IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeeman/v89y2018icp71-93.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal coverage of an emission tax in the presence of monitoring, reporting, and verification costs

Author

Listed:
  • De Cara, Stéphane
  • Henry, Loïc
  • Jayet, Pierre-Alain

Abstract

Environmental policies often include exemptions for some firms, e.g. the small emitters. This paper explores the implications of such exemptions in the case of an emission tax, and in the presence of monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) costs. We develop an analytical framework capturing the trade-off between the cost-effectiveness of a broader tax base, and the savings on MRV costs enabled by a partial coverage. Second-best partial coverage is defined by a threshold value of some characteristic of the firms below which firms are exempted. We characterize the optimal threshold and discuss its welfare implications. Since determining this threshold is demanding in terms of information regarding firm-level MRV and abatement costs, we show how limited knowledge about these costs at the aggregate level can be used in practice to approximate the optimal threshold. We apply this framework to assess the welfare implications of such an instrument in the case of greenhouse gas emissions from European agriculture. The findings indicate that exempting the small emitters may provide significant savings on MRV costs compared to the full coverage, while still incentivizing cost-effective reductions in emissions.

Suggested Citation

  • De Cara, Stéphane & Henry, Loïc & Jayet, Pierre-Alain, 2018. "Optimal coverage of an emission tax in the presence of monitoring, reporting, and verification costs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 71-93.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeeman:v:89:y:2018:i:c:p:71-93
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jeem.2018.03.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069617302814
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. World Bank & Ecofys, "undated". "Carbon Pricing Watch 2017," World Bank Other Operational Studies 26565, The World Bank.
    2. Ignacio Pérez Domínguez & Thomas Fellmann & Franz Weiss & Peter Witzke & Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & Mihaly Himics & Torbjörn Jansson & Guna Salputra & Adrian Leip, 2016. "An economic assessment of GHG mitigation policy options for EU agriculture (EcAMPA 2)," JRC Working Papers JRC101396, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    3. Pellerin, Sylvain & Bamière, Laure & Angers, Denis & Béline, Fabrice & Benoit, Marc & Butault, Jean-Pierre & Chenu, Claire & Colnenne-David, Caroline & De Cara, Stéphane & Delame, Nathalie & Doreau, M, 2017. "Identifying cost-competitive greenhouse gas mitigation potential of French agriculture," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 130-139.
    4. Mason, Charles F. & Plantinga, Andrew J., 2013. "The additionality problem with offsets: Optimal contracts for carbon sequestration in forests," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 1-14.
    5. Stéphane Cara & Martin Houzé & Pierre-Alain Jayet, 2005. "Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agriculture in the EU: A Spatial Assessment of Sources and Abatement Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(4), pages 551-583, December.
    6. Betz, Regina & Sanderson, Todd & Ancev, Tihomir, 2009. "In or Out: Efficient inclusion of installations in an Emissions Trading Scheme?," Research Reports 94877, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    7. Stéphane De Cara & Bruno Vermont, 2011. "Policy Considerations for Mandating Agriculture in a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme: A comment," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 661-667.
    8. Becker, Randy A. & Pasurka, Carl & Shadbegian, Ronald J., 2013. "Do environmental regulations disproportionately affect small businesses? Evidence from the Pollution Abatement Costs and Expenditures survey," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 523-538.
    9. Macho-Stadler, Ines & Perez-Castrillo, David, 2006. "Optimal enforcement policy and firms' emissions and compliance with environmental taxes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 110-131, January.
    10. Stranlund, John K. & Chávez, Carlos A. & Villena, Mauricio G., 2009. "The optimal pricing of pollution when enforcement is costly," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 183-191, September.
    11. Tiho Ancev, 2011. "Policy Considerations for Mandating Agriculture in a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme: Reply," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(4), pages 668-672.
    12. Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 1979. "A Note on Optimal Taxation and Administrative Costs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(3), pages 475-480, June.
    13. De Cara, Stéphane & Jayet, Pierre-Alain, 2011. "Marginal abatement costs of greenhouse gas emissions from European agriculture, cost effectiveness, and the EU non-ETS burden sharing agreement," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1680-1690, July.
