Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Technological externalities and environmental policy

How to simulate manure management regulation within a DEA framework

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The directional distance function defined in a DEA type non-parametric framework provides a highly flexible structure for modelling producer behaviour in the presence of polluting emissions and environmental regulations. This article presents five models describing different “command and control” type policy measures as an economic one about nitrogen pollution of agricultural origin. These measures concern the management of the mandatory constraint on the spreading of organic manure and the investment in manure treatment facilities. The study also simulates the use of an economic instrument by enforcing the individual manure constraint at an aggregated level. Using individual and aggregated DEA models, this paper provides insights into the impact of individual and collective management of environmental policy instruments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baumol, W. J., & Oates, W. (1988). The theory of environmental policy (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brännlund, R., Chung, Y., Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (1998). Emissions trading and profitability: the Swedish pulp and paper industry. Environmental and Resource Economics, 12, 345–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. G., Chung, Y. H., & Färe, R. (1996). Benefit and distance functions. Journal of Economic Theory, 70, 407–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chavas, J.-P., & Cox, T. L. (1999). A generalized Distance function and the analysis of production efficiency. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Staff paper 422.

  • Chung, Y. H., Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (1997). Productivity and undesirable outputs: a directional distance function approach. Journal of Environmental Management, 51, 229–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2003). Non-parametric productivity analysis with undesirable outputs: comment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 85, 1070–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2004). New directions; efficiency and productivity. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., & Grosskopf, S. (2009). A comment on weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 91(2), 535–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., & Zelenyuk, V. (2003). On aggregated Farrell efficiencies. European Journal of Operational Research, 146, 616–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Lovell, C. A. K. (1985). The measurement of efficiency of production. Studies in productivity analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., & Lovell, C. A. K. (1994). Production frontiers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuosmanen, T. L. (2005). Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis with undesirable outputs. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 87(4), 1077–1082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuosmanen, T. L., Cherchye, L., & Sipiläinen, T. (2006). The law of one price in data envelopment analysis: restricting weight flexibility across firms. European Journal of Operational Research, 170(3), 735–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuosmanen, T. L., & Podinovski, V. (2009). Weak disposability in nonparametric production analysis: reply to Färe and Grosskopf. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 91(2), 539–545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, S. K., & Ng, Y. C. (1995). Measuring the productive efficiency of a group of firms. International Advances in Economic Research, 1(4), 377–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luenberger, D. G. (1992). Benefit functions and duality. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 21, 461–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luenberger, D. G. (1995). Microeconomic theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, W. D. (1972). Markets in licences and efficient pollution control programs. Journal of Economic Theory, 5, 395–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2001). OECD national soil surface nitrogen balances—explanatory notes. Paris.

  • OECD (2003). Agriculture, trade and the environment, the pig sector. Paris.

  • Randall, A. (1972). Market solutions to externality problems: theory and practice. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 54(2), 175–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shephard, R. W. (1970). Theory of cost and production functions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), Edificio Expo, c/Inca Garcilaso, 3, 41092, Seville, Spain

    Isabelle Piot-Lepetit

  2. INRA, UMR 1302 SMART, 35000, Rennes, France

    Isabelle Piot-Lepetit

Authors
  1. Isabelle Piot-Lepetit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Isabelle Piot-Lepetit.

Additional information

Disclamer: The views expressed are purely those of the author and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating as official position of the European Commission.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Piot-Lepetit, I. Technological externalities and environmental policy. Ann Oper Res 214, 31–48 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-010-0744-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-010-0744-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation