IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Why Does Environmental Policy in Representative Democracies Tend to Be Inadequate? A Preliminary Public Choice Analysis

Author Info

  • Andrea Kollmann

    ()

    (Energy Institute, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Altenberger Straße 69, 4040 Linz, Austria)

  • Friedrich Schneider

    ()

    (Institute of Economics, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Altenberger Straße 69, 4040 Linz, Austria)

Abstract

There is a widespread consensus among the most important players in developed countries (voters, politicians, producers, traditional and green interest groups and bureaucracies) that a shift towards an eco-social market economy is essential for sustainable growth. Nevertheless, market-based instruments have not as yet been implemented satisfactorily in environmental policy. To identify the reasons for this insufficient implementation over the past decade, the Public Choice theory is used. The players’ behavior is analyzed in order to show that their incentives for implementing market-based instruments in environmental policy, instead of command-and-control measures, are surprisingly weak. Knowing the obstacles to implementing market-based instruments provides valuable insight into how to overcome them.

Download Info

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.

File URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/2/12/3710/pdf
Download Restriction: no
File URL: http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/2/12/3710/
Download Restriction: no

Article provided by MDPI, Open Access Journal in its journal Sustainability.

Volume (Year): 2 (2010)
Issue (Month): 12 (November)
Pages: 3710

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:2:y:2010:i:12:p:3710-3734:d:10376
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.mdpi.com/

Keywords: public choice and environmental policies; sustainability; voters; government; interest groups; tradable permits; green taxes [D23; D62; D72; D73; H23; Q57; Q58];

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
  • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics
  • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
  • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation
  • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
  • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
  • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
  • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products

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.:

