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! ]

Controlling Agricultural Emissions of Nitrates: Regulations versus Taxes

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Lally, Breda
Riordan, Brendan
van Rensburg, Tom

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Two policy instruments, input taxes and regulations, can be used to deal with nitrate pollution. However, in practice command and control (CAC) measures such as input regulations and management practices, as outlined in Action Programmes under the EU Nitrates Directive, rather than economic instruments, are commonly used to deal with nitrate pollution from agricultural sources. Action Programmes are to meant to ensure that the applications of nitrogen to farmland are within limits calculated to avoid a level of nitrate emissions to water supplies that would put them above the concentration limit of 50mg/litre specified in the Directive. The premise of the Action Programmes is that farmers should take all reasonable steps to prevent or minimise the application to land of fertilisers in excess of crop requirements. To this end the Irish Action Programme specifies that the amount of livestock manure applied in any year to land on a holding, together with that deposited to land by livestock, cannot exceed an amount containing 170 kg nitrogen per hectare (ha) and also sets limits on the application of inorganic (manufactured) nitrogen. However, the objective of the Nitrates Directive, at least in terms of organic and inorganic nitrogen application rates, could theoretically be achieved by imposing a tax on nitrogen inputs. This paper tests the hypotheses that the objectives of the Nitrates Directive, in terms of organic and inorganic N application rates, would be more effectively and more equitably achieved by regulation, than by a tax. The results of the analysis indicate that this is the case.

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/7981
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Agricultural Economics Society in its series 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University with number 7981.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aes007:7981

Contact details of provider:
Email:
Web page: http://www.aes.ac.uk/
More information through EDIRC

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

Related research
Keywords: Agricultural and Food Policy; Environmental Economics and Policy;

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. Berentsen, P. B. M. & Giesen, G. W. J., 1995. "An environmental-economic model at farm level to analyse institutional and technical change in dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 153-175. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? IDEAS indexes over 800000 items of research in Economics alone.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-11.


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.