Advertisement

Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 28, Issue 4, pp 395–408 | Cite as

Optimal Environmental Charges/Taxes: Easy to Estimate and Surplus-yielding

  • Yew-Kwang Ng
Article

Abstract

The estimation of the optimal charges/taxes on environmental disruption and the financing of the spending on the abatement of environmental disruption are important practical problems. This paper shows that, for most cases where some abatement is desirable, both the estimation and the financing problems may be easily solved. It is desirable to charge disruption (at least) at the marginal cost of abatement (which is easier to estimate than the marginal damage of disruption) and such a charge will normally yield total revenue in excess of the amount of abatement spending.

abatement damage estimation double dividend effluent charges environmental disruption environmental protection financing optimal taxes pollution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Batabyal, A. A., ed. (2000), The Economics of International Environmental Agreements. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  2. Bimonte, S. (1999), 'An algorithm for optimal Pigouvian taxes without benefit data’, Environmental and Resource Economics 13, 1-11.Google Scholar
  3. Bosello, F., C. Carraro and M. Galeotti, (2001), 'The double dividend issue: Modeling strategies and empirical findings’, Environment & Development Economics 6(1), 9-45.Google Scholar
  4. Bosquet, B. (2000), 'Environmental tax reform: Does it work? A survey of the empirical evidence’, Ecological Economics 34(1), 19-32.Google Scholar
  5. Bovenberg, A. L. (1998), 'Green tax reforms: Implications for welfare and distribution’, Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics 134(3), 271-95.Google Scholar
  6. Bovenberg, A. L. and Ploeg, F. van der (1994), 'Environmental policy, public finance and the labor market in a second-best world’, Journal of Public Economics 55, 349-390.Google Scholar
  7. De Mooij, R. A. (2000), Environmental Taxation and the Double Dividend. Amsterdam: North-Holand.Google Scholar
  8. Felder, S. and R. Schleiniger, (1995), 'Domestic environmental policy and international factor mobility: A general equilibrium analysis’, Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics 131(3), 547-558.Google Scholar
  9. Frank, R. H. (1999), Luxury Fever: Why Money Fails to Satisfy in an Era of Excess. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  10. Goodstein, Eban (2002), 'Labor supply and the double-dividend’, Ecological Economicsm 42(1-2), 101-106.Google Scholar
  11. Kahn, J. R. & A. Farmer (1999), 'The double dividend, second-best worlds, and real-world environmental policy’, Ecological Economics 30(3), 433-439.Google Scholar
  12. Kaplow, L. (1996), 'The optimal supply of public goods and the distortionary cost of taxation’, National Tax Journal49(4), 13-533.Google Scholar
  13. Lee, S. Ho and I. KIM (2000), 'Self-selection and optimal nonlinear effluent charges’, Environmental & Resource Economics 1-14Google Scholar
  14. Ng, Y.-K. (1979/1983), Welfare Economics: Introduction and Development of Basic Concepts. Basingstoke, Hampshireti, U.K.: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  15. Ng, Y.-K. (1984), 'Quasi-Pareto social improvements’, American Economic Review, December, 74(5), 1033-1050.Google Scholar
  16. Ng, Y.-K. (2000a), 'The optimal size of public spending and the distortionary costs of taxation’, National Tax Journal 52(2), 253-272.Google Scholar
  17. Ng, Y.-K. (2000b), Efficiency, Equality, and public Policy: With a case for Higher Public Spending, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  18. Ng, Y.-K. (2003), 'From preference to happiness: Towards a more complete welfare economics’, Social Choice and Welfare 20, 307-350.Google Scholar
  19. Ng, Y.-K. (2004), Welfare Economics: Towards a More Complete Analysis. London: Macmillan/Palgrave.Google Scholar
  20. Ng, Y.-K. and B. D. Liu (2004), 'Global environmental protection: Solving the international public goods problem by empowering the United Nations through cooperation with WTO’, International Journal of Global Environmental Issues 3(4), 409-417.Google Scholar
  21. Parry, I. W. H. and A. M. Bento (2000), 'Tax deductions, environmental policy, and the "'double dividend’" hypothesis’, Journal of Environmental Economics & Management 39(1), 67-96.Google Scholar
  22. Parry, I. W. H. & W. E. Oates (2000), 'Policy Analysis in the Presence of Distorting Taxes’, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 19(4), 603-613.Google Scholar
  23. Schob, R. (1997), 'Environmental taxes and pre-existing distortions: The normalization trap’, International Tax and Public finance 4(2), 167-176.Google Scholar
  24. Schwartz, Je. & R. Repetto (2000), 'Nonseparable utility and the double dividend debate’, Environmental & Resource Economics 15(2), 149-157.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yew-Kwang Ng
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsMonash UniversityAustralia (E-mail:

Personalised recommendations