There is concern that the carbon prices generated through climate policies are too low to create the incentives necessary to stimulate technological development. This paper empirically analyzes how the Swedish carbon dioxide (CO2) tax and the European Union emission trading system (EU ETS) have affected productivity development in the Swedish pulp and paper industry 1998-2008. A Luenberger total factor productivity (TFP) indicator is computed using data envelopment analysis. The results show that climate policy had a modest impact on technological development in the pulp and paper industry, and if significant it was negative. The price of fossil fuels, on the contrary, seems to have created important incentives for technological development. Hence, the results suggest that the carbon prices faced by the industry through EU ETS and the CO2 tax have been too low. Even though the data for this study is specific for Sweden, the models and results are applicable internationally. When designing policy to mitigate CO2 emissions, it is vital that the policy creates a carbon price that is high enough - otherwise the pressure on technological development will not be sufficiently strong.
Sweden has only just begun remediation of its many contaminated sites, a process that will cost an estimated SEK 60,000 million (USD 9100 million). Although the risk assessment method, carried out by the Swedish EPA, is driven by health effects, it does not consider actual exposure. Instead, the sites are assessed based on divergence from guideline values. This paper uses an environmental medicine approach that takes exposure into account to analyse how cancer risks on and near arsenic-contaminated sites are implicitly valued in the remediation process. The results show that the level of ambition is high. At 23 contaminated sites, the cost per life saved varies from SEK 287 million to SEK 1,835,000 million, despite conservative calculations that in fact probably underestimate the costs. It is concluded that if environmental health risks are to be reduced, there are probably other areas where economic resources can be used more cost-effectively.