IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mib/wpaper/471.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Differentiated goods in a dynamic Cournot duopoly with emission charges on outputs

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmad Naimzada
  • Marina Pireddu

Abstract

We extend the dynamic Cournot duopoly framework with emission charges on outputs by Mamada and Perrings (2020), which encompassed homogeneous products in its original formulation, to the more general case of differentiated goods, in order to highlight the richness in its static and dynamic outcomes. In the model each firm is taxed proportionally to its own emission only and charge functions are quadratic. Moreover, due to an adjustment capacity constraint, firms partially modify their output level toward the best response. Like it happened in Mamada and Perrings (2020), the only model steady state coincides with the Nash equilibrium. We find that the full efficacy of the environmental policy, which applies to an equilibrium that is globally asymptotically stable anytime it is admissible, is achieved in the case of independent goods, as well as with a low interdependence degree between goods in absolute value, independently of being substitutes or complements. On the other hand, when goods are substitutes and their interdependence degree is high, the considered environmental policy is still able to reduce pollution at the equilibrium, but the latter is stable just when the policy intensity degree is high enough. When instead goods are complements and their interdependence degree is high in absolute value, the considered environmental policy produces detrimental effects on the pollution level and the unique equilibrium is always unstable, when admissible. This highlights that, from a static viewpoint, even in the absence of free riding possibilities, the choice of the mechanism to implement has to be carefully pondered, according to the features of the considered economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmad Naimzada & Marina Pireddu, 2021. "Differentiated goods in a dynamic Cournot duopoly with emission charges on outputs," Working Papers 471, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:mib:wpaper:471
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://repec.dems.unimib.it/repec/pdf/mibwpaper471.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mamada, Robert & Perrings, Charles, 2020. "The effect of emission charges on output and emissions in dynamic Cournot duopoly," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 370-380.
    2. Zeppini, Paolo, 2015. "A discrete choice model of transitions to sustainable technologies," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 187-203.
    3. Angelo Antoci & Simone Borghesi & Gianluca Iannucci & Paolo Russu, 2020. "Emission permits, innovation and sanction in an evolutionary game," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 37(2), pages 525-546, July.
    4. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    5. Bischi, Gian Italo & Naimzada, Ahmad K. & Sbragia, Lucia, 2007. "Oligopoly games with Local Monopolistic Approximation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 371-388, March.
    6. Akio Matsumoto & Ferenc Szidarovszky, 2021. "Controlling non-point source pollution in Cournot oligopolies with hyperbolic demand," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 1-15, February.
    7. Akio Matsumoto & Ferenc Szidarovszky, 2022. "N-firm oligopolies with pollution control and random profits," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 1017-1039, October.
    8. Huffaker, R. & Canavari, M. & Muñoz-Carpena, R., 2018. "Distinguishing between endogenous and exogenous price volatility in food security assessment: An empirical nonlinear dynamics approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 98-109.
    9. G.‐I. Bischi & M. Gallegati & A. Naimzada, 1999. "Symmetry‐breaking bifurcations and representativefirm in dynamic duopoly games," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 89(0), pages 252-271, January.
    10. Jordan F. Suter & Christian A. Vossler & Gregory L. Poe & Kathleen Segerson, 2008. "Experiments on Damage-Based Ambient Taxes for Nonpoint Source Polluters," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 86-102.
    11. Segerson, Kathleen, 1988. "Uncertainty and incentives for nonpoint pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 87-98, March.
    12. Suter, Jordan F. & Vossler, Christian A. & Poe, Gregory L. & Segerson, Kathleen, 2008. "AJAE Appendix: Experiments on Damage-Based Ambient Taxes for Nonpoint Source Polluters," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 1-14, February.
    13. Akio Matsumoto & Ferenc Szidarovszky & Masahiro Yabuta, 2018. "Environmental effects of ambient charge in cournot oligopoly," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 41-56, January.
    14. Arango, Santiago & Moxnes, Erling, 2012. "Commodity cycles, a function of market complexity? Extending the cobweb experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 321-334.
    15. Christophe Gouel, 2012. "Agricultural Price Instability: A Survey Of Competing Explanations And Remedies," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(1), pages 129-156, February.
    16. Chatrath, Arjun & Adrangi, Bahram & Dhanda, Kanwalroop Kathy, 2002. "Are commodity prices chaotic?," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 123-137, August.
    17. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Xepapadeas, Anastasios, 1995. " Environmental Policy under Oligopoly with Endogenous Market Structure," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(3), pages 411-420, September.
    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. Ahmad Naimzada & Marina Pireddu, 2023. "Dynamic approaches for the evaluation of the environmental policy efficacy in a nonlinear Cournot duopoly with differentiated goods and emission charges," Working Papers 517, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics.

