IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/scandj/v120y2018i1p211-241.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Feasibility of the Double‐Dividend Hypothesis in a Democratic Economy

Author

Listed:
  • Yu‐Bong Lai

Abstract

The two dividends in the double‐dividend hypothesis are assumed to be independent. This assumption can be misleading when it comes to formulating policy. I construct a model where the pollution tax rate is voted for by heterogeneous people. In addition to the revenue‐recycling effect, the equilibrium pollution tax rate depends on two opposite forces: the tax‐cutting effect and the profit effect. The two forces show that an instrument that exploits a greater revenue‐recycling effect can cause a more severe environmental deterioration, thereby resulting in the infeasibility of the hypothesis. The introduction of the interdependence between the two dividends can also mean that non‐revenue‐raising instruments are more efficient than revenue‐raising instruments.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu‐Bong Lai, 2018. "The Feasibility of the Double‐Dividend Hypothesis in a Democratic Economy," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 211-241, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:scandj:v:120:y:2018:i:1:p:211-241
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/sjoe.12213
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bento, Antonio M. & Jacobsen, Mark, 2007. "Ricardian rents, environmental policy and the `double-dividend' hypothesis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 17-31, January.
    2. Hubert Kempf & Stéphane Rossignol, 2007. "Is Inequality Harmful For The Environment In A Growing Economy?," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 53-71, March.
    3. John A. List & Daniel M. Sturm, 2006. "How Elections Matter: Theory and Evidence from Environmental Policy," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(4), pages 1249-1281.
    4. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Dallas Burtraw, 1997. "Revenue-Raising versus Other Approaches to Environmental Protection: The Critical Significance of Preexisting Tax Distortions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(4), pages 708-731, Winter.
    5. Henrik Klinge Jacobsen & Katja Birr-Pedersen & Mette Wier, 2003. "Distributional Implications of Environmental Taxation in Denmark," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 24(4), pages 477-499, December.
    6. Jäntti, Markus & Pirttilä, Jukka & Selin, Håkan, 2015. "Estimating labour supply elasticities based on cross-country micro data: A bridge between micro and macro estimates?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 87-99.
    7. Goulder, Lawrence H., 2013. "Climate change policy's interactions with the tax system," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 3-11.
    8. Lee, Dwight R. & Misiolek, Walter S., 1986. "Substituting pollution taxation for general taxation: Some implications for efficiency in pollutions taxation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 338-347, December.
    9. Bovenberg, A. L. & van der Ploeg, F., 1994. "Environmental policy, public finance and the labour market in a second-best world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 349-390, November.
    10. Fullerton, Don & Metcalf, Gilbert E., 2001. "Environmental controls, scarcity rents, and pre-existing distortions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 249-267, May.
    11. Dewees, Donald N, 1983. "Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(1), pages 53-71, January.
    12. John Pezzey, 1992. "The Symmetry between Controlling Pollution by Price and Controlling It by Quantity," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 25(4), pages 983-991, November.
    13. Nelson, Erik & Uwasu, Michinori & Polasky, Stephen, 2007. "Voting on open space: What explains the appearance and support of municipal-level open space conservation referenda in the United States?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 580-593, May.
    14. Bergstrom, Ted C, 1979. " When Does Majority Rule Supply Public Goods Efficiently?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 81(2), pages 216-226.
    15. de Bovenberg, A Lans & Mooij, Ruud A, 1994. "Environmental Levies and Distortionary Taxation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1085-1089, September.
    16. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Powers, Shawn M., 2006. "Explaining the appearance and success of voter referenda for open-space conservation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 373-390, July.
    17. Kathryn Harrison, 2012. "A Tale of Two Taxes: The Fate of Environmental Tax Reform in Canada," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(3), pages 383-407, May.
    18. Hahn, Robert W, 1990. "The Political Economy of Environmental Regulation: Towards a Unifying Framework," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 21-47, April.
    19. Jacobs, Bas & de Mooij, Ruud A., 2015. "Pigou meets Mirrlees: On the irrelevance of tax distortions for the second-best Pigouvian tax," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 90-108.
    20. Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini, 1992. "The Politics of 1992: Fiscal Policy and European Integration," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(4), pages 689-701.
    21. A. Bovenberg, 1999. "Green Tax Reforms and the Double Dividend: an Updated Reader's Guide," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 6(3), pages 421-443, August.
    22. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    23. Clinch, J. Peter & Dunne, Louise & Dresner, Simon, 2006. "Environmental and wider implications of political impediments to environmental tax reform," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(8), pages 960-970, May.
    24. Wier, Mette & Birr-Pedersen, Katja & Jacobsen, Henrik Klinge & Klok, Jacob, 2005. "Are CO2 taxes regressive? Evidence from the Danish experience," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 239-251, January.
    25. Aidt, Toke S., 2010. "Green taxes: Refunding rules and lobbying," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 31-43, July.
    26. Hahn, Robert W & Stavins, Robert N, 1992. "Economic Incentives for Environmental Protection: Integrating Theory and Practice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 464-468, May.
    27. Kahn, Matthew E & Matsusaka, John G, 1997. "Demand for Environmental Goods: Evidence from Voting Patterns on California Initiatives," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(1), pages 137-173, April.
    28. Lawrence Goulder, 1995. "Environmental taxation and the double dividend: A reader's guide," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 2(2), pages 157-183, August.
    29. Deacon, Robert T & Shapiro, Perry, 1975. "Private Preference for Collective Goods Revealed Through Voting on Referenda," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 943-955, December.
    30. MacKenzie, Ian A. & Ohndorf, Markus, 2012. "Cap-and-trade, taxes, and distributional conflict," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 51-65.
    31. McAusland, Carol, 2003. "Voting for pollution policy: the importance of income inequality and openness to trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 425-451, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:bla:scandj:v:120:y:2018:i:1:p:211-241. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-9442 .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.