Advertisement

Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 435–459 | Cite as

Environmental Goods and the Distribution of Income

  • Udo Ebert
Article

Abstract

The paper presents a (theoretical) investigation of the distributional impacts of environmental commodities. It introduces an appropriate framework, defines concepts for measuring benefits and examines the determinants of benefit incidence within this setup. Its emphasis is on methodology and on recognizing the relevant economic variables and information. It turns out that in an “equal-preference” model the magnitude of the income elasticity of marginal willingness to pay for an environmental good is the crucial variable determining progressivity. It is related to a number of other elasticities which are more easily accessible to an empirical estimation.

determinants of benefit incidence income distribution nonmarket goods 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aaron, H. and M. McGuire (1970), ‘Public Goods and Income Distribution’, Econometrica 38, 907-919.Google Scholar
  2. Baumol, W. J. (1974), ‘Environmental Protection and Income Distribution’, in H. Hochman and G. Peterson, eds., Redistribution through Socials Choice. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Baumol, W. J. and W. E. Oates (1988), The Theory of Environmental Policy, second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Berck, P. and K. Sydsaeter (1993), Economists’ Mathematical Manual, second edition. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  5. Bergstrom, T. C. and R. P. Goodman, ‘Private Demands for Public Goods’, American Economic Review 63, 280-296.Google Scholar
  6. Borcherding, T. E. and R. T. Deacon (1972), ‘The Demand for Services of Non Federal Governments’, American Economic Review 62, 891-901.Google Scholar
  7. Braden, J. B. and C. D. Kolstad, eds. (1991), Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.Google Scholar
  8. Brennan, G. (1976), ‘The Distributional Implications of Public Goods’, Econometrica 44, 391-399.Google Scholar
  9. Brennan, G. (1987), ‘The Distributional Implications of Public Goods’, Econometrica 44, 391-399.Google Scholar
  10. Carson, R., N. E. Flores and W. M. Hanemann (1998), ‘Sequencing and Valuing Public Goods’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 36, 314-323.Google Scholar
  11. Cullis, J. and P. Jones (1992), Public Finance and Public Choice. London: Mc Graw Hill.Google Scholar
  12. Diewert, W. E. (1974), ‘A Note on Aggregation and Elasticities of Substitution’, Canadian Journal of Economics 7, 12-20.Google Scholar
  13. Ebert, U. (1993), ‘A Note on Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept’, Social Choice and Welfare 10, 363-370.Google Scholar
  14. Ebert, U. (1997), ‘Selecting Preferences for Nonmarket Goods, Possibilities and Limitations’, Public Finance 52, 301-317.Google Scholar
  15. Ebert, U. (1998), ‘Evaluation of Nonmarket Goods: Recovering Unconditional Preferences’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80, 241-254.Google Scholar
  16. Ebert, U. and P. Lambert (1999), ‘Combined Income Taxes and Tax-benefit Systems’, Economic Record 75, 397-404.Google Scholar
  17. Flores, N. E. and R. T. Carson (1997), ‘The Relationship between the Income Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33, 287-295.Google Scholar
  18. Freeman, A. M. (1972), ‘The Distribution of Environmental Quality’, in A. Kneese and B. Bower, eds., Environmental Quality Analysis. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  19. Freeman III, A. M. (1985), ‘Methods for Assessing the Benefits of Environmental Programs’, in A. V. Kneese and J. L. Sweeny, eds., Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics I(6), 223-270. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.Google Scholar
  20. Hanemann, W. M. (1991), ‘Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?’, American Economic Review 81, 635-647.Google Scholar
  21. Höbky, S. and T. Söderqvist (2003), Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay for Environmental Services in Sweden, forthcoming in: Environmental and Resource Economics.Google Scholar
  22. Johannson, P.-O. (1987), The Economic Theory and Measurement of Environmental Benefits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kovenock, D. and E. Sadka (1981), ‘Progression under the Benefit Approach to the Theory of Taxation’, Economics Letters 8, 95-99.Google Scholar
  24. Kristöm, B. and P. Riera (1996), ‘Is the Income Elasticity of Environmental Improvements Less Than One?’, Environmental and Resource Economics 7, 45-55.Google Scholar
  25. Lambert, P. J. (2001), The Distribution and Redistribution of Income, third edition. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Madden, P. (1991), ‘A generalization of Hicksian q-substitutes and Complements with Application to Demand Rationing’, Econometrica 59, 1497-1508.Google Scholar
  27. Maital, S. (1973), ‘Public Goods and Income Distribution: Some Further Results’, Econometrica 41, 561-568.Google Scholar
  28. Mäler, K.-G. (1985), ‘Welfare Economics and the Environment’, in A. V. Kneese and J. L. Sweeney, eds., Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics I(1), 3-60. Amsterdam: Elsevier, Science Publishers B.V.Google Scholar
  29. Neary, J. P. and K. W. S. Roberts (1980), ‘The Theory of Household Behaviour under Rationing’, European Economic Review 13, 25-42.Google Scholar
  30. Pearce, D. W. (1980), ‘The Social Incidence of Environmental Costs and Benefits’, in T. O'Riordan and K. Turner, eds., Progress in Resource Management and Environmental Planning 2, John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar
  31. Siebert, H. (1992), Economics of the Environment, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  32. Snow, A. and R. S. Warren (1983), ‘Tax Progression in Lindahl Equilibrium’, Economics Letters 12, 319-326.Google Scholar
  33. Thompson, C. St. and A. W. Tinsley (1978), ‘Income Expenditure Elasticities for Recreation: Their Estimation and Relation to Demand for Recreation’, Journal of Leisure Research 10, 265-270.Google Scholar
  34. Uzawa, H. (1962), ‘Production Functions with Constant Elasticity of Substitution’, Review of Economic Studies 29, 291-299.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Udo Ebert
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of OldenburgOldenburgGermany

Personalised recommendations