IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v126y2023ics0264837723000157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ex-post evaluation of the Danish pesticide tax: A novel and effective tax design

Author

Listed:
  • Nielsen, Helle Ørsted
  • Konrad, Maria Theresia Hedegaard
  • Pedersen, Anders Branth
  • Gyldenkærne, Steen

Abstract

Externality taxes are considered a key tool in the climate and environmental policy toolkit. However, externality taxes do not always deliver on their promise due to design flaws and low tax rates. The Danish pesticide tax, which was redesigned in 2013, addresses these flaws by differentiating tax rates according to the harmfulness of products and significantly increasing prices on the most harmful pesticides. This article evaluates the redesigned tax, using a panel data set with pesticide use on 1900 medium-size and large farms two years before and four years after the tax change. We find that the tax has been effective, prompting substitution from more harmful products to less harmful ones, resulting in a 16 pct. reduction in pesticide load. Response to the pesticide tax varies among farms, depending on the crop types grown. The study is highly policy relevant for countries aiming to lower pesticide load, providing empirical evidence that a proper tax design can overcome the low price sensitivity found with previous pesticide taxes in Denmark and elsewhere. Moreover, this study offers a rare example of an ex-post evaluation that builds on detailed farm-level data, following registered pesticide use before and after the tax redesign, which allows for a more precise estimation of the impact of the tax.

