IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/csledp/200207.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Warum Staaten Ökosteuern statt Lizenzen einführen, und wann das schlecht für die Wohlfahrt ist

Author

Listed:
  • Haucap, Justus
  • Kirstein, Roland

Abstract

In diesem Aufsatz untersuchen wir, warum Staaten Anreize haben, Umweltverschmutzung zu besteuern anstatt Umweltverschmutzungsrechte zu veräußern. Unser Modell berücksichtigt, dass Regierungen sowohl umweltpolitische Ziele als auch fiskalische oder industriepolitische Motive haben können. Wir zeigen, dass eine budgetorientierte Regierung als monopolistischer Anbieter von Verschmutzungsrechten Anreize hat, das Verschmutzungsniveau suboptimal niedrig zu halten, indem sie die Lizenzmenge künstlich verknappt und so den Lizenzpreis erhöht. Dabei berücksichtigen wir, dass Lizenzen dauerhaft nutzbare Güter sind und dass der Staat als monopolistischer Anbieter der Lizenzen Anreize hat, nach Abschluss der ersten Verkaufsrunde weitere Lizenzen zu verkaufen, um so die Einnahmen zu steigern. Werden Verschmutzungsrechte jedoch nicht dauerhaft verkauft, sondern stattdessen Emissionen mit einer Steuer belegt, so ist der budgetmaximierende Steuersatz in jeder Periode derselbe. Damit bleibt in jeder Periode auch der Schadstoffausstoß auf demselben (suboptimal niedrigen) Niveau, bei dem zwar das Steueraufkommen, nicht aber die Wohlfahrt maximiert wird. In einem Lizenzregime ist es dagegen eher zu erwarten, dass die wohlfahrtsmaximierende Emissionsmenge erreicht wird, weil der Staat sich nicht glaubwürdig auf das monopolistische Niveau festlegen kann. Dieses Argument für ein Lizenzregime ergänzt die bekannten Argumente pro Umweltlizenzen, die sich auf Informationsasymmetrien und Innovationsanreize beziehen.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:csledp:200207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/23121/1/2002-07_oeko.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Louis Kaplow & Steven Shavell, 2002. "On the Superiority of Corrective Taxes to Quantity Regulation," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, January.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. 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.
    7. Denicolo, Vincenzo, 1999. "Pollution-Reducing Innovations under Taxes or Permits," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 184-199, January.
    8. Biglaiser, Gary & Horowitz, John K & Quiggin, John, 1995. "Dynamic Pollution Regulation," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 33-44, July.
    9. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Dallas Burtraw, 1997. "Revenue-Raising versus Other Approaches to Environmental Protection: The Critical Significance of Preexisting Tax Distortions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 28(4), pages 708-731, Winter.
    10. Bulow, Jeremy I, 1982. "Durable-Goods Monopolists," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(2), pages 314-332, April.
    11. 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.
    12. Haucap, Justus & Kirstein, Roland, 2003. "Government Incentives When Pollution Permits Are Durable Goods," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 115(1-2), pages 163-183, April.
    13. Nancy L. Stokey, 1981. "Rational Expectations and Durable Goods Pricing," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(1), pages 112-128, Spring.
    14. 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.
    15. Robert A. Collinge & Wallace E. Oates, 1982. "Efficiency in Pollution Control in the Short and Long Runs: A System of Rental Emission Permits," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 15(2), pages 347-354, May.
    16. 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)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Emissionszertifikate; Ökosteuer; Glaubwürdigkeit; Zeitinkonsistenz; dauerhafte Güter; politische Ökonomie; Emissions Permits; Pollution Tax; Credibility; Time Inconsistency; Durable Goods; Political Economy;

    JEL classification:

    • K3 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law
    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • 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:zbw:csledp:200207. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/fosaade.html .

    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.