IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/pennzl/348.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Regulation and Capitalization of Environmental Amenities: Evidence from the Toxic Release Inventory in Massachusetts

Author

Listed:
  • Linda T.M. Bui
  • Christopher J. Mayer

Abstract

Environmental regulation in the United States has undergone a slow evolution from command and control strategies towards market-based regulations. One such innovation is the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), a regulation that requires polluting firms to publicly disclose information about their toxic emissions. The basic tenet of this regulation is that it corrects for informational asymmetries between polluters and households, allowing communities to pressure polluters to decrease their emissions. Policy-makers have judged the TRI a tremendous success, as national releases declined by 43% between 1988 and 1999. Yet many of the fundamental problems which are known to lead to the classic failure of the Coase theorem (such as high transaction costs and difficulties in organizing) cast doubt on the effectiveness of disclosure rules, alone, to lead to an efficient outcome in the case of pollution. We use an event study methodology with high-quality data on house prices and other local attributes to assess the extent to which the public values changes in toxic releases and thus the success of TRI. Our major findings include: (1) declines in toxic releases appear unrelated to any political economy variables that might lead to public activism; (2) initial information released under TRI had no significant effect on the distribution of house prices; and (3) house prices show no significant impact of declines in reported toxic releases over time. Standard errors are small enough that we can reject the hypothesis that large declines in toxic releases lead to more than a 0.5% increase in house prices. These results also hold when we control for differences in the availability of information on TRI and the possible effect of expectations. Our findings cast doubt on the ability of the public to process complex information on hazardous emissions and support the Coase theorem in that right-to-know laws such as TRI may not be the most effective form of environmental regulation. © 200
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Linda T.M. Bui & Christopher J. Mayer, "undated". "Regulation and Capitalization of Environmental Amenities: Evidence from the Toxic Release Inventory in Massachusetts," Zell/Lurie Center Working Papers 348, Wharton School Samuel Zell and Robert Lurie Real Estate Center, University of Pennsylvania.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:pennzl:348
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://realestate.wharton.upenn.edu/papers/full/348.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Case, Karl E. & Mayer, Christopher J., 1996. "Housing price dynamics within a metropolitan area," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3-4), pages 387-407, June.
    2. Robert J. Shiller, 1991. "Arithmetic Repeat Sales Price Estimators," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 971, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    3. Freeman, A Myrick, III, 1971. "Air Pollution and Property Values: A Methodological Comment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 53(4), pages 415-416, November.
    4. Greenberg, M & Hughes, J, 1992. "The Impact of Hazardous Waste Superfund Sites on the Value of Houses Sold in New Jersey," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 26(2), pages 147-153, June.
    5. Kenneth Y. Chay & Michael Greenstone, 2005. "Does Air Quality Matter? Evidence from the Housing Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(2), pages 376-424, April.
    6. Small, Kenneth A, 1975. "Air Pollution and Property Values: Further Comment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 57(1), pages 105-107, February.
    7. Karl E. Case & Robert J. Shiller, 1987. "Prices of single-family homes since 1970: new indexes for four cities," New England Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, issue Sep, pages 45-56.
    8. Epple, Dennis, 1987. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Estimating Demand and Supply Functions for Differentiated Products," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(1), pages 59-80, February.
    9. Hamilton James T., 1995. "Pollution as News: Media and Stock Market Reactions to the Toxics Release Inventory Data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 98-113, January.
    10. Polinsky, A Mitchell & Shavell, Steven, 1975. "The Air Pollution and Property Value Debate," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 57(1), pages 100-104, February.
    11. Harrison, David, Jr & Rubinfeld, Daniel L, 1978. "The Air Pollution and Property Value Debate: Some Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 60(4), pages 635-638, November.
    12. Kiel Katherine A. & McClain Katherine T., 1995. "House Prices during Siting Decision Stages: The Case of an Incinerator from Rumor through Operation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 241-255, March.
    13. Konar, Shameek & Cohen, Mark A., 1997. "Information As Regulation: The Effect of Community Right to Know Laws on Toxic Emissions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 109-124, January.
    14. Kohlhase, Janet E., 1991. "The impact of toxic waste sites on housing values," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-26, July.
