IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v115y2003i1-2p163-83.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Government Incentives When Pollution Permits Are Durable Goods

Author

Listed:
  • Haucap, Justus
  • Kirstein, Roland

Abstract

This paper analyzes the incentive effects of pollution taxes versus pollution permits for a budget oriented Government. Pollution permits are analyzed as durable goods, and a pollution tax is seen as being equivalent to leasing out pollution permits. First, a general model is developed, and then four stylized types of Government are discussed (a benevolent dictator, a pure Leviathan, a green and a business-friendly Government). We show that all types of Government prefer a pollution tax system, but this regime is not necessarily the best in social welfare terms. The intuition is that a tax or leasing system makes it easier for the Government to credibly commit to the budget maximizing level of pollution permits which is good for Government revenues, but not necessarily for social welfare. Copyright 2003 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Haucap, Justus & Kirstein, Roland, 2003. "Government Incentives When Pollution Permits Are Durable Goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 115(1-2), pages 163-183, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:115:y:2003:i:1-2:p:163-83
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journals.kluweronline.com/issn/0048-5829/contents
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Wirl, Franz & Dockner, Engelbert, 1995. "Leviathan governments and carbon taxes: Costs and potential benefits," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 1215-1236, June.
    2. Biglaiser, Gary & Horowitz, John K & Quiggin, John, 1995. "Dynamic Pollution Regulation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 33-44, July.
    3. von der Fehr, Nils-Henrik Morch & Kuhn, Kai-Uwe, 1995. "Coase versus Pacman: Who Eats Whom in the Durable-Goods Monopoly?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 785-812, August.
    4. Nancy L. Stokey, 1981. "Rational Expectations and Durable Goods Pricing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(1), pages 112-128, Spring.
    5. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1996. "Pollution permits and environmental innovation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 127-140, October.
    6. Bagnoli, Mark & Salant, Stephen W & Swierzbinski, Joseph E, 1989. "Durable-Goods Monopoly with Discrete Demand," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(6), pages 1459-1478, December.
    7. Till Requate, 1995. "Incentives to adopt new technologies under different pollution-control policies," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 2(2), pages 295-317, August.
    8. Milliman, Scott R. & Prince, Raymond, 1989. "Firm incentives to promote technological change in pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 247-265, November.
    9. Gersbach, Hans & Glazer, Amihai, 1999. "Markets and Regulatory Hold-Up Problems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 151-164, March.
    10. Denicolo, Vincenzo, 1999. "Pollution-Reducing Innovations under Taxes or Permits," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 184-199, January.
    11. Bulow, Jeremy I, 1982. "Durable-Goods Monopolists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(2), pages 314-332, April.
    12. Jung, Chulho & Krutilla, Kerry & Boyd, Roy, 1996. "Incentives for Advanced Pollution Abatement Technology at the Industry Level: An Evaluation of Policy Alternatives," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 95-111, January.
    13. Fredriksson, Per G., 1997. "The Political Economy of Pollution Taxes in a Small Open Economy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 44-58, May.
    14. Coase, Ronald H, 1972. "Durability and Monopoly," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 143-149, April.
    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. Leon Vinokur, 2009. "Environmental Policy under Ambiguity," Working Papers 638, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    2. Leon Vinokur, 2009. "Environmental Policy under Ambiguity," Working Papers 638, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    3. Rajeev K. Goel & Edward W. T. Hsieh, 2004. "Durable Emissions and Optimal Pigouvian Taxes," Public Finance Review, , vol. 32(4), pages 441-449, July.
    4. Kirchgassner, Gebhard & Schneider, Friedrich, 2003. "On the Political Economy of Environmental Policy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 115(3-4), pages 369-396, June.
    5. Haucap, Justus & Kirstein, Roland, 2002. "Warum Staaten Ökosteuern statt Lizenzen einführen, und wann das schlecht für die Wohlfahrt ist," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 2002-07, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    6. Eva Schliephake, 2013. "Risk Weighted Capital Regulation and Government Debt," FEMM Working Papers 130011, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    7. Rajeev Goel, 2006. "Uncertain innovation with uncertain product durability," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(13), pages 829-834.
    8. Halkos, George, 2009. "A Differential game approach in the case of a polluting oligopoly," MPRA Paper 23742, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haucap, Justus & Kirstein, Roland, 2002. "Warum Staaten Ökosteuern statt Lizenzen einführen, und wann das schlecht für die Wohlfahrt ist," CSLE Discussion Paper Series 2002-07, Saarland University, CSLE - Center for the Study of Law and Economics.
    2. Dagmar Nelissen & Till Requate, 2007. "Pollution-reducing and resource-saving technological progress," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 6(1), pages 5-44.
    3. Hans Gersbach & Till Requate, 2000. "Emission Taxes and the Design of Refunding Schemes," CESifo Working Paper Series 325, CESifo.
    4. Mohr, Robert D., 2006. "Environmental performance standards and the adoption of technology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 238-248, June.
    5. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Francesco Nava & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2019. "Differentiated Durable Goods Monopoly: A Robust Coase Conjecture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(5), pages 1930-1968, May.
    7. Requate, Till, 2005. "Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments--a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2-3), pages 175-195, August.
    8. Shimomura, Koji, 1998. "A dynamic equilibrium model of durable goods monopoly," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(3-4), pages 507-520, January.
    9. Breitscheidel, Jörg, 2005. "Hold-up Problems with Respect to R&D Investment and Licensing in Environmental Regulation," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-86, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    10. Jong‐Hee Hahn, 2006. "Damaged durable goods," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(1), pages 121-133, March.
    11. Joerg Breitscheidel & Hans Gersbach, 2005. "Self-Financing Environmental Mechanisms," CESifo Working Paper Series 1528, CESifo.
    12. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516, Elsevier.
    13. Gersbach, Hans & Glazer, Amihai, 1999. "Markets and Regulatory Hold-Up Problems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 151-164, March.
    14. Heinrich Ursprung & Katarina Zigova, 2021. "The Ultimate Coasian Commitment: Estimating and Explaining Artist-Specific Death Effects," Working Papers CEB 21-013, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    15. James J. Anton & Gary Biglaiser, 2010. "Quality, Upgrades, and Equilibrium in a Dynamic Monopoly Model," Working Papers 10-36, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    16. James J. Anton & Gary Biglaiser, 2007. "Quality Upgrades and the (loss) of Market Power in a Dynamic Monopoly Model," Working Papers 18, Portuguese Competition Authority.
    17. Walter Beckert, 2004. "Dynamic Monopolies with Stochastic Demand," Birkbeck Working Papers in Economics and Finance 0404, Birkbeck, Department of Economics, Mathematics & Statistics.
    18. Arguedas, Carmen & van Soest, Daan P., 2009. "On reducing the windfall profits in environmental subsidy programs," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 192-205, September.
    19. Kendall, Todd D., 2008. "Durable good celebrities," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 312-321, May.
    20. Paulo Maçãs Nunes, 2015. "Pricing Strategy In The Context Of Durable Goods Monopoly With Discrete Demand," Economic Annals, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Belgrade, vol. 60(204), pages 61-74, January –.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • K3 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law
    • D7 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making

    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:pubcho:v:115:y:2003:i:1-2:p:163-83. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.