    14. Tiho Ancev, 2011. "Policy Considerations for Mandating Agriculture in a Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Scheme," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 33(1), pages 99-115.
    15. Ines Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2004. "Optimal Enforcement Policy and Firms’ Emissions and Compliance with Environmental Taxes," CESifo Working Paper Series 1193, CESifo Group Munich.
    16. Spulber, Daniel F., 1988. "Optimal environmental regulation under asymmetric information," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 163-181, March.
    17. K Hervé Dakpo & Philippe Jeanneaux & Laure Latruffe, 2017. "Greenhouse gas emissions and efficiency in French sheep meat farming: A non-parametric framework of pollution-adjusted technologies," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 44(1), pages 33-65.
    18. Krutilla, Kerry & Krause, Rachel, 2011. "Transaction Costs and Environmental Policy: An Assessment Framework and Literature Review," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 4(3–4), pages 261-354, April.
    19. Juan-Pablo Montero, 2008. "A Simple Auction Mechanism for the Optimal Allocation of the Commons," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 496-518, March.
    20. Keen, Michael & Mintz, Jack, 2004. "The optimal threshold for a value-added tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3-4), pages 559-576, March.
    21. Coria, Jessica & Jaraite, Jurate, 2015. "Carbon Pricing: Transaction Costs of Emissions Trading vs. Carbon Taxes," Working Papers in Economics 609, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    22. Stavins Robert N., 1995. "Transaction Costs and Tradeable Permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 133-148, September.
    23. Andriana Vlachou, 2014. "The European Union’s Emissions Trading System," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 127-152.
    24. Mitchell Polinsky, A. & Shavell, Steven, 1982. "Pigouvian taxation with administrative costs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 385-394, December.
    25. Dharmapala, Dhammika & Slemrod, Joel & Wilson, John Douglas, 2011. "Tax policy and the missing middle: Optimal tax remittance with firm-level administrative costs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(9-10), pages 1036-1047, October.
    26. Bontems, Philippe & Bourgeon, Jean-Marc, 2005. "Optimal environmental taxation and enforcement policy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 409-435, February.
    27. Wilson, John Douglas, 1989. "On the Optimal Tax Base for Commodity Taxation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1196-1206, December.
    28. Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "Intra-union flexibility of non-ETS emission reduction obligations in the European Union," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1745-1752, May.
    29. Garnache, Cloé & Mérel, Pierre R. & Lee, Juhwan & Six, Johan, 2017. "The social costs of second-best policies: Evidence from agricultural GHG mitigation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 39-73.
    30. Anna Lungarska & Pierre-Alain Jayet, 2018. "Impact of Spatial Differentiation of Nitrogen Taxes on French Farms’ Compliance Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(1), pages 1-21, January.
    31. Becker, Randy A. & Pasurka, Carl & Shadbegian, Ronald J., 2013. "Do environmental regulations disproportionately affect small businesses? Evidence from the Pollution Abatement Costs and Expenditures survey," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 523-538.
    32. Leclère, David & Jayet, Pierre-Alain & de Noblet-Ducoudré, Nathalie, 2013. "Farm-level Autonomous Adaptation of European Agricultural Supply to Climate Change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 1-14.
    33. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    34. Cacho, Oscar J. & Lipper, Leslie & Moss, Jonathan, 2013. "Transaction costs of carbon offset projects: A comparative study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 232-243.
    35. Fabian Joas & Christian Flachsland, 2016. "The (ir)relevance of transaction costs in climate policy instrument choice: an analysis of the EU and the US," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 26-49, January.
    36. Vermont, Bruno & De Cara, Stéphane, 2010. "How costly is mitigation of non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture?: A meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1373-1386, May.
    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. Joel Wood, 2018. "The Pros and Cons of Carbon Taxes and Cap-and-Trade Systems," SPP Briefing Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 11(30), November.
    2. Schaufele, Brandon, 2019. "Demand Shocks Change the Excess Burden From Carbon Taxes," MPRA Paper 92132, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Climate policy; Emission tax; Partial coverage; Greenhouse gas emissions; Agriculture;

    JEL classification:

    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment

    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:eee:jeeman:v:89:y:2018:i:c:p:71-93. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622870 .

    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.