IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i4p1047-d206705.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tax Policy, Environmental Concern and Level of Emission Reduction

Author

Listed:
  • Xuexian Gao

    (School of Economics & Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China
    Institute for Energy Economics and Policy, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Haidong Zheng

    (School of Economics & Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Yan Zhang

    (School of Economics & Management, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China
    Institute for Energy Economics and Policy, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao 266580, China)

  • Naser Golsanami

    (State Key Laboratory of Mining Disaster Prevention and Control, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China
    College of Mining and Safety Engineering, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China)

Abstract

Regulators often use environmental policy to induce green initiatives by firms. This paper examines the emission-reduction-inducement effect of the environmental tax deduction (ETD) incentive by Stackelberg game models between an environmental regulator and a profit-maximizing monopolistic firm facing emission-dependent demand. Different cases, i.e., with/without considering the regulator’s environmental concerns, were used to investigate the ETD policy effects with a numerical example. This paper shows that the regulator’s tax policy will only affect the emission reduction level, but cannot influence the output, which combined with the firm’s operation factors mainly depends the consumers’ attitude toward green products and price sensitivity. Numerical simulation results showed that for the cases with a moderate level of environmental concern and emission standard, the regulator can set an ETD incentive to motivate the choice of a higher level of emission reduction and simultaneously increase social welfare; otherwise, the increase in environmental quality is at the expense of social welfare. When the market’s environmental consciousness increases, it is easier for the regulator to guide the firm to adopt an ETD solution. Therefore, improving consumers’ awareness of environmental protection is an effective way to promote green investment of firms.

Suggested Citation

  • Xuexian Gao & Haidong Zheng & Yan Zhang & Naser Golsanami, 2019. "Tax Policy, Environmental Concern and Level of Emission Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1047-:d:206705
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1047/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1047/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ghosh, Debabrata & Shah, Janat, 2012. "A comparative analysis of greening policies across supply chain structures," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(2), pages 568-583.
    2. Sengupta, Aditi, 2012. "Investment in cleaner technology and signaling distortions in a market with green consumers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 468-480.
    3. Austan Goolsbee, 1997. "Investment Tax Incentives, Prices, and the Supply of Capital Goods," NBER Working Papers 6192, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Sen, Partha & Turnovsky, Stephen J., 1990. "Investment tax credit in an open economy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 277-299, August.
    5. Dorothée Brécard, 2011. "Environmental Tax in a Green Market," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(3), pages 387-403, July.
    6. Gsottbauer, Elisabeth & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2014. "Environmental policy when pollutive consumption is sensitive to advertising: Norms versus status," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 39-50.
    7. Ana Espínola-Arredondo & Félix Muñoz-García, 2016. "Profit-enhancing environmental policy: uninformed regulation in an entry-deterrence model," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 146-163, October.
    8. Carmen Arguedas & Francisco Cabo & Guiomar Martín-Herrán, 2017. "Optimal Pollution Standards and Non-compliance in a Dynamic Framework," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 537-567, November.
    9. Broer, D Peter & Heijdra, Ben J, 2001. "The Investment Tax Credit under Monopolistic Competition," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 318-351, April.
    10. Jingpu Song & Mingming Leng, 2012. "Analysis of the Single-Period Problem under Carbon Emissions Policies," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Tsan-Ming Choi (ed.), Handbook of Newsvendor Problems, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 297-313, Springer.
    11. Gao Xiang Lou & Hai Yang Xia & Jie Qiong Zhang & Ti Jun Fan, 2015. "Investment Strategy of Emission-Reduction Technology in a Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-25, August.
    12. Requate, Till, 2005. "Environmental Policy under Imperfect Competition: A Survey," Economics Working Papers 2005-12, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    13. Wesseh, Presley K. & Lin, Boqiang & Atsagli, Philip, 2017. "Carbon taxes, industrial production, welfare and the environment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 305-313.
    14. Jie Mao & Chunhua Wang, 2016. "Tax incentives and environmental protection: evidence from China’s taxpayer-level data," China Finance and Economic Review, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-30, December.
    15. Gongbing Bi & Minyue Jin & Liuyi Ling & Feng Yang, 2017. "Environmental subsidy and the choice of green technology in the presence of green consumers," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 255(1), pages 547-568, August.
    16. Mannberg, Andrea & Jansson, Johan & Pettersson, Thomas & Brännlund, Runar & Lindgren, Urban, 2014. "Do tax incentives affect households׳ adoption of ‘green’ cars? A panel study of the Stockholm congestion tax," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 286-299.
    17. Kangzhou Wang & Yingxue Zhao & Yonghong Cheng & Tsan-Ming Choi, 2014. "Cooperation or Competition? Channel Choice for a Remanufacturing Fashion Supply Chain with Government Subsidy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(10), pages 1-19, October.
    18. Ciwei Dong & Bin Shen & Pui-Sze Chow & Liu Yang & Chi To Ng, 2016. "Sustainability investment under cap-and-trade regulation," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 240(2), pages 509-531, May.
    19. Roach, Travis, 2015. "The effect of the production tax credit on wind energy production in deregulated electricity markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 86-88.
    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. Zhibo Zhou & Weiguo Zhang & Xinxin Pan & Jiangfeng Hu & Ganlin Pu, 2019. "Environmental Tax Reform and the “Double Dividend” Hypothesis in a Small Open Economy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Vera Mirović & Branimir Kalaš & Jelena Andrašić & Nada Milenković, 2023. "Implications of Environmental Taxation for Economic Growth and Government Expenditures in Visegrad Group countries," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2023(4), pages 422-446.
    3. Vadim Zasko & Elena Sidorova & Vera Komarova & Diana Boboshko & Olesya Dontsova, 2021. "Digitization of the Customs Revenue Administration as a Factor of the Enhancement of the Budget Efficiency of the Russian Federation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, September.
    4. Dan Yu & Kewei Hu & Yugui Hao, 2023. "The Effect of Local Government Environmental Concern on Corporate Environmental Investment: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-20, July.
    5. Trung-Hieu Tran & Yong Mao & Peer-Olaf Siebers, 2019. "Optimising Decarbonisation Investment for Firms towards Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-19, October.
    6. Ioana-Laura Țibulcă, 2021. "Debt Sustainability: Can EU Member States Use Environmental Taxes to Regain Fiscal Space?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-15, May.
    7. Abu Hashan Md Mashud & Dipa Roy & Yosef Daryanto & Mohd Helmi Ali, 2020. "A Sustainable Inventory Model with Imperfect Products, Deterioration, and Controllable Emissions," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-21, November.
    8. Favourate Y. Mpofu, 2022. "Green Taxes in Africa: Opportunities and Challenges for Environmental Protection, Sustainability, and the Attainment of Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-26, August.
    9. Naser Golsanami & Bin Gong & Sajjad Negahban, 2022. "Evaluating the Effect of New Gas Solubility and Bubble Point Pressure Models on PVT Parameters and Optimizing Injected Gas Rate in Gas-Lift Dual Gradient Drilling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-25, February.
    10. Naser Golsanami & Xuepeng Zhang & Weichao Yan & Linjun Yu & Huaimin Dong & Xu Dong & Likai Cui & Madusanka Nirosh Jayasuriya & Shanilka Gimhan Fernando & Ehsan Barzgar, 2021. "NMR-Based Study of the Pore Types’ Contribution to the Elastic Response of the Reservoir Rock," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-26, March.

