IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i5p4180-d1080437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Water Pollution Abatement in Olive Oil Industry in Morocco: Cost Estimates and Policy Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Imane Bounadi

    (Département des Sciences Humaines, Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II, Madinat Al Irfane, B.P. 6202, Rabat 10101, Morocco)

  • Khalil Allali

    (Département des Sciences Humaines, Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II, Madinat Al Irfane, B.P. 6202, Rabat 10101, Morocco
    Département d’Economie Rurale, Ecole Nationale d’Agriculture, B.P. S/40, Meknès 50001, Morocco)

  • Aziz Fadlaoui

    (Department of Management of Natural Resources, Economics and Sociology and Quality, Regional Agricultural Research Center, B.P. 578 (VN), Meknès 50000, Morocco)

  • Mohammed Dehhaoui

    (Département de Statistique et Informatique Appliquées, Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II, Madinat Al Irfane, B.P. 6202, Rabat 10101, Morocco)

Abstract

This article discusses the challenges of water scarcity and industrial water pollution in developing countries, specifically in Morocco, where the olive oil industry is a significant contributor to organic water pollution. The Moroccan government has implemented regulations and economic incentives to address this issue, but enforcement has been hindered by a lack of information on environmental damage and pollution abatement costs. This study aims to improve the knowledge of public decision makers on the costs of the depollution of oil mills and to use this information to develop tools for the reinforcement of the current regulation mechanism. To meet our research objective, the Translog hyperbolic distance function is used to represent the environmental technology generating three undesirable outputs (SS, BOD, and COD) and to estimate the olive oil mills’ specific pollution abatement cost (shadow price). Finally, pollutant-specific taxes are computed using the tax-standard method. The results showed that oil mills must renounce the production of olive oil totaling MAD 13,314, MAD 4706, and MAD 5786 for the reduction of one ton of SS, BOD, and COD, respectively, and that there are economies of scale in the treatment of olive mill wastewater. After calculating the rate of the environmental tax, we conclude that implementing the tax according to current emission standards can be very restrictive for oil mills, as it would represent 22% of the total annual turnover of the olive oil industry. These findings suggest a redesign of the regulation mechanism, including the implementation of environmental monitoring systems, the consideration of economies of scale in pollution control, and the use of better-targeted green subsidies and effective environmental tax. However, further research is needed to understand the impact of these measures on the economic performance of the olive oil industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Imane Bounadi & Khalil Allali & Aziz Fadlaoui & Mohammed Dehhaoui, 2023. "Water Pollution Abatement in Olive Oil Industry in Morocco: Cost Estimates and Policy Implications," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:5:p:4180-:d:1080437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/5/4180/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/5/4180/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tim J. Coelli, 1995. "Recent Developments In Frontier Modelling And Efficiency Measurement," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 39(3), pages 219-245, December.
    2. Mamardashvili, Phatima & Emvalomatis, Grigorios & Jan, Pierrick, 2016. "Environmental Performance and Shadow Value of Polluting on Swiss Dairy Farms," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), May.
    3. Anne Wambui Mumbi & Tsunemi Watanabe, 2022. "Cost Estimations of Water Pollution for the Adoption of Suitable Water Treatment Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, January.
    4. Louis Kaplow & Steven Shavell, 2002. "On the Superiority of Corrective Taxes to Quantity Regulation," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, January.
    5. Aparajita Singh & Haripriya Gundimeda, 2021. "Impact of bad outputs and environmental regulation on efficiency of Indian leather firms: a directional distance function approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(8), pages 1331-1351, June.
    6. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    7. Wei, Chu & Löschel, Andreas & Liu, Bing, 2013. "An empirical analysis of the CO2 shadow price in Chinese thermal power enterprises," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 22-31.
    8. Jean-Jacques Malfait & Patrick Moyes, 1990. "La gestion de la qualité de l'eau par les Agences de bassin. Une tentative d'évaluation empirique," Revue Économique, Programme National Persée, vol. 41(2), pages 395-410.
    9. Stefano Farolfi & Mabel Tidball, 2002. "Instruments économiques de politique environnementale et choix technique du pollueur - Le traitement des eaux résiduaires dans l’industrie de vinification," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 64, pages 83-109.
