IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ete/revbec/20050203.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effluent Trading to Improve Water Quality. What do we Know Today?

Author

Listed:
  • S. Rousseau

Abstract

Watershed based trading or effluent trading, allows pollution sources to buy controls that will reduce the amount of a problem pollutant elsewhere in the watershed or drainage basin. By buying such controls, factories do not need to install abatement technologies to lower the discharge of that pollutant for their own plants. Parties involved in the trade want to either: (a) trade directly with each other; or (b) create a market of ‘credits’ that represent a specific amount of pollutant reduction. The intent of trading is to achieve an expected reduction of a particular pollutant at a lower cost. The challenge with trading is to allow for innovative, market-based reforms without compromising the existing safeguards in environmental protection. In this paper we provide an overview of the benefits and considerations associated with designing an effluent trading program. We end by formulating some policy recommendations.

Suggested Citation

  • S. Rousseau, 2005. "Effluent Trading to Improve Water Quality. What do we Know Today?," Review of Business and Economic Literature, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business (FEB), Review of Business and Economic Literature, vol. 0(2), pages 229-260.
    • Handle: RePEc:ete:revbec:20050203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/120135/1/TEM-2_05_Rousseau.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1996. "Pollution permits and compliance strategies," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 85-125, October.
    2. Jaffe Adam B. & Stavins Robert N., 1995. "Dynamic Incentives of Environmental Regulations: The Effects of Alternative Policy Instruments on Technology Diffusion," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 43-63, November.
    3. Montgomery, W. David, 1972. "Markets in licenses and efficient pollution control programs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 395-418, December.
    4. Brandt, Sylvia J., 2003. "Evaluating Tradable Property Rights For Natural Resources: The Role Of Strategic Entry And Exit," Working Paper Series 14502, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    5. Charles D. Kolstad, 2000. "Spatial Environmental and Resource Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1918.
    6. Lawrence H. Goulder & Ian W.H. Parry & Roberton C. Williams III & Dallas Burtraw, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Alternative Instruments for Environmental Protection in a Second-Best Setting," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 27, pages 523-554, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Rob van der Veeren & Richard Tol, 2001. "Benefits of a Reallocation of Nitrate Emission Reductions in the Rhine River Basin," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 18(1), pages 19-41, January.
    8. Kling, Catherine & Rubin, Jonathan, 1997. "Bankable permits for the control of environmental pollution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 101-115, April.
    9. Baumol,William J. & Oates,Wallace E., 1988. "The Theory of Environmental Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521322249, September.
    10. Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 355-435, Elsevier.
    11. Brandt, Sylvia, 2007. "Evaluating tradable property rights for natural resources: The role of strategic entry and exit," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 158-176, May.
    12. Weber, Marian L., 2001. "Markets for Water Rights under Environmental Constraints," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 53-64, July.
    13. Hilary Sigman, 2002. "International Spillovers and Water Quality in Rivers: Do Countries Free Ride?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1152-1159, September.
    14. Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Tirole, Jean, 1996. "Pollution permits and environmental innovation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1-2), pages 127-140, October.
    15. Atkinson, Scott & Tietenberg, Tom, 1991. "Market failure in incentive-based regulation: The case of emissions trading," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 17-31, July.
    16. Malik, Arun S., 1990. "Markets for pollution control when firms are noncompliant," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 97-106, March.
    17. Keeler, Andrew G., 1991. "Noncompliant firms in transferable discharge permit markets: Some extensions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 180-189, September.
    18. 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.
    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. Nadine Wittmann, 2014. "A Microeconomic Perspective on Water Resources Management: Analyzing the Effects on Optimal Land Rents Along a River Basin," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(5), pages 1309-1325, March.

    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. Revesz, Richard & Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Law and Policy," Working Paper Series rwp04-023, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    2. 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.
    3. Ivana Capozza, 2003. "A Dynamic Game of Technology Diffusion under an Emission Trading Regulation: A Pilot Experiment," SERIES 0008, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza - Università degli Studi di Bari "Aldo Moro", revised Apr 2003.
    4. Stavins, Robert, 2001. "Lessons From the American Experiment With Market-Based Environmental Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-53, Resources for the Future.
    5. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," Working Paper Series rwp04-051, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Problem of the Commons: Still Unsettled after 100 Years," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 81-108, February.
    7. Newell, Richard G & Stavins, Robert N, 2003. "Cost Heterogeneity and the Potential Savings from Market-Based Policies," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 43-59, January.
    8. Stavins, Robert, 2003. "Market-Based Environmental Policies: What Can We Learn from U.S. Experience and Related Research?," Working Paper Series rwp03-031, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    9. 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.
    10. Robert N. Stavins, 1998. "What Can We Learn from the Grand Policy Experiment? Lessons from SO2 Allowance Trading," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(3), pages 69-88, Summer.
    11. Pasquale Scandizzo & Odin Knudsen, 2012. "Risk management and regulation compliance with tradable permits under dynamic uncertainty," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 127-157, February.
    12. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    13. Jay S. Coggins & Andrew L. Goodkind & Jason Nguyen & Zhiyu Wang, 2019. "Price Effects, Inefficient Environmental Policy, and Windfall Profits," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(3), pages 637-656, March.
    14. Suzi Kerr & Richard G. Newell, 2003. "Policy‐Induced Technology Adoption: Evidence from the U.S. Lead Phasedown," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 317-343, September.
    15. Hung, Ming-Feng & Shaw, Daigee, 2005. "A trading-ratio system for trading water pollution discharge permits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 83-102, January.
    16. Phillia Restiani & Regina Betz, 2010. "A Theoretical Model of Optimal Compliance Decisions under Different Penalty Designs in Emissions Trading Markets," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1086, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    17. Olivier Rousse & Benoît Sévi, 2005. "Behavioral Heterogeneity in the US Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Allowance Trading Program," ERSA conference papers ersa05p550, European Regional Science Association.
    18. Stavins, Robert & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Abatement-Cost Heterogeneity and Anticipated Savings from Market-Based Environmental Policies," Working Paper Series rwp00-006, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    19. Adam Jaffe & Richard Newell & Robert Stavins, 2002. "Environmental Policy and Technological Change," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 41-70, June.
    20. 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.

    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:ete:revbec:20050203. 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: library EBIB (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fekulbe.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.