Publications

Filter by Program:

Filter by Author:

Filter by Publication Type:

Bridge Collaborative Practitioner’s Guide: Principles and Guidance for Cross-sector Action Planning and Evidence Evaluation

The health, development and environment sectors increasingly realize that they cannot achieve their respective goals by acting in isolation. Yet, as they pivot to act collectively, they face challenges in finding and interpreting evidence on sectoral interrelationships, and thus in developing effective evidence-based responses. Each sector already uses some form of evidence-based research, design and action planning, but methods vary and ideas about the strength of evidence differ, creating stumbling blocks in the way of cross-sector impact. A new initiative, called the Bridge Collaborative, sets out to spark cross-sector problem solving by developing common approaches that the three sectors could agree to and use. Specifically, the collaborative has focused on two linked areas of practice that could unlock cross sector collaboration – results chains and the evaluation of supporting evidence. Through this process, the collaborative has provided a platform for dialogue and collaboration among professionals from across these sectors, allowing for face-to-face interaction and discussion to build professional networks. This document captures a set of principles identified and used by the Collaborative, along with a detailed set of guidance for creating comparable results chains across sectors and evaluating evidence from multiple disciplines in common terms. These principles and guidance reflect novel contributions from the Bridge Collaborative as well as restatements of existing recommendations that resonated among health, development and environment researchers and practitioners.  

Lead Authors: Heather Tallis, Katharine Kreis, Lydia Olander, Claudia Ringler

Filters

Climate and Energy

Ecosystem Services

Environmental Economics

Ocean and Coastal Policy

Water Policy

Reports

A Call to Action for Health, Environment, and Development Leaders

Our world is changing. Ongoing economic, technological, and demographic shifts are altering the nature of today’s major, global issues and challenging us to rethink our past and current approaches to solving them. The world’s population is increasing rapidly, and individuals are living longer than ever before. As our planet becomes more populated and prosperous, the demand for finite resources—such as water, energy, and food—are increasing rapidly. These trends escalate the urgency to find new ways of addressing persistent and growing challenges. Despite decades of evidence generation and progress on global challenges such as poverty, malnutrition, pollution, climate change, and humanitarian crises, these issues persist—and are intensifying in many cases. The current research and policy systems inhibit integrated approaches to problem solving. Too often, the health, environment, and development sectors work independently setting narrowly defined objectives and failing to consider consequences outside of their own sector. A Call to Action for Health, Environment, and Development Leaders and a companion paper Bridge Collaborative Practitioner’s Guide: Principles and Guidance for Cross-sector Action Planning and Evidence Evaluation contribute to a growing movement aimed at increasing cross-sectoral focused on shared evidence. 

Lead Authors: Heather Tallis, Barbara J. Merz, Cindy Huang, Katharine Kreis, Lydia Olander, Claudia Ringler

Filters

Climate and Energy

Ecosystem Services

Environmental Economics

Ocean and Coastal Policy

Water Policy

Reports

Modeling Energy Efficiency as a Supply Resource

Energy efficiency may be an inexpensive way to meet future demand and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, yet little work has been attempted to estimate annual energy efficiency supply functions for electricity planning. The main advantage of using a supply function is that energy efficiency adoption can change as demand changes. Models such as Duke University’s Dynamic Integrated Economy/Energy/Emissions Model (DIEM) have had to rely on simplistic or fixed estimates of future energy efficiency from the literature rather than on estimates from energy efficiency supply curves. This paper attempts to develop a realistic energy efficiency supply curve and to improve on the current energy efficiency modeling. It suggests an alternative approach based on saved-energy cost data from program administrators and explains the methodologies employed to create the supply curve. It illustrates this approach with results from DIEM for various electricity demand scenarios. The analysis suggests that an additional 5%–9% of energy efficiency is deployed for every 10% increase in the cost of electricity. Therefore, DIEM “invested” in energy efficiency up to an inelastic point on the energy efficiency supply curve. By contrast, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s energy efficiency approach assumes that realized energy efficiency is fixed, and has no elasticity, regardless of changes to marginal costs or constraints that affect emissions or economics. 

