Narrow Results

Biota Discovers New Potent Antivirals.

Celladon Partners with V-Kardia on Development of Percutaneous Delivery of Gene Therapy for Heart Failure.

Regenera Closes Multimillion Dollar Drug Deal.

Napo Pharma Collaborates with AsiaPharm.

Matrix Buys Over Belgian Company Docpharma.

Ranbaxy Buys Portfolio from Spain's EFARMES.

Japan's MediBIC and ReaMetrix India Team up.

Medical & Biological Labs and DNAVEC Establish Joint Venture Company in China.

Britsol-Meyers Squibb Collaborates with Korea's Celltrion.

YM Biosciences Partners with Kuhnil to Develop Nimotuzumab.

A Company that Helps Translate Basic Research into Useful Biomedical Products.

InfleXion Corp Develops Diagnostic Kits.

GNI and Shanghai Genomics Merge.

MerLion Announces Collaboration Agreement with Sankyo.

Schering AG Sets Up Asia-Pacific Headquarters in Singapore.

Three Global Companies Invest US$112 Million to Form Joint Venture: Interpharma, Quintiles and Temasek Holdings

Simulations Plus Announces Preliminary Success in Malaria Drug Design Project.

xCELLigence System Evaluated in EU Project to Replace Animal Experiments in Cosmetics Industry.

Progress in $100 Million Biodiesel and Commercial Fish Food Project.

QIAGEN and Bio-X Center Open Shanghai Translational Medicine Lab.

Index Ventures Launches First 150m Life Sciences Fund.

Enzo Biochem Expands Distribution with Japan's Cosmo Bio.

Maxwell Biotech Venture Fund Invests in Hepatitis B/D.

ScinoPharm and NHRI Announce Jointly Developed Diabetes Drug.

Calibr: A New Paradigm for Academic – Industry Cooperation.

Biocon and Pfizer End Commercialization Agreement.

Plandai Biotech Demonstrates Significance of Flavonoid & Polyphenol Bioavailability.

Ceva Uses ProBioGen's AGE1.CR Cell Line for Viral Vaccine Production.

Quintiles to Sign Memorandum of Agreement with Malaysia Biotechnology Corporation.

Fluidigm China opens its doors.

Brazil Center for Excellence in Bioinformatics at FIOCRUZ chooses Convey to advance genomics.

American CryoStem and Protein Genomics to jointly develop stem cell applications for wound healing.

BASF and Catalent join forces to solve bioavailability challenges.

AB SCIEX and Phenomenex develop food safety solution for India.

2013 – A Year of Access, Convergence and Technology.

The Chinese Boom – Predictions for 2013.

The IVD Market from an Investor's Perspective.

Changing Paradigms of the Pharma Industry: Global Economy or Tougher Regulatory Standards to Blame?

Neuroscience – The Search Continues.

Science Academies' Role in Development: Presidents Reveal It All.

Protein Nanocages: The Versatile Molecular Shell.

Amplifying Spatial Awareness via GIS — Tech which brings Healthcare Management, Preventative & Predictive Measures under the same Cloud

When it is not just about size, you gotta' be Smart, too!

Chew on It! How Singapore-based health informatics company MHC Asia Group crunches big-data to uncover your company's health

Digital tool when well-used, it is Passion

Carving the Digital Route to Wellness

Big Data, Bigger Disease Management and Current preparations to manage the Future Health of Singaporeans

A Conversation with Mr Arun Puri

Extreme Networks: Health Solutions

Big Data in Clinical Research Sector

For EMF 32, we applied a new version of our Intertemporal General Equilibrium Model (IGEM) based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). We simulated the impacts arising from the Energy Modeling Forum’s broad range of carbon taxes under three revenue recycling options — lump sum redistributions, capital tax reductions, and labor tax cuts. We examined their consequences for industry prices and quantities, for the overall economy, and for the welfare of households, individuals, and society, the latter in terms of efficiency and equity. We rank recycling mechanisms from most to least favorable in terms of the magnitudes of their impacts on net social welfare — efficiency net of equity — recognizing that other objectives may be more important to policy makers and the public. Finally, we and the EMF 32 effort focus only on the economic effects of carbon taxation and revenue recycling; the environmental benefits arising from emissions reductions are not within our scope of study.

We find CO₂ emissions abatement to be invariant to the chosen recycling scheme. This means that policy makers need not compromise their environmental objectives when designing carbon tax swap options. We also find additional emissions reductions beyond the scope of coverage and points of taxation.

Reducing capital taxes promotes new saving, investment and capital formation and is the most favorable recycling mechanism. In 2010 dollars, the welfare loss per ton abated ranges from $0.19 to $3.90 depending on the path of carbon prices. Reducing labor taxes promotes consumption and work through real-wage incentives and is the next most favorable recycling scheme. Here, the welfare loss per ton abated ranges from $11.09 to $16.49 depending on the carbon tax trajectory. Lump sum redistribution of carbon tax revenues is the least favorable recycling option. It incentivizes neither capital nor labor. Consequently, the damages to the economy and welfare are the greatest among the three schemes. With lump sum recycling, the welfare loss per ton abated ranges from $37.15 to $43.61 as carbon taxation becomes more aggressive. While this ranking is common among the participating EMF 32 models, the spread in our results is the greatest in comparison which we attribute to the substitution possibilities inherent in IGEM’s econometrics, the absence of barriers to factor mobility, and likely differences in the manner in which tax incentives are structured.

We find welfare gains are possible under capital and labor tax recycling when emissions accounting is viewed from a top-down rather than a bottom-up perspective and carbon pricing is at an economy-wide average. However, these gains occur at the expense of abatement.

We find capital tax recycling to be regressive while labor tax recycling is progressive as is redistribution through lump sums. Moreover, we find that the lump sum mechanism provides the best means for sheltering the poorest from the welfare consequences of carbon taxation. Thus, promoting capital formation is the best use of carbon tax revenues in terms of reducing the magnitudes of welfare losses while the lump sum and labor tax options are the best uses for reducing inequality.