Should Green Industrial Policy Be Technology Neutral?

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Emma Aisbett, Wenting Cheng, Ralf Steinhauser, Fiona Beck
{"title":"Should Green Industrial Policy Be Technology Neutral?","authors":"Emma Aisbett,&nbsp;Wenting Cheng,&nbsp;Ralf Steinhauser,&nbsp;Fiona Beck","doi":"10.1111/1758-5899.70124","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>The central question of this paper is whether technology neutrality is, on balance, a helpful principle for green industrial policy (GIP). To answer this question, we first conduct a systematic literature review to understand what GIP is. We find that the term is most often used by authors in a neoclassical economic tradition and propose a definition that encapsulates the dominant elements of various definitions in this literature. Using a transdisciplinary approach, we turn to the question of technology neutrality in GIP. Considering a range of disciplinary perspectives and arguments, we conclude that the weight of argument and evidence lies strongly against de jure technology neutrality in GIP. Furthermore, the literature provides a range of alternative principles and approaches that can better address potential government failures in GIP and related policies. Finally, combining theoretical approaches and case-study evidence from the US Inflation Reduction Act and the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, we provide potential explanations for why technology neutrality nonetheless remains a popular principle in GIP.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51510,"journal":{"name":"Global Policy","volume":"17 1","pages":"107-121"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1758-5899.70124","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The central question of this paper is whether technology neutrality is, on balance, a helpful principle for green industrial policy (GIP). To answer this question, we first conduct a systematic literature review to understand what GIP is. We find that the term is most often used by authors in a neoclassical economic tradition and propose a definition that encapsulates the dominant elements of various definitions in this literature. Using a transdisciplinary approach, we turn to the question of technology neutrality in GIP. Considering a range of disciplinary perspectives and arguments, we conclude that the weight of argument and evidence lies strongly against de jure technology neutrality in GIP. Furthermore, the literature provides a range of alternative principles and approaches that can better address potential government failures in GIP and related policies. Finally, combining theoretical approaches and case-study evidence from the US Inflation Reduction Act and the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, we provide potential explanations for why technology neutrality nonetheless remains a popular principle in GIP.

绿色产业政策应该是技术中立的吗?
本文的核心问题是技术中立是否总体上有利于绿色产业政策(GIP)。为了回答这个问题,我们首先进行了系统的文献综述,以了解GIP是什么。我们发现该术语最常被新古典经济学传统的作者使用,并提出了一个定义,该定义包含了该文献中各种定义的主要元素。使用跨学科的方法,我们转向GIP中的技术中立性问题。考虑到一系列学科观点和论点,我们得出结论,论点和证据的权重强烈反对GIP中法律上的技术中立。此外,文献提供了一系列可选的原则和方法,可以更好地解决政府在GIP和相关政策方面的潜在失败。最后,结合理论方法和案例研究证据,从美国的通货膨胀减少法案和欧盟的碳边界调整机制,我们提供了潜在的解释,为什么技术中立仍然是GIP的流行原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Policy
Global Policy Multiple-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
125
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书