IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/4379.html

Designing economic instruments for the environment in a decentralized fiscal system

Author

Listed:
  • Alm, James
  • Banzhaf, H. Spencer

Abstract

When external effects are important, markets will be inefficient, and economists have considered several broad classes of economic instruments to correct these inefficiencies. However, the standard economic analysis has tended to neglect important distinctions and interactions between the geographic scope of pollutants, the enforcement authority of various levels of government, and the fiscal responsibilities of the levels of government. For example, externalities generated in a particular local area may be confined to the local area or may spill over to other jurisdictions. Also, local governments may be well informed about how best to regulate or enforce pollution control within their jurisdiction, but they may not consider the effects of their actions on other jurisdictions. Finally, the existence of locally-generated waste emissions affects the appropriate assignment of both expenditure and tax responsibilities among levels of government. The standard analysis therefore focuses mainly upon an aggregate (or national) perspective, it typically ignores the possibility that the externality may be created and addressed by local governments, and it does not consider the implications of decentralization for the design of economic instruments targeted at environmental problems. This paper examines the implications of decentralization for the design of corrective policies; that is, how does one design economic instruments in a decentralized fiscal system in which externalities exist at the local level and in which subnational governments have the power to provide local public services, as well as to choose tax instruments that can both finance these expenditures and correct the market failures of externalities?

Suggested Citation

  • Alm, James & Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2007. "Designing economic instruments for the environment in a decentralized fiscal system," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4379, The World Bank.
  • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:4379
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/10/24/000158349_20071024084328/Rendered/PDF/wps4379.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Merhatbeb Teklemedhn Gebregiorgs, 2018. "The Role of Public Interest Litigation in the Achievement of Sustainable Waste Management in Ethiopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Shyam Nath & Yeti Nisha Madhoo, 2021. "Environmental fiscal federalism and atmospheric pollution: A tale of two Indian cities," ASARC Working Papers 2021-01, The Australian National University, Australia South Asia Research Centre.
    3. Fredriksson, Per G. & Wollscheid, Jim R., 2014. "Environmental decentralization and political centralization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 402-410.
    4. Sai Yuan & Xiongfeng Pan & Mengna Li, 2023. "The nonlinear influence of innovation efficiency on carbon and haze co-control: the threshold effect of environmental decentralization," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(12), pages 14283-14307, December.
    5. Ian Hodge, 2019. "Renewing the Governance of Rural Land after Brexit: an Ecosystems Policy Approach," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 18(2), pages 4-10, August.
    6. Jaime Vallés-Giménez & Anabel Zárate-Marco, 2013. "Environmental taxation and industrial water use in Spain," INVESTIGACIONES REGIONALES - Journal of REGIONAL RESEARCH, Asociación Española de Ciencia Regional, issue 25, pages 133-162.
    7. Christopher Costello & Daniel Kaffine, 2018. "Natural Resource Federalism: Preferences Versus Connectivity for Patchy Resources," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 99-126, September.
    8. William M. Shobe & Dallas Burtraw, 2012. "Rethinking Environmental Federalism In A Warming World," Climate Change Economics (CCE), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(04), pages 1-33.
    9. Adel Shamaileh, 2016. "An Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Environment Policy in Jordan," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(2), pages 1-92, January.
    10. Millimet, Daniel L., 2013. "Environmental Federalism: A Survey of the Empirical Literature," IZA Discussion Papers 7831, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Laura Levaggi & Rosella Levaggi & Carmen Marchiori & Carmine Trecroci, 2020. "Waste-to-Energy in the EU: The Effects of Plant Ownership, Waste Mobility, and Decentralization on Environmental Outcomes and Welfare," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-12, July.
    12. Merhatbeb Teklemedhn Gebregiorgs, 2018. "Towards Sustainable Waste Management through Cautious Design of Environmental Taxes: The Case of Ethiopia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-23, August.
    13. Caihua Zhou & Hualin Xie & Xinmin Zhang, 2019. "Does Fiscal Policy Promote Third-Party Environmental Pollution Control in China? An Evolutionary Game Theoretical Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-18, August.
    14. Zenglian Zhang & Wenju Zhao, 2018. "Research on Financial Pressure, Poverty Governance, and Environmental Pollution in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-24, June.
    15. Alexeev, Alexander & Good, David H. & Krutilla, Kerry, 2016. "Environmental taxation and the double dividend in decentralized jurisdictions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 90-100.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • H4 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods
    • H7 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wbk:wbrwps:4379. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.html .

    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.