    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. Ahmad Naimzada & Marina Pireddu, 2023. "Dynamic approaches for the evaluation of the environmental policy efficacy in a nonlinear Cournot duopoly with differentiated goods and emission charges," Working Papers 517, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics.
    2. Ahmad Naimzada & Marina Pireddu, 2021. "On the detrimental effects of concave emission charges in a dynamic Cournot duopoly model," Working Papers 466, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics.
    3. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    4. Hamet Sarr & Mohamed Ali Bchir & Francois Cochard & Anne Rozan, 2016. "Nonpoint source pollution: An experimental investigation of the Average Pigouvian Tax," Working Papers hal-01375078, HAL.
    5. Hamet SARR & Mohamed Ali BCHIR & François COCHARD & Anne ROZAN, 2016. "Nonpoint source pollution: An experimental investigation of the Average Pigouvian Tax," Working Papers 2016-05, CRESE.
    6. Fanti, Luciano & Gori, Luca & Sodini, Mauro, 2015. "Nonlinear dynamics in a Cournot duopoly with isoelastic demand," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 129-143.
    7. Marc Willinger & Nasreddine Ammar & Ahmed Ennasri, 2014. "Performance of the Ambient Tax: Does the Nature of the Damage Matter?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(3), pages 479-502, November.
    8. Banerjee, Simanti & Cason, Timothy N. & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2017. "Transaction costs, communication and spatial coordination in Payment for Ecosystem Services Schemes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 68-89.
    9. Akio Matsumoto & Ferenc Szidarovszky, 2022. "N-firm oligopolies with pollution control and random profits," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 1017-1039, October.
    10. Ohnishi, Kazuhiro, 2021. "The environmental effect of ambient charges in mixed triopoly with diverse firm objectives," MPRA Paper 108521, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Hans E. Andersen & Gite Blicher-Mathiasen & Wiktor Budziński & Katarina Elofsson & Jan Hagemejer & Berit Hasler & Christoph Humborg & James C. R. Smart & Erik Smedberg & Per Ståln, 2020. "Increasing the cost-effectiveness of water quality improvements through pollution abatement target-setting at different spatial scales," Working Papers 2020-02, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    12. Li, Tongzhe & Fooks, Jacob R. & Messer, Kent D. & Ferraro, Paul J., 2021. "A field experiment to estimate the effects of anchoring and framing on residents’ willingness to purchase water runoff management technologies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    13. Gaston Giordana & Marc Willinger, 2013. "Regulatory instruments for monitoring ambient pollution," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 7, pages 193-232, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Sheila M. Olmstead, 2010. "The Economics of Water Quality," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(1), pages 44-62, Winter.
    15. Wu, Shang & Palm-Forster, Leah H. & Messer, Kent D., 2021. "Impact of peer comparisons and firm heterogeneity on nonpoint source water pollution: An experimental study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    16. Suter, Jordan F. & Vossler, Christian A. & Poe, Gregory L., 2009. "Ambient-based pollution mechanisms: A comparison of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups of emitters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1883-1892, April.
    17. Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2011. "The Economics of Non-Point-Source Pollution," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 355-373, October.
    18. Ohnishi, Kazuhiro, 2021. "Pollution, partial privatization and the effect of ambient charges," MPRA Paper 109592, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 04 Sep 2021.
    19. Troy Tassier, 2013. "Handbook of Research on Complexity, by J. Barkley Rosser, Jr. and Edward Elgar," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 39(1), pages 132-133.
    20. Rodriguez, Luz A. & Pfaff, Alexander & Velez, Maria Alejandra, 2019. "Graduated stringency within collective incentives for group environmental compliance: Building coordination in field-lab experiments with artisanal gold miners in Colombia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    dynamic Cournot duopoly; differentiated products; emission charges; pollution control; comparative statics; stability analysis.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C62 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Existence and Stability Conditions of Equilibrium
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:mib:wpaper:471. 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: Matteo Pelagatti (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dpmibit.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.