovation). Wang et al. (2013), however, explain that increases in energy R&D will not necessarily have positive contributions to the economic growth of a country: increases in energy R&D result in improved production processes and hence higher productivity. On the other side, however, dedicating more financial resources on energy R&D might mean substitution from other production factors with negative results to economic growth.

Purpose and motivation To decouple the topic of R&D, studies have used more complex R&D indicators to take into account other factors (Grilliches, 1994; Jones and Williams, 1998; Corderi and Lin, 2011; and Inglesi-Lotz, 2017) such as R&D intensity as a percentage to GDP. Inglesi-Lotz (2017) looked further in disaggregating the energy R&D into different technologies and not dealing of it as a single expenditure item. Her results showed investing in R&D to promote energy efficiency and nuclear technologies yield positive return for the society.

Purpose and motivation Combining the number of papers in energy – related fields (Ecology, Energy & Fuels, Environmental Studies, Water resources) as measured in the Web of Science database for the period 1981-2018, the five most research producing countries that are members of the International Energy Agency (IEA) are: US (28.52%), UK (7.27%), Canada (5.95%), Germany (5.28%), and Australia (5.26%).   . It can be observed in Figure 1, that the energy R&D expenditures have increased in the period 1990 to 2017, with US having the highest increase (72%) while Australia the lowest (10%); while at the same time, Australia showed the highest increase in energy-related papers in the period (908%). Also, although energy R&D increased by 38% the energy-related research showed a decrease by 78% in this period.

Overall purpose This paper aims at decomposing the changes in energy-related research for the top 5 IEA countries in energy-related research for the period 1981 to 2017 into four factors: energy R&D productivity, energy R&D priority, R&D intensity, and GDP. Big 5: most prolific countries in energy-related issues (Ecology, Energy & Fuels, Environmental Studies, Water resources) as classified in Thomson Reuters: Australia, Canada, Germany, UK and US. The data are derived from the IEA RDD Budgets database (IEA, 2018), and the Thomson Reuters databases (Thomson Reuters, 2017) for the period 1981- 2017.

Decomposition technique: LMDI  

Decomposition technique: LMDI  

Empirical results: Total decomposition 1981-2017 Looking at the results for the countries group in its entirety for the full period from 1981 to 2017, Figure 2 suggests that the only negative contributor in the changes of energy research was the R&D intensity of the countries, while all the other factors pushed upwards the number of energy-related papers. Energy R&D productivity was the dominant positive contributor.

Empirical results: Top 5 energy-related research IEA countries Figure 3 illustrates the decomposition results for the period 1981 to 2017 for each of the countries individually. The signs of the determinants follow the overall pattern with the total decomposition exercise, even though the magnitudes differ. The only exception is UK where the R&D intensity was the dominant positive contributor for the period with GDP playing a negative role.

Empirical results: Decomposition per decade 1981-2017 Drastic changes in economic growth Interest in energy and environmental research Margolis and Kammen (1999), energy technology R&D expenditures showed decreases from the early 1980s until the beginning of 2000s in US Costa-Campi et al. (2014) and GEA (2012) also confirm that R&D expenditure in the energy field is relatively low, compared to other fields. The period from 1981 to 2017 was characterized by drastic changes in economic growth and in the interest of the literature in energy-related fields. Especially after the 2000s, the consequences of climate change as well as issues in energy security have attracted attention by researchers. As per Margolis and Kammen (1999), energy technology R&D expenditures showed decreases from the early 1980s until the beginning of 2000s in US, but Costa-Campi et al. (2014) and GEA (2012) also confirm that R&D expenditure in the energy field is relatively low, compared to other fields. Based on this, the study proceeds with a separate decomposition exercise for four periods/decades: 1981-1990, 1991-2000, 2001-2010 and 2011-2017 (Figure 4). The first two periods follow the same signs in factors as the overall decomposition results. However, for 2001-2010 and 2011-2017, the direction and magnitude of the effects change: the dominant positive factor during 2001-2010 is the R&D intensity with energy R&D productivity becoming a negative contributor. When the countries start recovering from the global financial crisis of 2008/09, what boosts again the increase of energy-related papers is the energy R&D productivity while the GDP and R&D intensity are a marginal positive and negative contributors respectively.

