This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Welfare Impacts of Alternative Public Policies for Environmental Protection in Agriculture in an Open Economy: A General Equilibrium Framework

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Taheripour, Farzad
Khanna, Madhu
Nelson, Charles
Abstract

This paper uses stylized analytical and numerical general equilibrium models to evaluate the welfare impacts of alternative policies for reducing nitrogen run-off from agricultural production in an open economy while recognizing the presence of distortionary agricultural support subsidies and factor income taxes. The alternative policies examined here are a nitrogen run-off tax, a nitrogen run-off reduction subsidy, a tax on the production of agricultural goods, a "two-part" instrument - a combination of the second and the third policies, and land retirement. The paper uses an analytical model to express the welfare impacts of each policy into several components and compares these components across alternative policies. From the analytical model the paper concludes that all alternative policies, except land retirement, may generate a double dividend because they reduce the provision of distortionary agricultural support subsidies and because a part of the burden of these policies can be passed on to foreign consumers of agricultural products through the world market. The numerical results indicate that all policies, except for land retirement, generate some welfare gains at low levels of nitrogen reduction targets in the first and second best settings when nitrogen and other inputs are substitutable. Gains are higher in the second best setting. As the level of nitrogen reduction increases, all policies become costly and they impose net welfare costs. These costs are higher in the second best setting. The numerical results also indicate that the relative efficiency of alternative policies is sensitive to the level of nitrogen reduction target.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. 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.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/19317
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association) in its series 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI with number 19317.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea05:19317

Contact details of provider:
Postal: 555 East Wells Street, Suite 1100, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: (414) 918-3190
Fax: (414) 276-3349
Email:
Web page: http://www.aaea.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (AgEcon Search).

Related research
Keywords: Environmental Economics and Policy;

References listed on IDEAS
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.:

  1. Terkla, David, 1984. "The efficiency value of effluent tax revenues," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 107-123, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Don Fullerton & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 1997. "Environmental Taxes and the Double-Dividend Hypothesis: Did You Really Expect Something for Nothing?," NBER Working Papers 6199, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Lichtenberg, Erik & Zilberman, David, 1986. "The Welfare Economics of Price Supports in U.S. Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1135-41, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Young, C Edwin & Westcott, Paul C, 2000. " How Decoupled Is U.S. Agricultural Support for Major Crops?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, American Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 82(3), pages 762-67, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Daniel A. Sumner, 2003. "Implications of the US Farm Bill of 2002 for agricultural trade and trade negotiations," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society and Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd., vol. 47(1), pages 99-122, 03. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Goulder, Lawrence H. & Parry, Ian W. H. & Williams III, Roberton C. & Burtraw, Dallas, 1999. "The cost-effectiveness of alternative instruments for environmental protection in a second-best setting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 329-360, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W. H. Parry & Dallas Burtraw, 1996. "Revenue-Raising vs. Other Approaches to Environmental Protection: The Critical Significance of Pre-Existing Tax Distortions," NBER Working Papers 5641, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Abler, David G & Shortle, James S, 1992. "Environmental and Farm Commodity Policy Linkages in the U.S. and the EC," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press for the Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 19(2), pages 197-217.
  9. Don Fullerton & Andrew Leicester & Stephen Smith, 2008. "Environmental Taxes," NBER Working Papers 14197, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Helmuth Cremer & Firouz Gahvari & Norbert Ladoux, 2001. "Second-Best Pollution Taxes and the Structure of Preferences," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 258-280, October.
  11. Shah, Anwar & Larsen, Bjorn, 1992. "Carbon taxes, the greenhouse effect, and developing countries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 957, The World Bank. [Downloadable!]
  12. Parry, Ian & Goulder, Lawrence & Williams III, Roberton, 1997. "When Can Carbon Abatement Policies Increase Welfare? The Fundamental Role of Distorted Factor Markets," Discussion Papers dp-97-18-rev, Resources For the Future. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  13. Kawagoe, Toshihiko & Otsuka, Keijiro & Hayami, Yujiro, 1986. "Induced Bias of Technical Change in Agriculture: The United States and Japan, 1880-1980," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 523-44, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  14. Stef Proost & Denise Van Regemorter, 2003. "Climate change policy in European countries and its effects on industry," Energy, Transport and Environment Working Papers Series ete0305, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centrum voor Economische Studiën, Energy, Transport and Environment. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  15. Binswanger, Hans P, 1974. "The Measurement of Technical Change Biases with Many Factors of Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 64(6), pages 964-76, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. de Bovenberg, A Lans & Mooij, Ruud A, 1994. "Environmental Levies and Distortionary Taxation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1085-89, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. Westcott, Paul C. & Young, C. Edwin & Price, J. Michael, 2002. "The 2002 Farm Act: Provisions And Implications For Commodity Markets," Agricultural Information Bulletins 33745, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. [Downloadable!]
  18. Wu, JunJie & Babcock, Bruce A., 1999. "The Relative Efficiency of Voluntary vs Mandatory Environmental Regulations," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 158-175, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  19. Ronnie Schöb, 1997. "Environmental Taxes and Pre-Existing Distortions: The Normalization Trap," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 167-176, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  20. Pearce, David W, 1991. "The Role of Carbon Taxes in Adjusting to Global Warming," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(407), pages 938-48, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  21. Metcalf, Gilbert E., 2003. "Environmental levies and distortionary taxation:: Pigou, taxation and pollution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 313-322, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  22. Parry, Ian W. H., 1997. "Environmental taxes and quotas in the presence of distorting taxes in factor markets," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 203-220, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  23. Ballard, Charles L. & Medema, Steven G., 1993. "The marginal efficiency effects of taxes and subsidies in the presence of externalities : A computational general equilibrium approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 199-216, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  24. Edward J. Balistreri & Christine A. McDaniel & Eina Vivian Wong, 2003. "An Estimation of U.S. Industry-Level Capital-Labor Substitution," Computational Economics 0303001, EconWPA. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? Apart from a small start up grant in the 1990's, RePEc has received no funding and lives on the help of volunteers.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-26.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.