IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/jecper/v16y2002i1p125-146.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Policy Since Earth Day I: What Have We Gained?

Author

Listed:
  • A. Myrick Freeman III

Abstract

I review the data on costs and benefits of the major environmental laws passed during the 1970s. The winners in terms of benefit-cost analysis include: getting lead out of gasoline; controlling particulate air pollution; reducing the concentration of lead in drinking water; and the cleanup of hazardous waste sites with the lowest cost per cancer case avoided under Superfund The losers include: mobile source air pollution control; water pollution control; and many of the regulations and cleanup decisions taken under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and Superfund.

Suggested Citation

  • A. Myrick Freeman III, 2002. "Environmental Policy Since Earth Day I: What Have We Gained?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 125-146, Winter.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:16:y:2002:i:1:p:125-146
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/0895330027148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/0895330027148
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Karen Palmer & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 3, pages 53-66, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Winston Harrington & Richard D. Morgenstern & Peter Nelson, 2000. "On the accuracy of regulatory cost estimates," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 297-322.
    3. James T. Hamilton & W. Kip Viscusi, 1999. "Calculating Risks?: The Spatial and Political Dimensions of Hazardous Waste Policy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262082780, December.
    4. Van Houtven, George & Cropper, Maureen L., 1996. "When is a Life Too Costly to Save? The Evidence from U.S. Environmental Regulations," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 348-368, May.
    5. Viscusi, W Kip, 1993. "The Value of Risks to Life and Health," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1912-1946, December.
    6. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    7. Revesz, Richard L. & Stavins, Robert N., 2007. "Environmental Law," Handbook of Law and Economics, in: A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell (ed.), Handbook of Law and Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 499-589, Elsevier.
    8. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    9. Stavins, Robert, 1998. "Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-98-26, Resources for the Future.
    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. Wayne B. Gray, 2015. "Environmental regulations and business decisions," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 187-187, September.
    2. Muller, Nicholas Z. & Mendelsohn, Robert, 2007. "Measuring the damages of air pollution in the United States," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 1-14, July.
    3. Lopamudra Chakraborti & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2012. "Does Ambient Water Quality Affect the Stringency of Regulations? Plant-Level Evidence of the Clean Water Act," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(3), pages 518-535.
    4. Dominique Bureau, 2005. "Lévaluation des réglementations : transports et environnement," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 167(1), pages 49-65.
    5. Caplan, Arthur J. & Gilbert, John & Chatterjee, Devalina, 2013. "Using Field-level Characteristics as Proxy Measures to Test for the Presence of Economies of Scale in Nonpoint Pollution Control," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(2), pages 365-386, August.
    6. Fullerton, Don & Metcalf, Gilbert E., 2002. "Cap and trade policies in the presence of monopoly and distortionary taxation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 327-347, November.
    7. Arthur J. Caplan & Yuya Sasaki, 2009. "Sharing the Surplus Generated from Noncooperative Cost Sharing: The Case of Nonpoint Associations and Water Quality Trading," Working Papers 2009-09, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
    8. Graves Philip E, 2009. "A Note on the Valuation of Collective Goods: Overlooked Input Market Free Riding for Non-Individually Incrementable Goods," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-20, February.
    9. Arthur J. Caplan & John Gilbert & Devalina Chatterjee, 2009. "Parametric and Non-Parametric Tests for Economies-of-Scale in Nonpoint Pollution Control: The Case of Bear River Basin, Utah," Working Papers 2009-01, Utah State University, Department of Economics, revised 26 May 2009.
    10. Chakraborti, Lopamudra, 2016. "Do plants’ emissions respond to ambient environmental quality? Evidence from the clean water act," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 55-69.
    11. Thomas P. Lyon & John W. Maxwell, 2014. "Self-Regulation and Regulatory Flexibility: Why Firms May be Reluctant to Signal Green," Working Papers 2014-11, Indiana University, Kelley School of Business, Department of Business Economics and Public Policy.
    12. Nicholas Z. Muller & Robert Mendelsohn & William Nordhaus, 2011. "Environmental Accounting for Pollution in the United States Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(5), pages 1649-1675, August.
    13. Caplan, Arthur J. & Sasaki, Yuya, 2014. "Benchmarking an optimal pattern of pollution trading: The case of Cub River, Utah," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 502-510.
    14. Moses Nyakuwanika & Huibrecht Margaretha van der Poll & John Andrew van der Poll, 2021. "A Conceptual Framework for Greener Goldmining through Environmental Management Accounting Practices (EMAPs): The Case of Zimbabwe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-26, September.
    15. Xu, Yan & Dietzenbacher, Erik & Los, Bart, 2020. "International trade and air pollution damages in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    16. Arthur J. Caplan & Yuya Sasaki, 2009. "Matching Traders in a Pollution Market: The Case of Cub River, Utah," Working Papers 2009-08, Utah State University, Department of Economics.
    17. John Loomis & Bryon Allen, 2008. "Using Non Market Valuation to Inform the Choice Between Permits and Fees in Environmental Regulation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 329-337, July.
    18. David Anthoff & Robert Hahn, 2010. "Government failure and market failure: on the inefficiency of environmental and energy policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 26(2), pages 197-224, Summer.

