Skip to main content
Log in

Reconciling the Green Accounts

  • Published:
Environmental and Resource Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In an optimally managed economy, green nationalexpenditure is equal to the linearization of the Hamiltonian from theproblem of maximizing discounted social utility. Herein, we utilize theadjoint conditions to add to the basis for viewing green NNP as an index ofsocial utility under ideal conditions and to show the equality of netnational income and expenditure. The results apply even when returns toscale are increasing or decreasing. Unpriced, net environmental benefitsshould be incorporated into comprehensive NNP in much the same way as thedisutility of labor. Otherwise, current practices of the national accountscan be defended, including the treatment of capital gains.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asheim, G. B. (1996), ‘Capital Gains and Net National Product in Open Economies’, Journal of Public Economics 59(3), 419-434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, R. D. (2001), ‘Seeing the Trees as a Forest: What Counts in Green Accounting’, Ecological Economics 36, 61-69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R. et al. (1997), ‘The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital’, Nature (15 May) 387, 253-260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartwick, J. M. (2000), National Accounting and Capital. Northampton MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman, M. L. (1976), ‘On the Welfare Significance of Net National Product’, Quarterly Journal of Economics 90, 156-162.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cairns, R.D. Reconciling the Green Accounts. Environmental and Resource Economics 25, 51–63 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023657029623

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023657029623

Navigation