    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. Xuexian Gao & Haidong Zheng, 2017. "Environmental Concerns, Environmental Policy and Green Investment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-13, December.
    2. Bowon Kim & Jeong Eun Sim, 2016. "Supply Chain Coordination and Consumer Awareness for Pollution Reduction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Gao Xiang Lou & Hai Yang Xia & Jie Qiong Zhang & Ti Jun Fan, 2015. "Investment Strategy of Emission-Reduction Technology in a Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-25, August.
    4. Juanjuan Qin & Liguo Ren & Liangjie Xia, 2017. "Carbon Emission Reduction and Pricing Strategies of Supply Chain under Various Demand Forecasting Scenarios," Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research (APJOR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 34(01), pages 1-27, February.
    5. Chen, Wenbo, 2018. "Retailer-driven carbon emission abatement with consumer environmental awareness and carbon tax: Revenue-sharing versus Cost-sharingAuthor-Name: Yang, Huixiao," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 179-191.
    6. Xianliang Shi & Genzhu Li & Ciwei Dong & Yefei Yang, 2020. "Value Co-Creation Behavior in Green Supply Chains: An Empirical Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-26, July.
    7. Dan Wu & Yuxiang Yang, 2020. "The Low-Carbon Supply Chain Coordination Problem with Consumers’ Low-Carbon Preference," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, April.
    8. Abhijit Barman & Rubi Das & Pijus Kanti De & Shib Sankar Sana, 2021. "Optimal Pricing and Greening Strategy in a Competitive Green Supply Chain: Impact of Government Subsidy and Tax Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-20, August.
    9. Nita Shah & Pratik Shah & Milan Patel, 2022. "Pricing Decisions with Effect of Advertisement and Greening Efforts for a Greengocer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-12, October.
    10. Chirantan Mondal & Bibhas C. Giri, 2022. "Retailers’ competition and cooperation in a closed-loop green supply chain under governmental intervention and cap-and-trade policy," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 859-894, April.
    11. Qi Qi & Jing Wang & Jianteng Xu, 2018. "A Dual-Channel Supply Chain Coordination under Carbon Cap-and-Trade Regulation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, June.
    12. Leon Bettendorf & Ben Heijdra, 2001. "Intergenerational and International Welfare Leakages of a Product Subsidy in a Small Open Economy," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 8(5), pages 705-729, November.
    13. Cheng, Fei & Chen, Tong & Chen, Qiao, 2022. "Cost-reducing strategy or emission-reducing strategy? The choice of low-carbon decisions under price threshold subsidy," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    14. Changhong Li & Jialuo Wang & Jiao Zheng & Jiani Gao, 2022. "Effects of Carbon Policy on Carbon Emission Reduction in Supply Chain under Uncertain Demand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, May.
    15. Yonghong Cheng & Zhongkai Xiong & Qinglin Luo, 2018. "Joint Pricing and Product Carbon Footprint Decisions and Coordination of Supply Chain with Cap-and-Trade Regulation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-24, February.
    16. Luo Wang & Bin Shen, 2017. "A Product Line Analysis for Eco-Designed Fashion Products: Evidence from an Outdoor Sportswear Brand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-12, July.
    17. Raza, Syed Asif & Govindaluri, Srikrishna Madhumohan, 2019. "Pricing strategies in a dual-channel green supply chain with cannibalization and risk aversion," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 6(C).
    18. Wen Cheng & Qunqi Wu & Fei Ye & Qian Li, 2022. "The Impact of Government Interventions and Consumer Green Preferences on the Competition between Green and Nongreen Supply Chains," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-34, May.
    19. Liming Zhang & Wei Yang & Yuan Yuan & Rui Zhou, 2017. "An Integrated Carbon Policy-Based Interactive Strategy for Carbon Reduction and Economic Development in a Construction Material Supply Chain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-15, November.
    20. Yenipazarli, Arda, 2019. "Incentives for environmental research and development: Consumer preferences, competitive pressure and emissions taxation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 276(2), pages 757-769.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1047-:d:206705. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.