Biofuel Subsidies and International Trade
AbstractThis paper explores optimal biofuel subsidization in the context of a general equilibrium trade model. The focus is on biofuels such as corn-based ethanol, which diverts corn from use as food to use as an intermediate input in energy production. In the small-country case, when a Pigouvian tax on conventional fuels such as crude is in place, the optimal biofuel subsidy is zero. When the tax on crude is not available as a policy option, however, a second-best biofuel subsidy (or tax) is optimal. In the large-country case, a biofuel subsidy spurs global demand for food and confers a terms-of-trade benefit to the food-exporting nation. In the absence of beggar-thy-neighbor trade policy tools due to WTO rules, the twin objectives of pollution reduction and term-of-trade improvement justify a combination of crude tax and biofuel subsidy for the food exporter. If the food importer also uses a biofuel subsidy (or tax), we have a Johnson (1953) type Nash equilibrium augmented by pollution considerations. If biofuel subsidies reduce global crude use, then in a Nash equilibrium, the food-exporting nation must use a subsidy, while a food-importing nation will impose a subsidy if and only if the pollution-reduction effect dominates the terms-of-trade effect.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 30760.
Date of creation: Oct 2010
Date of revision:
Optimal Biofuel Subsidy; Pigouvian Tax; Terms-of-Trade; Pollution Externality;
Other versions of this item:
- O1 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development
- H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
- F1 - International Economics - - Trade
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-AGR-2011-05-14 (Agricultural Economics)
- NEP-ALL-2011-05-14 (All new papers)
- NEP-ENE-2011-05-14 (Energy Economics)
- NEP-ENV-2011-05-14 (Environmental Economics)
- NEP-INT-2011-05-14 (International Trade)
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.:
- Rauscher, Michael, 1997. "International Trade, Factor Movements, and the Environment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198290506.
- Lapan, Harvey E. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2009. "Biofuels Policies and Welfare: Is the Stick of Mandates Better Than the Carrot of Subsidies?," Staff General Research Papers 13076, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
- Marjit, Sugata & Kar, Saibal & Beladi, Hamid, 2007. "Protectionary bias in agriculture: A pure economic argument," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 160-164, June.
- Vedenov, Dmitry & Wetzstein, Michael, 2008. "Toward an optimal U.S. ethanol fuel subsidy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 2073-2090, September.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2005.
"Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality,"
The Review of Economics and Statistics,
MIT Press, vol. 87(1), pages 85-91, February.
- Jeffrey A. Frankel & Andrew K. Rose, 2002. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," NBER Working Papers 9201, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Frankel, Jeffrey & Rose, Andrew K., 2003. "Is Trade Good or Bad for the Environment? Sorting Out the Causality," Working Paper Series rwp03-038, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
- Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2003.
"Trade, Growth and the Environment,"
NBER Working Papers
9823, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Lopez Ramon, 1994. "The Environment as a Factor of Production: The Effects of Economic Growth and Trade Liberalization," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 163-184, September.
- Werner Antweiler & Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2001.
"Is Free Trade Good for the Environment?,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 877-908, September.
- Jen Baggs, 2009. "International Trade in Hazardous Waste," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(1), pages 1-16, 02.
- Harry de Gorter & David R. Just, 2010. "The Social Costs and Benefits of Biofuels: The Intersection of Environmental, Energy and Agricultural Policy," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 32(1), pages 4-32.
- Fredriksson, Per G., 1997. "The Political Economy of Pollution Taxes in a Small Open Economy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 44-58, May.
- Oecd, 2006. "Agricultural Market Impacts of Future Growth in the Production of Biofuels," OECD Papers, OECD Publishing, vol. 6(1), pages 1-57.
- Copeland, Brian R & Taylor, M Scott, 1994. "North-South Trade and the Environment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 109(3), pages 755-87, August.
Blog mentionsAs found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
- Does it make sense to subsidize biofuels?
by Economic Logician in Economic Logic on 2011-06-07 14:52:00
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.