Pollution standards vs charges under uncertainty
AbstractConventional analysis of pollution control policy under uncertainty does not properly account for the potential cost effectiveness difference between standards and charges, thus drawing misleading conclusions for the case of inefficient standards. Correcting for this anomaly, the following conclusions can be drawn. When uncertainty involves the position of the marginal damage cost schedule, rather than policy indifference, a charge is always superior to an inefficient standard. When uncertainty is about the position of the marginal control cost schedule, policy indifference may occur, but if it does it must be the case that the slope of marginal damage cost exceeds that of marginal control cost. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists in its journal Environmental & Resource Economics.
Volume (Year): 4 (1994)
Issue (Month): 3 (June)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100263
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Adar, Zvi & Griffin, James M., 1976. "Uncertainty and the choice of pollution control instruments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 178-188, October.
- Fishelson, Gideon, 1976. "Emission control policies under uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 189-197, October.
- Helfand, Gloria E, 1991. "Standards versus Standards: The Effects of Different Pollution Restrictions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 622-34, June.
- Russeli, Clifford S., 1986. "A note on the efficiency ranking of two second-best policy instruments for pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 13-17, March.
- Roberts, Marc J. & Spence, Michael, 1976. "Effluent charges and licenses under uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 193-208.
- Bohm, Peter & Russell, Clifford S., 1985. "Comparative analysis of alternative policy instruments," Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, in: A. V. Kneese† & J. L. Sweeney (ed.), Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 395-460 Elsevier.
- Akira Maeda, 2012. "Setting trigger price in emissions permit markets equipped with a safety valve mechanism," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 358-379, June.
- Verhoef, Erik T. & Nijkamp, Peter, 1999. "Second-best energy policies for heterogeneous firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 111-134, April.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.