Empirical results: Decomposition per decade 1981-1990 & 1991-2000 Patterns remain the same 2001-2010 Rapidly decreasing GDP from 2008 R&D stickier to shocks as it is a policy decision (especially in the government sector) 2011-2017 Slowly countries start recovering albeit GDP is not a contributor to research The period from 1981 to 2017 was characterized by drastic changes in economic growth and in the interest of the literature in energy-related fields. Especially after the 2000s, the consequences of climate change as well as issues in energy security have attracted attention by researchers. As per Margolis and Kammen (1999), energy technology R&D expenditures showed decreases from the early 1980s until the beginning of 2000s in US, but Costa-Campi et al. (2014) and GEA (2012) also confirm that R&D expenditure in the energy field is relatively low, compared to other fields. Based on this, the study proceeds with a separate decomposition exercise for four periods/decades: 1981-1990, 1991-2000, 2001-2010 and 2011-2017 (Figure 4). The first two periods follow the same signs in factors as the overall decomposition results. However, for 2001-2010 and 2011-2017, the direction and magnitude of the effects change: the dominant positive factor during 2001-2010 is the R&D intensity with energy R&D productivity becoming a negative contributor. When the countries start recovering from the global financial crisis of 2008/09, what boosts again the increase of energy-related papers is the energy R&D productivity while the GDP and R&D intensity are a marginal positive and negative contributors respectively.

Conclusion Energy R&D productivity the dominant positive; it can be improved from a policy point of view with better monitoring and reporting, as well as managing expectations when R&D expenditures are made. By including more researchers in energy-related fields, economies of scale from collaboration and research production from the same “unit” of R&D will increase energy R&D productivity further. Creating the right conditions and environment for researchers to produce research is a target for policy makers that do appreciate the value of energy-related research and its importance for the energy sector and the economy, as a whole. When looking at the results by country, the pattern remains the same with R&D intensity being mostly a negative contributor, while energy R&D productivity the dominant positive. That means that the rate of return of every unit invested in energy R&D affects positively the energy-related research. The energy R&D productivity can be improved from a policy point of view with better monitoring and reporting, as well as managing expectations when R&D expenditures are made. Also, by including more researchers in energy-related fields, economies of scale from collaboration and research production from the same “unit” of R&D will increase energy R&D productivity more. Finally, creating the right conditions and environment for researchers to produce research is a target for policy makers that do appreciate the value of energy-related research and its importance for the energy sector and the economy, as a whole.

Conclusion The periods 2001-2010 and 2011-2017 have exhibited a slightly different trend: the dominant positive factor during 2001-2010 is the R&D intensity with energy R&D productivity becoming a negative contributor. In periods of low GDP such as 2008-2009, the positive factor that kept research publications increasing was the R&D intensity: GDP decreased rapidly, while the R&D investment is stickier to shocks as it is a policy decision. When the countries start recovering from the global financial crisis of 2008/09, what boosts again the increase of energy-related papers is the energy R&D productivity while the GDP and R&D intensity are marginal positive and negative contributors respectively.

Future research ideas In past literature, models such as Nordhaus (2002) made strong assumptions such a fixed R&D labour, and hence, energy R&D crowds out either types of R&D. On the other side, studies such as Buaonanno et al. (2003) deal with R&D expenditures in various fields as complementary – in that way, crowding out does not exist. It would be interesting in examining further the within-energy field distribution of research into various applications and their relationship with the supply mix chosen in various countries – does it lead the decision on supply mix or does it depend on it? Different measurements of research output will produce different results? Patents? Innovation? Human capital?

Roula Inglesi-Lotz Personal website: https://sites.google.com/view/roulainglesi-lotz/Home Email: roula.inglesi-lotz@up.ac.za