Authors: Etan Gumerman abd Tibor Vegh

Filters

Climate and Energy

Environmental Economics

Modeling

Working Papers

Resolving the Inherent Uncertainty of Carbon Taxes

This introduction to symposium essays in the Harvard Environmental Law Review describes the role of pricing carbon in contemporary climate change policy (with a summary of experience with carbon tax and cap-and-trade policies around the world) and points out similarities of carbon tax policies and cap-and-trade policies based on the academic literature. But it focuses on how a tax and cap-and-trade schemes differ in terms of their economic and emission outcomes in light of the uncertainty characterizing the markets and economies in which these instruments are used. These differences have potentially important economic, environmental, and political economy implications for U.S. climate change policy. Finally, the article highlights the proposals and key findings of each of the symposium essays, including Increasing Emissions Certainty under a Carbon Tax.

Authors: Joseph E. Aldy, Marc Hafstead, Gilbert E. Metcalf, Brian C. Murray, William A. Pizer, Christina Reichert, and Roberton C. Williams III

Filters

Carbon Tax

Climate and Energy

Environmental Economics

Journal Articles

On Morals, Markets, and Climate Change: Exploring Pope Francis’ Challenge

This article in Law and Contemporary Problems explores the contrast between the movement toward environmental markets, characterized by the emergence of new carbon markets across the globe, and the renewed opposition to markets manifested in the pope’s encyclical and the views of some environmental advocates. It considers the arguments raised by these latter critics, explores alternative views of their concerns, and examines how market-based climate policies could be designed to alleviate these concerns. Others have examined the moral and ethical dimensions of market-based climate policies, but this article contributes to the literature by providing a contemporary examination of the papal encyclical’s prominent questioning of the use of markets to address climate change. It also speaks to issues that more than 190 countries now face under the Paris Agreement and that forty-eight U.S. states face under the Clean Power Plan as they decide what role, if any, market-based instruments will play in their pursuit of the greenhouse gas reductions. And it explores options for designing a market-based instrument to address climate change in ways that could ease some of the moral criticisms, and discusses some of the tradeoffs involved in those design choices. Part 2 reviews how market-based mechanisms are being designed for climate change policy. Part 3 examines the pope’s encyclical and the moral issues it raises regarding carbon markets. Part 4 assesses in more detail the moral objections to using market-based mechanisms for climate change policy and offers counterpoints to these arguments. Part 5 discusses possible ways to reconcile these viewpoints by designing market-based climate policies in ways that resolve or reduce the critics’ concerns and discusses the tradeoffs associated with each approach. Part 6 offers specific insights into the decisions faced and tradeoffs presented by market-based climate policies.

Authors: Jonas J. Monast, Brian C. Murray, and Jonathan B. Wiener

Filters

Climate and Energy

Clean Air Act

Environmental Economics

Journal Articles

A State Policymaker’s Guide to Power Sector Modeling

In a new report, the Bipartisan Policy Center and Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions explore the value, use, and limitations of economic modeling of the electricity sector. The report presents a suite of recent analyses by different organizations, showing how economic modeling can be used to simulate possible policy, market, and technology changes as the electricity sector transforms due to growth of domestic natural gas, increased use for electric generation, the rapid progress of renewable technologies, and environmental regulations.

It is meant to be a guide for state policymakers who have both the benefit and challenge of unpacking modeling results and figuring out how best to learn from diverse findings. It provides them with both an understanding of how to best utilize economic models and interpret their results as well as explores key modeling structures often being deployed to model carbon regulations such as the Clean Power Plan and input assumptions that impact power sector modeling results.

Authors: Blair Beasley, David Hoppock, Jennifer Macedonia, Martin Ross, and Tracy Terry

Filters

Climate and Energy

Clean Air Act

Environmental Economics

State Policy

Reports

Blue Carbon Financing of Mangrove Conservation in the Abidijan Convention Region: A Feasibility Study

Coastal vegetated ecosystems such as mangrove forests, seagrass meadows, and salt marshes have long benefited coastal communities and fisheries, and in recent years have been recognized internationally for their significant capacity to sequester and store carbon (“blue carbon”)—at rates that surpass those of tropical forests. Yet these ecosystems are being converted rapidly. Current annual mangrove deforestation has been estimated to emit 240 million tons of carbon dioxide. For this reason, financing mechanisms to pay those tropical countries that have significant blue carbon resources to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from deforestation have been explored as a means to fund mangrove conservation. This report by the United Nations Environment Programme, the Abidjan Convention Secretariat, and GRID-Arendal explores the potential of international carbon finance mechanisms to help fund mangrove conservation along the coast of West, Central, and Southern Africa that is covered by the Abidjan Convention—from the southern border of Mauritania to the northern border of Angola—and the scale of economic benefits that this conservation might provide for communities and countries in the region, including benefits not always recognized in traditional assessments or valuations. This report aims to increase knowledge about blue carbon stocks in West, Central, and Southern Africa and the steps that interested communities and countries in the region could take to secure international payments for their conservation and avoided GHG emissions.

