IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pubfin/v12y1984i2p183-195.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Relatively Efficient Pollution Standards Under Perfect Competition

Author

Listed:
  • Jon D. Harford

    (Cleveland State University)

Abstract

The results of this article indicate that pursuit of efficiency with the use of pollution standards cannot be done by mimicking aspects of the efficiency conditions involving pollution taxes. A relatively efficient pollution standard applied to perfectly competitive firms will usually be characterized by a situation in which the marginal cost of pollution control exceeds the marginal damage of pollution, as the latter concept is conventionally measured. Furthermore, it will generally not be relatively efficient to set standards so that the marginal costs of pollution reduction are the same for all polluting firms. A relatively efficient set of standards will depend, in general, on the elasticities of supply and demand of output, as well as the shape and location of the firms' marginal cost ofpollution reduction curves. Some implications of these results for cost-benefit analysis are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jon D. Harford, 1984. "Relatively Efficient Pollution Standards Under Perfect Competition," Public Finance Review, , vol. 12(2), pages 183-195, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:12:y:1984:i:2:p:183-195
    DOI: 10.1177/109114218401200204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/109114218401200204
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/109114218401200204?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buchanan, James M & Tullock, Gordon, 1975. "Polluters' Profits and Political Response: Direct Controls Versus Taxes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 139-147, March.
    2. Randall G. Holcombe & Roger E. Meiners, 1980. "Corrective Taxes and Auctions of Rights in the Control of Externalities," Public Finance Review, , vol. 8(3), pages 345-349, July.
    3. Harford, J. & Ogura, S., 1983. "Pollution taxes and standards: A continuum of quasi-optimal solutions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 1-17, March.
    4. Barnett, A H, 1980. "The Pigouvian Tax Rule under Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 1037-1041, December.
    5. Schulze, William & d'Arge, Ralph C, 1974. "The Coase Proposition, Information Constraints, and Long-Run Equilibrium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(4), pages 763-772, September.
    6. Cropper, M L, 1981. "Measuring the Benefits from Reduced Morbidity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 235-240, May.
    7. Buchanan, James M, 1969. "External Diseconomies, Corrective Taxes, and Market Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 174-177, 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. Aaron Hatcher, 2007. "Firm behaviour under pollution ratio standards with non-compliance," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 89-98, September.

    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. Marcel Boyer & Jean-Jacques Laffont, 1996. "Toward a Political Theory of Environmental Policy," CIRANO Working Papers 96s-07, CIRANO.
    2. Lambert Schoonbeek & Frans Vries, 2009. "Environmental taxes and industry monopolization," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 94-106, August.
    3. 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.
    4. Rauscher, Michael, 2001. "International trade, foreign investment, and the environment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 29, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    5. Jon D. Harford & Gordon Karp, 1983. "The Effects and Efficiencies of Different Pollution Standards," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 79-89, Apr-Jun.
    6. Udo Ebert, 1998. "Relative standards: A positive and normative analysis," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 67(1), pages 17-38, February.
    7. Juan Carlos Bárcena‐Ruiz & María Begoña Garzón, 2022. "Environmental policy instruments and ownership of firms," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(4), pages 385-408, July.
    8. John R. Boyce & Gregory E. Goering, 1997. "Optimal Taxation of a Polluting Durable Goods Monopolist," Public Finance Review, , vol. 25(5), pages 522-541, September.
    9. Don Fullerton & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2002. "Environmental Controls, Scarcity Rents, and Pre-existing Distortions," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 26, pages 504-522, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Heider, Florian & Inderst, Roman, 2021. "A Corporate Finance Perspective on Environmental Policy," EconStor Preprints 253669, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    11. Qianqian Shao & Thorsten Janus & Maarten J. Punt & Justus Wesseler, 2018. "The Conservation Effects of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Biased Policymakers," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    12. Claudia Ranocchia & Luca Lambertini, 2021. "Porter Hypothesis vs Pollution Haven Hypothesis: Can There Be Environmental Policies Getting Two Eggs in One Basket?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(1), pages 177-199, January.
    13. Maia David & Bernard Sinclair-Desgagné, 2005. "Environmental Regulation and the Eco-Industry," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 141-155, September.
    14. Ángela García-Alaminos & Santiago J. Rubio, 2021. "Emission taxes and feed-in subsidies in the regulation of a polluting monopoly," SERIEs: Journal of the Spanish Economic Association, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 255-279, June.
    15. Dieter Schmidtchen & Jenny Helstroffer & Christian Koboldt, 2021. "Regulatory failure and the polluter pays principle: why regulatory impact assessment dominates the polluter pays principle," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 23(1), pages 109-144, January.
    16. Mahenc, Philippe & Podesta, Marion, 2012. "The monopolist is not the best environmentalist’s best friend: An example," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 379-382.
    17. Clemens Heuson, 2008. "Weitzman revisited: Emission standards vs. taxes with uncertain control costs and market power of polluting firms," Discussion Paper Series 299, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    18. Ngo Van Long & Antoine Soubeyran, 2001. "Emission Taxes and Standards for an Asymmetric Oligopoly," CIRANO Working Papers 2001s-07, CIRANO.
    19. Joanna Poyago-Thotoky, 2003. "Optimal Environmental Taxation, R&D Subsidization and the Role of Market Conduct," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 15-26, Spring.
    20. Hirose, Kosuke & Ishihara, Akifumi & Matsumura, Toshihiro, 2021. "Tax versus Regulations: Robustness to Polluter Lobbying Against Near-Zero Emission Targets," MPRA Paper 108380, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:pubfin:v:12:y:1984:i:2:p:183-195. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.