IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v4y1994i3p295-304.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pollution standards vs charges under uncertainty

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Tisato

Abstract

Conventional analysis of pollution control policy under uncertainty does not properly account for the potential cost effectiveness difference between standards and charges, thus drawing misleading conclusions for the case of inefficient standards. Correcting for this anomaly, the following conclusions can be drawn. When uncertainty involves the position of the marginal damage cost schedule, rather than policy indifference, a charge is always superior to an inefficient standard. When uncertainty is about the position of the marginal control cost schedule, policy indifference may occur, but if it does it must be the case that the slope of marginal damage cost exceeds that of marginal control cost. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Tisato, 1994. "Pollution standards vs charges under uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(3), pages 295-304, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:4:y:1994:i:3:p:295-304 DOI: 10.1007/BF00692330
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF00692330
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fishelson, Gideon, 1976. "Emission control policies under uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 189-197, October.
    2. Russeli, Clifford S., 1986. "A note on the efficiency ranking of two second-best policy instruments for pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 13-17, March.
    3. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249, December.
    4. Bohm, Peter & Russell, Clifford S., 1985. "Comparative analysis of alternative policy instruments," Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics,in: A. V. Kneeseā€  & J. L. Sweeney (ed.), Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 395-460 Elsevier.
    5. Roberts, Marc J. & Spence, Michael, 1976. "Effluent charges and licenses under uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 193-208.
    6. Helfand, Gloria E, 1991. "Standards versus Standards: The Effects of Different Pollution Restrictions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 622-634, June.
    7. Adar, Zvi & Griffin, James M., 1976. "Uncertainty and the choice of pollution control instruments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 178-188, October.
    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. Akira Maeda, 2012. "Setting trigger price in emissions permit markets equipped with a safety valve mechanism," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 358-379, June.
    2. MOROTOMI Toru, 2004. "Climate Change Policy and Combination of Multiple Policy Instruments (in Japanese)," ESRI Discussion paper series 111, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    3. Clemens Heuson, 2008. "Weitzman revisited: Emission standards vs. taxes with uncertain control costs and market power of polluting firms," Working Papers 044, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    4. Clemens Heuson, 2008. "Emission standards vs. taxes: The case of asymmetric Cournot duopoly and uncertain control costs," Working Papers 045, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    5. Verhoef, Erik T. & Nijkamp, Peter, 1999. "Second-best energy policies for heterogeneous firms," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 111-134, April.

    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:kap:enreec:v:4:y:1994:i:3:p:295-304. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.