Authors: John Virdin, Tibor Vegh, Connie Y. Kot, Jesse Cleary, Patrick N. Halpin, Christopher Gordon, Marie-Christine Cormier-Salem, and Adelina Mensah

Filters

Blue Carbon

Blue Economy

Climate and Energy

Ocean and Coastal Policy

Environmental Economics

Reports

Unconventional Oil and Gas Spills: Risks, Mitigation Priorities and States Reporting Requirements

An analysis led by the Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, which appears in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, concludes that making state spill data more uniform and accessible could provide stakeholders with important information on where to target efforts for locating and preventing future spills. However, reporting requirements differ across states, requiring considerable effort to make the data usable for analysis. 
 
By examining state-level spill data, it finds that 2 to 16 percent of hydraulically fractured oil and gas wells across Colorado, New Mexico, North Dakota and Pennsylvania spill hydrocarbons, chemical-laden water, hydraulic fracturing fluids and other substances each year. The study characterizes spills associated with unconventional oil and gas development at 31,481 wells hydraulically fractured or "fracked" in the four states between 2005 and 2014, identifying 6,648 spills in the 10-year period. Across all states, the first three years of a well's life, when drilling and hydraulic fracturing occurred and production volumes were highest, had the greatest risk of a spill. It found a significant portion of spills (from 26 percent in Colorado to 53 percent in North Dakota) occur at wells that experienced more than one spill, which suggests that wells where spills have already occurred merit closer attention.
 
Authors: Lauren A. Patterson, Katherine E. Konschnik, Hannah Wiseman, Joseph Fargione, Kelly O. Maloney, Joseph Kiesecker, Jean-Philippe Nicot, Sharon Baruch-Mordo, Sally Entrekin, Anne Trainor, and James E. Saiers

Filters

Hydraulic Fracturing and Water Use

Climate and Energy

Water Policy

State Policy

Journal Articles

Potential Pathways: Future of the Electricity Sector in the Southeast—Workshop Summary, October 5, 2016, Durham, North Carolina

The electricity sector is rapidly changing due to the shale gas revolution, a precipitous decline in coal generation, steep declines in the cost of solar generation, the proliferation of smart grid technologies, and a suite of new environmental regulations. On October 5, 2016, Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions and the Duke University Energy Initiative co-hosted a one-day workshop that brought together experts on the electricity sector in the Southeast—including representatives of electric utilities, other market participants, nonprofit organizations, and energy and environmental agencies—to discuss factors affecting the region’s electricity sector. The main topics were future demand uncertainty, the ways that technology innovation could affect business models and regulatory structures, and the role of nuclear energy in the Southeast’s electricity future. This proceedings describes the main ideas that emerged from the workshop. It concludes with issues ripe for future research.

Author: Danielle A. Arostegui

Filters

Climate and Energy

Environmental Economics

Energy Sector

Proceedings

The Uncertain Future of Nuclear Power in the Southeast: Implications of an Aging Fleet for Electricity Sector Planning and Emissions

Nuclear power provides about one-quarter of the electricity in the Southeast and the majority of the region’s non-fossil generation. Beginning around 2030, nuclear plants in the Southeast, as in the rest of the country, will start to reach the end of their initial operating license extensions to 60 years, at which point they must receive an additional license extension or retire. How many nuclear units will seek and receive a second license extension is unknown. Replacing existing nuclear capacity with new nuclear capacity requires approximately 10 to 15 years. If a high percentage of nuclear units in the Southeast do retire at 60 years, it is unlikely that the units can simultaneously be replaced with new units given the long lead times and limited applications for new nuclear plants at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Given these circumstances, southeastern states may want to start planning for the potential loss of their largest carbon-free generation source now. This policy brief explores how the potential loss of existing nuclear power plants in the Southeast interacts with region’s other electricity sector challenges—among them, increasing natural gas dependence, demand uncertainty, and emerging technology—and it proposes steps states can take to address these challenges.

Authors: David Hoppock and Sarah Adair

Filters

Climate and Energy

Environmental Economics

Energy Sector

Policy Briefs

Pages