Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Emissions Targets and the Real Business Cycle: Intensity Targets versus Caps or Taxes

By Carolyn Fischer and Michael R. Springborn


For reducing greenhouse gas emissions, intensity targets are attracting interest as a flexible mechanism that would better allow for economic growth than emissions caps. For the same expected emissions, however, the economic responses to unexpected productivity shocks differ. Using a real business cycle model, we find that a cap dampens the effects of productivity shocks in the economy. An emissions tax leads to the same expected outcomes as a cap but with greater volatility. Certainty-equivalent intensity targets maintain higher levels of labor, capital, and output than other policies, with lower expected costs and no more volatility than with no policy.emissions tax, cap-and-trade, intensity target, business cycle

OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2008). A Tax-Based Approach to Slowing Global Climate Change.
  2. (2000). Allocation of CO2 Emission Permits: A General Equilibrium Analysis of Policy Instruments.
  3. (2005). Business Cycles in Emerging Economies: The Role of Interest Rates.
  4. (2003). Combining Rate-Based and Cap-and-Trade Emissions Policies. Climate Policy (3S2): S89–S109.
  5. (2005). Cost-effectiveness of the Performance Standard System to Reduce CO2 Emissions in Canada: A General Equilibrium Analysis.
  6. (2005). Does Uncertainty Justify Intensity Emission Caps.
  7. (2008). Economic Growth and the Environment: A Review of Theory and Empirics.
  8. (2004). Energy Information Administration (EIA).
  9. (2008). How Should Environmental Policy Respond to Business Cycles? Optimal Policy under Persistent Productivity Shocks.
  10. (2008). Indexed Regulation. NBER Working Paper 13991.
  11. (2008). Intensity targets: implications for the economic uncertainties of emissions trading.
  12. (1987). Models of Business Cycles.
  13. (2003). On the Welfare Cost of Economic Fluctuations in Developing Countries.
  14. (2007). Output-Based Allocation of Emissions Permits for Mitigating Tax and Trade Interactions.
  15. (1974). Prices vs.
  16. (1988). Production, Growth and Business Cycles: I. The Basic Neoclassical Model.
  17. (1999). Second-Best Evaluation of Eight Policy Instruments to Reduce Carbon Emissions.
  18. (2006). Target: Intensity – an Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Intensity Targets. WRI Report.
  19. (2005). The Case for Intensity Targets.
  20. (2004). The Cost of Business Cycles and the Benefits of Stabilization: A Survey. NBER Working Paper W10926.
  21. (1999). The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting.
  22. (2001). The Welfare Cost of Business Cycles Revisited: Finite Lives and Cyclical Variation in Idiosyncratic Risk. European Economic Review 45(7): 1311–39. Resources for the Future Fischer and Springborn Sue Wing,
  23. (1986). Theory Ahead of Business Cycle Measurement. Federal Reserve Bank of

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.