    10. Allen Blackman & Zhengyan Li & Antung A. Liu, 2018. "Efficacy of Command-and-Control and Market-Based Environmental Regulation in Developing Countries," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 381-404, October.
    11. Murty,, 2009. "Environment, Sustainable Development, and Well-being: Valuation, Taxes and Incentives," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198060208.
    12. Cuesta, Rafael A. & Lovell, C.A. Knox & Zofío, José L., 2009. "Environmental efficiency measurement with translog distance functions: A parametric approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2232-2242, June.
    13. Ling-Yun He & Jia-Jia Ou, 2017. "Pollution Emissions, Environmental Policy, and Marginal Abatement Costs," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Färe, Rolf & Margaritis, Dimitris & Rouse, Paul & Roshdi, Israfil, 2016. "Estimating the hyperbolic distance function: A directional distance function approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(1), pages 312-319.
    15. Kodde, David A & Palm, Franz C, 1986. "Wald Criteria for Jointly Testing Equality and Inequality Restriction s," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(5), pages 1243-1248, September.
    16. Reig-Martinez, Ernest & Picazo-Tadeo, Andres & Hernandez-Sancho, Francesc, 2001. "The calculation of shadow prices for industrial wastes using distance functions: An analysis for Spanish ceramic pavements firms," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 277-285, February.
    17. Fare, Rolf, et al, 1989. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons When Some Outputs Are Undesirable: A Nonparametric Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 71(1), pages 90-98, February.
    18. Michael Greenstone & B. Kelsey Jack, 2015. "Envirodevonomics: A Research Agenda for an Emerging Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 53(1), pages 5-42, March.
    19. Leleu, Hervé, 2013. "Shadow pricing of undesirable outputs in nonparametric analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 231(2), pages 474-480.
    20. Imane Bounadi & Khalil Allali & Aziz Fadlaoui & Mohammed Dehhaoui, 2022. "Can Environmental Regulation Drive the Environmental Technology Diffusion and Enhance Firms’ Environmental Performance in Developing Countries? Case of Olive Oil Industry in Morocco," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-18, November.
    21. Régina D.C. Bonou-zin & Khalil Allali & Aziz Fadlaoui, 2019. "Environmental Efficiency of Organic and Conventional Cotton in Benin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-17, May.
    22. Atakelty Hailu & Terrence S. Veeman, 2001. "Non-parametric Productivity Analysis with Undesirable Outputs: An Application to the Canadian Pulp and Paper Industry," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(3), pages 605-616.
    23. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249.
    24. Battese, George E. & Coelli, Tim J., 1988. "Prediction of firm-level technical efficiencies with a generalized frontier production function and panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 387-399, July.
    25. Fare, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna & Noh, Dong-Woon & Weber, William, 2005. "Characteristics of a polluting technology: theory and practice," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 469-492, June.
    26. Tietenberg, T H, 1990. "Economic Instruments for Environmental Regulation," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 6(1), pages 17-33, Spring.
    27. Fare, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna & Zaim, Osman, 2002. "Hyperbolic efficiency and return to the dollar," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 136(3), pages 671-679, February.
    28. Reinhard, Stijn & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Thijssen, Geert J., 2000. "Environmental efficiency with multiple environmentally detrimental variables; estimated with SFA and DEA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 287-303, March.
    29. Kumar, Surender & Managi, Shunsuke, 2011. "Non-separability and substitutability among water pollutants: evidence from India," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(6), pages 709-733, December.
    30. Zhou, P. & Zhou, X. & Fan, L.W., 2014. "On estimating shadow prices of undesirable outputs with efficiency models: A literature review," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 799-806.
    31. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2008. "A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-18, August.
    32. Seiford, Lawrence M. & Zhu, Joe, 2002. "Modeling undesirable factors in efficiency evaluation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 16-20, October.
    33. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    34. Pittman, Russell W, 1983. "Multilateral Productivity Comparisons with Undesirable Outputs," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 93(372), pages 883-891, December.
    35. Chambers, Robert G. & Chung, Yangho & Fare, Rolf, 1996. "Benefit and Distance Functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 407-419, August.
