IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/pugtwp/333461.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Modeling Development Policies with Multiple Objectives

Author

Listed:
  • Martin, Will
  • Ivanic, Maros
  • Mamun, Abdullah

Abstract

In recent years, policymakers have become more insistent in seeking advice on policies targeting multiple objectives in addition to the traditional economists’ concerns for economic efficiency and equity. Dealing with multiple goals in a serious manner is quite challenging given that it generally requires roughly as many instruments as goals, each instrument typically affects multiple goals, and the effects of instruments on goals are typically non-linear. Economists have adapted to the need to incorporate multiple goals using simple devices such as radar diagrams to highlight the local impacts of individual instruments on all goals. While useful in understanding these differential impacts, these approaches do not take us far in terms of designing policy packages needed to best achieve multiple goals. This paper proposes using programming approaches based on quantitative models to design policy packages for multiple goals. Two illustrative applications are provided—one to the setting of carbon tax rates for agricultural commodities and one to the allocation of R&D resources across agricultural activities in Ethiopia.

Suggested Citation

  • Martin, Will & Ivanic, Maros & Mamun, Abdullah, 2022. "Modeling Development Policies with Multiple Objectives," Conference papers 333461, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:pugtwp:333461
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/333461/files/11077.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rausser, Gordon C & Freebairn, John W, 1974. "Estimation of Policy Preference Functions: An Application to U.S. Beef Import Quotas," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 56(4), pages 437-449, November.
    2. Thurlow, James & Randriamamonjy, Josee R & Benson, Todd, 2018. "Identifying Priority Value Chains in Tanzania," Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security Policy Research Papers 279854, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics, Feed the Future Innovation Lab for Food Security (FSP).
    3. Robert A. Mundell, 1960. "The Monetary Dynamics of International Adjustment under Fixed and Flexible Exchange Rates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 74(2), pages 227-257.
    4. Harberger, Arnold C, 1978. "On the Use of Distributional Weights in Social Cost-Benefit Analysis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 86(2), pages 87-120, April.
    5. Mark Horridge & Michael Jerie & Dean Mustakinov & Florian Schiffmann, 2019. "GEMPACK manual," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers gpman, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    6. Hendren, Nathaniel, 2020. "Measuring economic efficiency using inverse-optimum weights," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    7. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Loomis, John B., 2011. "Incorporating Distributional Issues into Benefit Cost Analysis: Why, How, and Two Empirical Examples Using Non-market Valuation," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 1-24, January.
    9. Harberger, Arnold C, 1971. "Three Basic Postulates for Applied Welfare Economics: An Interpretive Essay," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 785-797, September.
    10. Giovanni Maggi & Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 1999. "Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1135-1155, December.
    11. Steve Newbold & Charles Griffiths & Christopher C. Moore & Ann Wolverton & Elizabeth Kopits, 2010. "The "Social Cost of Carbon" Made Simple," NCEE Working Paper Series 201007, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Aug 2010.
    12. David Laborde & Abdullah Mamun & Will Martin & Valeria Piñeiro & Rob Vos, 2021. "Agricultural subsidies and global greenhouse gas emissions," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-9, December.
    13. Hoel, Michael, 1996. "Should a carbon tax be differentiated across sectors?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 17-32, January.
    14. Ben S. Bernanke & Frederic S. Mishkin, 1997. "Inflation Targeting: A New Framework for Monetary Policy?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(2), pages 97-116, Spring.
    15. Loomis, John B., 2011. "Incorporating Distributional Issues into Benefit Cost Analysis: Why, How, and Two Empirical Examples Using Non-market Valuation," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 1-24, January.
    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. Anderson, Kym, 2022. "Trade-related food policies in a more volatile climate and trade environment," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Martin, Will, 2021. "Tools for measuring the full impacts of agricultural interventions," IFPRI-MCC technical papers 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    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. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.
    2. Martin, Will, 2021. "Tools for measuring the full impacts of agricultural interventions," IFPRI-MCC technical papers 2, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Gillespie Rob & Kragt Marit E., 2012. "Accounting for Nonmarket Impacts in a Benefit-Cost Analysis of Underground Coal Mining in New South Wales, Australia," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-29, May.
    4. Håkansson, Cecilia & Östberg, Katarina & Bostedt, Göran, 2012. "Estimating Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy in Swedish Coastal Environments – A Walk along different Socio-economic Dimensions," CERE Working Papers 2012:18, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    5. Lisa A. Robinson & James K. Hammitt, 2013. "Behavioral economics and the conduct of benefit–cost analysis: towards principles and standards," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 10, pages 317-363, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Cecilia Håkansson & Katarina Östberg & Göran Bostedt, 2016. "Estimating distributional effects of environmental policy in Swedish coastal environments - a walk along different dimensions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 49-78, March.
    7. Karoly Lynn A., 2012. "Toward Standardization of Benefit-Cost Analysis of Early Childhood Interventions," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 1-45, January.
    8. Morello, Thiago & Anderson, Liana & Silva, Sonaira, 2022. "Innovative fire policy in the Amazon: A statistical Hicks-Kaldor analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    9. Aboal, Diego & Perera, Marcelo & Tacsir, Ezequiel & Vairo, Maren, 2018. "A guide for the evaluation of programs of human capital training for science, technology and innovation," MERIT Working Papers 2018-031, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    10. Udo Ebert, 1986. "Equity and distribution in cost-benefit analysis," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 67-78, December.
    11. Heckman, James, 2001. "Accounting for Heterogeneity, Diversity and General Equilibrium in Evaluating Social Programmes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(475), pages 654-699, November.
    12. John Piggott, 1982. "The Social Marginal Valuation of Income: Australian Estimates from Government Behaviour," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 58(1), pages 92-99, March.
    13. Udo Ebert, 2007. "Redistributional Preference in Environmental Policy," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 63(4), pages 548-562, December.
    14. Mohammad Ismail & Abukar Warsame & Mats Wilhelmsson, 2022. "Who Owns the City, and Why Should We Care?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, March.
    15. Stoeckl, Natalie & Hicks, Christina & Farr, Marina & Grainger, Daniel & Esparon, Michelle & Thomas, Joseph & Larson, Silva, 2018. "The Crowding Out of Complex Social Goods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 65-72.
    16. Cassing, James H. & Long, Ngo Van, 2021. "Trade in trash: A political economy approach," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    17. Bromley, Daniel W., 1989. "The Poverty of Efficiency: Searching for A Theory of Policy Analysis," Staff Papers 200477, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    18. Francois, Joseph & Nelson, Douglas R., 2014. "Political support for trade policy in the European Union," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 243-253.
    19. Nerhagen, Lena & Pyddoke , Roger & Jussila Hammes, Johanna, 2014. "Response to a social dilemma : an analysis of the choice between an economic and an environmental optimum in a policy making context," Working papers in Transport Economics 2014:8, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).
    20. Kuchler, Fred & Golan, Elise H., 1999. "Assigning Values To Life: Comparing Methods For Valuing Health Risks," Agricultural Economic Reports 34037, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:pugtwp:333461. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gtpurus.html .

    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.