Cited by 149Climate Change Policy and EconomicsEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthInnovation Diffusion and Forecasting

Endogenizing technological change: Matching empirical evidence to modeling needs

Pizer, William A., Popp, David·2008·Energy Economics

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eneco.2008.02.006

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 89 · Cited by 149

Authors
Pizer, W. A., & Popp, D.
Affiliations
  • Resources For The Future (US)
  • National Bureau of Economic Research (US)
Corresponding author
Pizer, William A.
Venue
Energy Economics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-11
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
2754-2770
ISSN
0140-9883 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2130235859
Cited by
149
References
89
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 15
FWCI
24.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Energy Economics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Climate Change Policy and Economics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Energy, Environment, Economic Growth
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
Keywords
endogenous technological change, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, climate policy, research and development, hands-on learning, technology diffusion, policy evaluation model, fossil fuel emissions, environmental technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review