    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. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    2. W. Kip Viscusi, 1996. "Economic Foundations of the Current Regulatory Reform Efforts," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(3), pages 119-134, Summer.
    3. Stavins, Robert, 2000. "Economic Analysis of Global Climate Change Policy: A Primer," Working Paper Series rwp00-003, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    4. Fletcher, Jerald, 1999. "Watershed Economics: Resource Valuation Issues," Western Region Archives 321705, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    5. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann, & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert C. Mitchell & Stanley Presser & Paul A. Rudd & V. Kerry Smith & Michael Conaway & Kerry Martin, 1997. "Temporal Reliability of Estimates from Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 151-163.
    6. 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.
    7. Lori D. Snyder & Robert N. Stavins & Alexander F. Wagner, 2003. "Private Options to Use Public Goods Exploiting Revealed Preferences to Estimate Environmental Benefits," Working Papers 2003.49, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert & Cavanagh, Sheila, 2001. "National Environmental Policy During the Clinton Years," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-38, Resources for the Future.
    9. Winston Harrington & Richard D. Morgenstern & Peter Nelson, 2000. "On the accuracy of regulatory cost estimates," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 297-322.
    10. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panel's No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(2), pages 335-338, May.
    11. John C. Whitehead & Timothy C. Haab & Ju‐Chin Huang, 1998. "Part‐Whole Bias in Contingent Valuation: Will Scope Effects Be Detected with Inexpensive Survey Methods?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 160-168, July.
    12. Stefan Ambec & Paul Lanoie, 2007. "When and Why Does It Pay To Be Green?," CIRANO Working Papers 2007s-20, CIRANO.
    13. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    14. Roach, Brian & Wade, William W., 2006. "Policy evaluation of natural resource injuries using habitat equivalency analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 421-433, June.
    15. Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael & Kopp, Raymond J. & Krosnick, Jon A. & Mitchell, Robert C. & Presser, Stanley & Ruud, Paul A. & Smith, V. Kerry & Conaway, Michael & Martin, Kerry, 1996. "Was the NOAA Panel Correct about Contingent Valuation?," Discussion Papers 10503, Resources for the Future.
    16. Everett, Tim & Ishwaran, Mallika & Ansaloni, Gian Paolo & Rubin, Alex, 2010. "Economic growth and the environment," MPRA Paper 23585, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    18. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    19. Ahuja, Vinod & McConnell, Kenneth E. & Umali-Deininger, Dina & de Haan, Cornelis, 2003. "Are the Poor Willing to Pay for Livestock Services? Evidence from Rural India," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 58(1), March.
    20. Grüner, Hans Peter & Muller, Daniel, 2016. "Measuring political information rents: Evidence from the European agricultural reform," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 107-126.

    More about this item

    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:aea:jecper:v:16:y:2002:i:1:p:125-146. 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: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.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.