    36. Adewale Henry Adenuga & John Davis & George Hutchinson & Trevor Donnellan & Myles Patton, 2019. "Environmental Efficiency and Pollution Costs of Nitrogen Surplus in Dairy Farms: A Parametric Hyperbolic Technology Distance Function Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1273-1298, November.
    37. Aigner, Dennis & Lovell, C. A. Knox & Schmidt, Peter, 1977. "Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 21-37, July.
    38. Scheel, Holger, 2001. "Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(2), pages 400-410, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Adewale Henry Adenuga & John Davis & George Hutchinson & Trevor Donnellan & Myles Patton, 2019. "Environmental Efficiency and Pollution Costs of Nitrogen Surplus in Dairy Farms: A Parametric Hyperbolic Technology Distance Function Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 1273-1298, November.
    2. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.
    3. Abad, Arnaud & Briec, Walter, 2019. "On the axiomatic of pollution-generating technologies: Non-parametric production analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(1), pages 377-390.
    4. Dakpo, Hervé K & Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2014. "Inclusion of undesirable outputs in production technology modeling: The case of greenhouse gas emissions in French meat sheep farming," Working Papers 207806, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    5. Afzalinejad, Mohammad, 2020. "Reverse efficiency measures for environmental assessment in data envelopment analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Cherchye, Laurens & Rock, Bram De & Walheer, Barnabé, 2015. "Multi-output efficiency with good and bad outputs," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(3), pages 872-881.
    7. Puggioni, Daniela & Stefanou, Spiro E., 2016. "The Value of Being Socially Responsible. A DEA Approach for Analyzing Efficiency and Recovering Shadow Prices of CSR Activities," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235723, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Forsund, Finn R., 2009. "Good Modelling of Bad Outputs: Pollution and Multiple-Output Production," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 3(1), pages 1-38, August.
    9. Shen, Zhiyang & Bai, Kaixuan & Hong, Tianyang & Balezentis, Tomas, 2021. "Evaluation of carbon shadow price within a non-parametric meta-frontier framework: The case of OECD, ASEAN and BRICS," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 299(C).
    10. Aparicio, Juan & Kapelko, Magdalena & Zofío, José L., 2020. "The measurement of environmental economic inefficiency with pollution-generating technologies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    11. Margaréta Halická & Mária Trnovská, 2018. "Negative features of hyperbolic and directional distance models for technologies with undesirable outputs," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(4), pages 887-907, December.
    12. Pham, Manh D. & Zelenyuk, Valentin, 2019. "Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis: A new taxonomy of reference technology sets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 186-198.
    13. George Halkos & George Papageorgiou, 2016. "Spatial environmental efficiency indicators in regional waste generation: a nonparametric approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 62-78, January.
    14. Toloo, Mehdi & Hančlová, Jana, 2020. "Multi-valued measures in DEA in the presence of undesirable outputs," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    15. Shen, Zhiyang & Boussemart, Jean-Philippe & Leleu, Hervé, 2017. "Aggregate green productivity growth in OECD’s countries," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 30-39.
    16. Chiu, Yung-Ho & Lee, Jen-Hui & Lu, Ching-Cheng & Shyu, Ming-Kuang & Luo, Zhengying, 2012. "The technology gap and efficiency measure in WEC countries: Application of the hybrid meta frontier model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 349-357.
    17. Charles, Vincent & Kumar, Mukesh & Irene Kavitha, S., 2012. "Measuring the efficiency of assembled printed circuit boards with undesirable outputs using data envelopment analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 194-206.
    18. Xiang Ji & Jiasen Sun & Qunwei Wang & Qianqian Yuan, 2019. "Revealing Energy Over-Consumption and Pollutant Over-Emission Behind GDP: A New Multi-criteria Sustainable Measure," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 54(4), pages 1391-1421, December.
    19. Long, Xingle & Wu, Chao & Zhang, Jijian & Zhang, Jing, 2018. "Environmental efficiency for 192 thermal power plants in the Yangtze River Delta considering heterogeneity: A metafrontier directional slacks-based measure approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3962-3971.
    20. Benjamin Hampf, 2018. "Measuring inefficiency in the presence of bad outputs: Does the disposability assumption matter?," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 101-127, February.

    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:15:y:2023:i:5:p:4180-:d:1080437. 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.