Suggested Citation

  • Nielsen, Helle Ørsted & Konrad, Maria Theresia Hedegaard & Pedersen, Anders Branth & Gyldenkærne, Steen, 2023. "Ex-post evaluation of the Danish pesticide tax: A novel and effective tax design," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:126:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723000157
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106549
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837723000157
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2023.106549?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Böcker & Robert Finger, 2016. "European Pesticide Tax Schemes in Comparison: An Analysis of Experiences and Developments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-22, April.
    2. Falconer, K. & Hodge, I., 2000. "Using economic incentives for pesticide usage reductions: responsiveness to input taxation and agricultural systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 175-194, March.
    3. Martin Schlotter & Guido Schwerdt & Ludger Woessmann, 2011. "Econometric methods for causal evaluation of education policies and practices: a non-technical guide," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 109-137.
    4. Féménia, Fabienne & Letort, Elodie, 2016. "How to achieve significant reduction in pesticide use? An empirical evaluation of the impacts of pesticide taxation associated to a change in cropping practice," Working Papers 233482, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    5. Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard & Daugbjerg, Carsten & Hjollund, Lene & Pedersen, Anders Branth, 2001. "Consumers, industrialists and the political economy of green taxation: CO2 taxation in OECD," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 489-497, May.
    6. Femenia, Fabienne & Letort, Elodie, 2016. "How to significantly reduce pesticide use: An empirical evaluation of the impacts of pesticide taxation associated with a change in cropping practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 27-37.
    7. Daugbjerg, Carsten & Pedersen, Anders Branth, 2004. "New Policy Ideas and Old Policy Networks: Implementing Green Taxation in Scandinavia," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(2), pages 219-249, August.
    8. Theodoros Skevas & Spiro E. Stefanou & Alfons Oude Lansink, 2012. "Can economic incentives encourage actual reductions in pesticide use and environmental spillovers?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 43(3), pages 267-276, May.
    9. Obafèmi Philippe Koutchadé & Alain Carpentier & Fabienne Femenia, 2018. "Modeling Heterogeneous Farm Responses to European Union Biofuel Support with a Random Parameter Multicrop Model," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(2), pages 434-455.
    10. Kudsk, Per & Jørgensen, Lise Nistrup & Ørum, Jens Erik, 2018. "Pesticide Load—A new Danish pesticide risk indicator with multiple applications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 384-393.
    11. Finger, Robert & Möhring, Niklas & Dalhaus, Tobias & Böcker, Thomas, 2017. "Revisiting Pesticide Taxation Schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 263-266.
    12. Mikael Andersen, 1999. "Governance by green taxes: implementing clean water policies in Europe 1970–1990," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 2(1), pages 39-63, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tiemei Yan & Tong Zhang & Zhanguo Zhu, 2023. "The Environmental Tax Scheme in China’s Large-Scale Pig Farming: Balancing Economic Burden and Responsibility," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-20, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bontemps, Christophe & Bougherara, Douadia & Nauges, Céline, 2020. "Do Risk Preferences Really Matter? The Case of Pesticide Use in Agriculture," TSE Working Papers 20-1095, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    2. Matthias Buchholz & Oliver Musshoff, 2021. "Tax or green nudge? An experimental analysis of pesticide policies in Germany [A psychological study of the inverse relationship between perceived risk and perceived benefit]," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 48(4), pages 940-982.
    3. Böcker, Thomas Gerd & Finger, Robert, 2016. "A Meta-Analysis On The Own-Price Elasticity Of Demand For Pesticides," 56th Annual Conference, Bonn, Germany, September 28-30, 2016 244871, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    4. Salomé Kahindo & Stéphane Blancard, 2022. "Reducing pesticide use through optimal reallocation at different spatial scales: The case of French arable farming," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(4), pages 648-666, July.
    5. Grovermann, Christian & Schreinemachers, Pepijn & Riwthong, Suthathip & Berger, Thomas, 2017. "‘Smart’ policies to reduce pesticide use and avoid income trade-offs: An agent-based model applied to Thai agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 91-103.
    6. Thomas G. Böcker & Robert Finger, 2017. "A Meta-Analysis on the Elasticity of Demand for Pesticides," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(2), pages 518-533, June.
    7. Danne, M. & Musshoff, O. & Schulte, M., 2019. "Analysing the importance of glyphosate as part of agricultural strategies: A discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 189-207.
    8. Dupraz, Pierre, 2021. "Policies for the ecological transition of agriculture: the livestock issue," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 101(4), January.
    9. Fabienne Féménia & Elodie Letort, 2016. "How to achieve significant reduction in pesticide use? An empirical evaluation of the impacts of pesticide taxation associated to a change in cropping practice," Working Papers SMART 16-02, INRAE UMR SMART.
    10. Chelsea A. Pardini & Ana Espínola‐Arredondo, 2023. "Fungicide resistance and misinformation: A game theoretic approach," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 71(2), pages 171-201, June.
    11. Alessandro Bonanno & Valentina C. Materia & Thomas Venus & Justus Wesseler, 2017. "The Plant Protection Products (PPP) Sector in the European Union: A Special View on Herbicides," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 29(3), pages 575-595, July.
    12. Bougherara, Douadia & Nauges, Céline, 2018. "How laboratory experiments could help disentangle the influences of production risk and risk preferences on input decisions," TSE Working Papers 18-903, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    13. Thomas Böcker & Robert Finger, 2016. "European Pesticide Tax Schemes in Comparison: An Analysis of Experiences and Developments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-22, April.
    14. Grovermann, Christian & Schreinemachers, Pepijn & Berger, Thomas, 2015. "Evaluation of IPM adoption and financial instruments to reduce pesticide use in Thai agriculture using econometrics and agent-based modeling," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211690, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Niklas Möhring & Martina Bozzola & Stefan Hirsch & Robert Finger, 2020. "Are pesticides risk decreasing? The relevance of pesticide indicator choice in empirical analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(3), pages 429-444, May.
    16. Faure, Jérôme & Mouysset, Lauriane & Gaba, Sabrina, 2023. "Combining incentives with collective action to provide pollination and a bundle of ecosystem services in farmland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    17. Daniel Slunge & Francisco Alpizar, 2019. "Market-Based Instruments for Managing Hazardous Chemicals: A Review of the Literature and Future Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Zhanping Hu, 2020. "What Socio-Economic and Political Factors Lead to Global Pesticide Dependence? A Critical Review from a Social Science Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-22, November.
    19. Chantal Gascuel & Michèle Tixier-Boichard & Benoit Dedieu & Cécile Détang-Dessendre & Pierre Dupraz & Philippe Faverdin & Laurent Hazard & Philippe Hinsinger & Isabelle Litrico-Chiarelli & Françoise M, 2019. "Réflexion prospective interdisciplinaire pour l’agroécologie. Rapport de synthèse," Post-Print hal-02154433, HAL.
    20. Valborg Kvakkestad & Åsmund Lægreid Steiro & Arild Vatn, 2021. "Pesticide Policies and Farm Behavior: The Introduction of Regulations for Integrated Pest Management," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:126:y:2023:i:c:s0264837723000157. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.