Green bans: theory and empirical evidence

With growing knowledge about the climate system, the long-term climate target has shifted from one of reducing emissions, as embedded in the Kyoto Protocol, to one of eliminating net emissions, as expressed in the Paris Agreement. This, in turn, means that the climate problem is in essence a challenge of banning net carbon emissions. Bans are uncommon in the energy sector, but are a standard tool in many political areas, including environmental policy. While economic theory sees bans as sub-optimal, empirical research on their actual impacts is scare. We therefore analyze the process of implementing bans and of the effectiveness of implemented bans through a systematic review of the academic literature, in order to build theory and draw parallels to the climate policy field. Specifically, we explore the conditions under which bans are implemented, and under which conditions bans are more effective in meeting their specific aims. These conditions include both technological factors (e.g. the presence of a mature technological replacement to the banned process) and political issues (e.g. acceptance among regulated and adjacent actors, political urgency/problem severity, and political majorities). While empirical evidence on bans’ implementation and effectiveness is scarce, the review suggests that bans rarely happen unless a replacement technology is available. However, once the ban is implemented, the acceptance is generally high. This suggests that, if other policies successfully trigger innovation and learning in new, zero-carbon technologies and make these useful by supporting systemic change, climate policy-related bans may become a feasible part of the policy toolkit.