    15. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    16. Palmquist, Raymond B., 1982. "Measuring environmental effects on property values without hedonic regressions," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 333-347, May.
    17. Freeman, A Myrick, III, 1974. "Air Pollution and Property Values: A Further Comment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 56(4), pages 554-556, November.
    18. Mitchell Polinsky, A. & Shavell, Steven, 1976. "Amenities and property values in a model of an urban area," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1-2), pages 119-129.
    19. Gyourko, Joseph & Kahn, Matthew & Tracy, Joseph, 1999. "Quality of life and environmental comparisons," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: P. C. Cheshire & E. S. Mills (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 37, pages 1413-1454, Elsevier.
    20. Bradbury, Katharine L. & Mayer, Christopher J. & Case, Karl E., 2001. "Property tax limits, local fiscal behavior, and property values: evidence from Massachusetts under Proposition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 287-311, May.
    21. Smith, V Kerry & Huang, Ju-Chin, 1995. "Can Markets Value Air Quality? A Meta-analysis of Hedonic Property Value Models," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(1), pages 209-227, February.
    22. Mendelsohn, Robert & Hellerstein, Daniel & Huguenin, Michael & Unsworth, Robert & Brazee, Richard, 1992. "Measuring hazardous waste damages with panel models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 259-271, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Katherine Kiel, 2006. "Environmental Contamination and House Values," Working Papers 0601, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    2. Palmquist, Raymond B., 2006. "Property Value Models," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 16, pages 763-819, Elsevier.
    3. Lucija Muehlenbachs & Elisheba Spiller & Christopher Timmins, 2015. "The Housing Market Impacts of Shale Gas Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(12), pages 3633-3659, December.
    4. Kenneth Y. Chay & Michael Greenstone, 2005. "Does Air Quality Matter? Evidence from the Housing Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 113(2), pages 376-424, April.
    5. Victor Ginsburgh & Jianping Mei & Michael Moses, 2006. "On the computation of art indices in art," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/7290, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    6. Rose, Steven K., 1999. "Non-Market Valuation Techniques: The State of the Art," Working Papers 127688, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    7. Gonzalez, Fidel & Leipnik, Mark & Mazumder, Diya, 2013. "How much are urban residents in Mexico willing to pay for cleaner air?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(3), pages 354-379, June.
    8. Hilber, Christian A.L. & Mayer, Christopher, 2009. "Why do households without children support local public schools? Linking house price capitalization to school spending," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 74-90, January.
    9. Leggett, Christopher G. & Bockstael, Nancy E., 2000. "Evidence of the Effects of Water Quality on Residential Land Prices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 121-144, March.
    10. Christian A. L. Hilber & Christopher J. Mayer, 2004. "Why Do Households Without Children Support Local Public Schools?," NBER Working Papers 10804, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Kuminoff, Nicolai V. & Parmeter, Christopher F. & Pope, Jaren C., 2010. "Which hedonic models can we trust to recover the marginal willingness to pay for environmental amenities?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 145-160, November.
    12. John Braden & Xia Feng & DooHwan Won, 2011. "Waste Sites and Property Values: A Meta-Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 175-201, October.
    13. Nicolai V. Kuminoff & V. Kerry Smith & Christopher Timmins, 2010. "The New Economics of Equilibrium Sorting and its Transformational Role for Policy Evaluation," NBER Working Papers 16349, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Hanna, Brid Gleeson, 2007. "House values, incomes, and industrial pollution," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 100-112, July.
    15. Nathaly M. Rivera, 2020. "Is Mining an Environmental Disamenity? Evidence from Resource Extraction Site Openings," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(3), pages 485-528, March.
    16. Kono, Tatsuhito & Sega, Kousuke & Seya, Hajime, 2020. "Estimating the willingness to pay for urban esthetic projects using an inter-temporal equilibrium: a difference-in-differences hedonic approach," MPRA Paper 102064, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Redfearn, Christian L., 2009. "How informative are average effects? Hedonic regression and amenity capitalization in complex urban housing markets," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 297-306, May.
    18. Farber, Stephen, 1998. "Undesirable facilities and property values: a summary of empirical studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-14, January.
    19. Koen van Ruijven & Joep Tijm, 2022. "Do people value environmental goods? Evidence from the Netherlands," CPB Discussion Paper 438, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    20. David M. Brasington & Diane Hite, 2005. "Demand for Environmental Quality: A Spatial Hedonic Approach," Departmental Working Papers 2005-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling

    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:wop:pennzl:348. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/szupaus.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.