Efficient income redistribution for a small country using optimal combined instruments
In this paper I improve Gardner's surplus transformation curve framework by assuming that governments are able to vary many policy instruments simultaneously instead of only one. I use my framework to find the combination of the currently used instruments which provides the most efficient income redistribution for the Austrian bread grains market. Comparing the most efficient policy with the actual policy reveals that 464 X 106 Austrian shillings were wasted. I theoretically compare for a small country the transfer efficiency of every possible pair of the four major agricultural policy instruments: floor price, (production) quota, co-responsibility levy, and deficiency payments. Without considering the marginal cost of public funds (MCF), deficiency payments cum quota (equal to a fully decoupled direct income support) is the most efficient policy, succeeded by floor price cum quota, and floor price cum deficiency payments. If the MCF is taken into account, the ranking crucially depends on the market parameters, the transfer level, and the value of the MCF. For the Austrian bread grains market, I empirically demonstrate that given the present support level, a fully decoupled direct income support redistributes income most efficiently as long as the MCF is lower than 1.17. Beyond this value a floor price cum quota policy becomes more efficient. A floor price cum deficiency payments policy is never superior to the floor price cum quota.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Charles L. Ballard & Don Fullerton, 1990.
"Distortionary Taxes and the Provision of Public Goods,"
NBER Working Papers
3506, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Charles L. Ballard & Don Fullerton, 1992. "Distortionary Taxes and the Provision of Public Goods," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 117-131, Summer.
- Fullerton, Don, 1991. "Reconciling Recent Estimates of the Marginal Welfare Cost of Taxation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 302-08, March.
- von Cramon-Taubadel, Stephan, 1992. "A critical assessment of the political preference function approach in agricultural economics," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 7(3-4), pages 371-394, October.
- Munk, K J, 1989. "Price Support to the EC Agricultural Sector: An Optimal Policy?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 76-89, Summer.
- Bullock, David S. & Jeong, Kyeong-Soo, 1994. "A critical assessment of the political preference function approach in agricultural economics," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 10(2), pages 201-206, April.
- Kola, Jukka, 1993. "Efficiency of Supply Control Programmes in Income Redistribution," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 20(2), pages 183-98.
- Bullock, David S. & Jeong, Kyeong-Soo, 1994. "Comment: A critical assessment of the political preference function approach in agricultural economics," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 10(2), April.
- Cramon-Taubadel, Stephan von, 1992. "A critical assessment of the political preference function approach in agricultural economics," Agricultural Economics of Agricultural Economists, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 7(3-4), October.
- Ballard, Charles L., 1990. "Marginal welfare cost calculations : Differential analysis vs. balanced-budget analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 263-276, March.
- Bullock, David S, 1995. "Are Government Transfers Efficient? An Alternative Test of the Efficient Redistribution Hypothesis," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(6), pages 1236-74, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agecon:v:13:y:1996:i:3:p:191-199. 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: (Shamier, Wendy)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.