as in new window
  1. Daniel Sturm & John List, 2004. "How Elections Matter: Theory and Evidence from Environmental Policy," Natural Field Experiments 00482, The Field Experiments Website.
  2. Jacob K. Goeree & Charles A. Holt & Karen Palmer & William Shobe & Dallas Burtraw, 2010. "An Experimental Study of Auctions Versus Grandfathering to Assign Pollution Permits," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(2-3), pages 514-525, 04-05.
  3. Martin Halla & Friedrich Schneider & Alexander Wagner, 2008. "Satisfaction with Democracy and Collective Action Problems: The Case of the Environment," Economics working papers 2008-08, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
  4. Romero-Jordán, Desiderio & del Río, Pablo & Jorge-García, Marta & Burguillo, Mercedes, 2010. "Price and income elasticities of demand for passenger transport fuels in Spain. Implications for public policies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 3898-3909, August.
  5. Welsch, Heinz, 2009. "Implications of happiness research for environmental economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2735-2742, September.
  6. Ghalwash, Tarek, 2004. "Energy Taxes as a Signaling Device: An Empirical Analysis of Consumer Preferences," Umeå Economic Studies 646, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
  7. Oates, Wallace E. & Portney, Paul R., 2003. "The political economy of environmental policy," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 8, pages 325-354 Elsevier.
  8. Patuelli, Roberto & Nijkamp, Peter & Pels, Eric, 2005. "Environmental tax reform and the double dividend: A meta-analytical performance assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 564-583, December.
  9. Urs Steiner Brandt & Gert Tinggaard Svendsen, 2004. "Rent-Seeking and Grandfathering: The Case of GHG Trade in the Eu," Energy & Environment, SAGE Publishing, vol. 15(1), pages 69-80, January.
  10. Betz, Regina, 2006. "Emissions trading to combat climate change: The impact of scheme design on transaction costs," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 174096, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  11. repec:ags:aare05:139304 is not listed on IDEAS
  12. Schneider, Friedrich & Volkert, Juergen, 1999. "No chance for incentive-oriented environmental policies in representative democracies? A Public Choice analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 123-138, October.
  13. Felder, Stefan & Schleiniger, Reto, 2002. "Environmental tax reform: efficiency and political feasibility," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 107-116, August.
  14. Cristina Ciocirlan & Bruce Yandle, 2003. "The Political Economy of Green Taxation in OECD Countries," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 203-218, May.
  15. Markussen, Peter & Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard, 2005. "Industry lobbying and the political economy of GHG trade in the European Union," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 245-255, January.
  16. Anger, Niels & Böhringer, Christoph & Lange, Andreas, 2006. "Differentiation of Green Taxes: A Political-Economy Analysis for Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-03, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  17. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Bilharz, Michael, 2006. "Green energy market development in Germany: effective public policy and emerging customer demand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(13), pages 1681-1696, September.
  18. Urs Steiner Brandt & Gert Tinggaard Svendsen, 2003. "The Political Economy of Climate Change Policy in the EU: Auction and Grandfathering," Working Papers 51/03, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business Economics.
  19. Santos, Rui & Antunes, Paula & Baptista, Gualter & Mateus, Pedro & Madruga, Luisa, 2006. "Stakeholder participation in the design of environmental policy mixes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 100-110, November.
  20. Bohringer, Christoph & Vogt, Carsten, 2004. "The dismantling of a breakthrough: the Kyoto Protocol as symbolic policy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 597-617, September.
  21. Anger, Niels & Böhringer, Christoph & Löschel, Andreas, 2010. "Paying the piper and calling the tune?: A meta-regression analysis of the double-dividend hypothesis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1495-1502, May.
  22. Bornstein, Nicholas & Lanz, Bruno, 2008. "Voting on the environment: Price or ideology? Evidence from Swiss referendums," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 430-440, October.
  23. Benoît Le Maux, 2009. "Governmental behavior in representative democracy: a synthesis of the theoretical literature," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 141(3), pages 447-465, December.
  24. Aidt, Toke S., 2010. "Green taxes: Refunding rules and lobbying," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 31-43, July.
  25. Agnolucci, Paolo, 2009. "The effect of the German and British environmental taxation reforms: A simple assessment," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 3043-3051, August.
  26. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
  27. Brännlund, Runar & Persson, Lars, 2010. "Tax or no tax? Preferences for climate policy attributes," Umeå Economic Studies 802, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
  28. Lars P. Feld & Bruno S. Frey, 2002. "Trust breeds trust: How taxpayers are treated," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 87-99, 07.
  29. Gary S. Becker, 1983. "A Theory of Competition Among Pressure Groups for Political Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 98(3), pages 371-400.
  30. Sebastian Goers & Alexander Wagner & Jürgen Wegmayr, 2010. "New and old market-based instruments for climate change policy," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-30, June.
  31. Mueller,Dennis C., 2003. "Public Choice III," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521894753, November.
  32. Daniel Graham & Stephen Glaister, 2005. "Decomposing the determinants of road traffic demand," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(1), pages 19-28.
  33. Philippe Thalmann, 2004. "The Public Acceptance of Green Taxes: 2 Million Voters Express Their Opinion," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 119(1_2), pages 179-217, 04.
  34. Owens, Susan & Driffill, Louise, 2008. "How to change attitudes and behaviours in the context of energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 4412-4418, December.
  35. Markussen, Peter & Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard & Vesterdal, Morten, 2002. "The political economy of a tradable GHG permit market in the European Union," Working Papers 02-3, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
  36. Gebhard Kirchgässner & Friedrich Schneider, 2002. "On the Political Economy of Environmental Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 741, CESifo Group Munich.
  37. Welsch, Heinz, 2006. "Environment and happiness: Valuation of air pollution using life satisfaction data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 801-813, July.
  38. Brons, Martijn & Nijkamp, Peter & Pels, Eric & Rietveld, Piet, 2008. "A meta-analysis of the price elasticity of gasoline demand. A SUR approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 2105-2122, September.
  39. Stavins, Robert & Keohane, Nathaniel & Revesz, Richard, 1997. "The Positive Political Economy of Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Discussion Papers dp-97-25, Resources For the Future.
  40. Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard & Daugbjerg, Carsten & Hjollund, Lene & Pedersen, Anders Branth, 2001. "Consumers, industrialists and the political economy of green taxation: CO2 taxation in OECD," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 489-497, May.
  41. 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, vol. 26(2), pages 197-224, Summer.
  42. Rainer Eising, 2007. "Institutional Context, Organizational Resources and Strategic Choices," European Union Politics, SAGE Publishing, vol. 8(3), pages 329-362, September.
  43. Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard, 2002. "Lobbyism and CO2 trade in the EU," Working Papers 02-16, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

as in new window


Cited by:

  1. Krumm, Raimund & Volkert, Jürgen, 2015. "Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der politischen Realisierbarkeit intra- und intergenerativer Gerechtigkeit," UFZ Discussion Papers 11/2015, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
  2. Leo Wangler & JJuan-Carlos Altamirano-Cabrera & Hans-Peter Weikard, 2011. "The Political Economy of International Environmental Agreements: A Survey," Jena Economic Research Papers 2011-038, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:2:y:2010:i:12:p:3710-3734:d:10376. 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: (XML Conversion Team)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.