Making the Transition

  • Edward B. Barbier
Chapter

Abstract

As outlined in the previous chapter, in order to end the current structural imbalance in the world economy, all economies need to address simultaneously the two key sources of this imbalance: the underpricing of natural capital that leads to its overexploitation, and the insufficient accumulation of human capital to meet the demand, which contributes to wealth inequality. Also, there must be additional policies aimed at encouraging structural transformation in resource-dependent developing economies and ending the significant pockets of rural poverty found worldwide. Finally, as we have seen throughout this book, the global impacts of environmental degradation are becoming a pressing problem. Thus, overcoming these worldwide market failures and environmental threats, especially climate change, ecological scarcity and declining freshwater availability, requires creating global markets.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    IEA/OPEC/OECD/World Bank (2010) Analysis of the Scope of Energy Subsidies and the Suggestions for the G-20 Initiative. Joint Report Prepared for Submission to the G-20 summit Meeting Toronto (Canada), 26–27 June 2010.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    This means that for every dollar earned in revenues by OECD farms, 18 cents came from some kind of agricultural subsidy. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2014) Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2014 — OECD Countries. Paris: OECD,. The OECD member countries include: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and United States. In fact, the agricultural subsidy rate for some individual countries is extremely high. According to OECD (2014), op. cit. in the European Union, producer support is around 20% of gross farm receipts, and the share is even larger for Japan (56%), South Korea (53%), Norway (53%), Switzerland (49%) and Iceland (41%). The European Union (EU) estimate is for the 27 members; i.e., it excludes Croatia, which joined on 1 July 2013. The 27 EU members are: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grant Potter (2014) “Agricultural subsidies remain a staple in the industrial world”, Vital Signs. The World Watch Institute. 28 February 2014. Available at: http://vitalsigns.worldwatch.org/vs-trend/agricultural-subsidies-remain-staple-industrial-worldGoogle Scholar
  4. 5.
    United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) (2011) Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication — A Synthesis for Policymakers. Nairobi: UNEP.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    Ussif Rashid Sumaila, et al. (2010) “Subsidies to High Seas Bottom Trawl Fleets and the Sustainability of Deep-Sea Demersal Fish Stocks”, Marine Policy, 34: 495–497. As the authors estimate the profit earned by bottom trawl fleets is normally not more than 10% of landed value, removal of their subsidies will stop the activities of many of these fleets worldwide, thereby reducing the current threat to deep-sea and high seas fish stocks.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 7.
    Edward B. Barbier and Anil Markandya (2012) A New Blueprint for a Green Economy. Routledge/Taylor & Francis: London, pp. 113–118.Google Scholar
  7. 8.
    C. Böhringer, et al. (2014) “The Impacts of Feed-in Tariffs on Innovation: Empirical Evidence from Germany”, CESIFO Working Paper No. 4680. Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute, Germany, March.Google Scholar
  8. 11.
    Benedict Clements, et al. (eds) (2013) Energy Subsidy Reform: Lessons and Implications. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund (IMF).Google Scholar
  9. For a further comprehensive study of the overall economic, environmental and health benefits of ending the underpricing of fossil fuels globally, see Ian Parry, Dirk Heine, Eliza Lis and Shanjun Li (2014) Getting Prices Right: From Principle to Practice. Washington, D C: International Monetary Fund.Google Scholar
  10. 12.
    Ariel Dinar and R. M. Saleth (2005) “Water Institutional Reforms: Theory and Practice”, Water Policy, 7: 1–19;Google Scholar
  11. C. Dosi and K. W. Easter (2003) “Water Scarcity: Market Failure and the Implications for Water Markets and Privatization”, International Journal of Public Administration, 26(3): 265–290;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. K. W. Easter, and S. Archibald (2002) “Water Markets: The Global Perspective”, Water Resources Impact, 4(1): 23–25;Google Scholar
  13. K. Schoengold and D. Zilberman (2007) “The Economics of Water, Irrigation, and Development”, in Robert Evenson and Prabhu Pingali (eds), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, vol. III. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 2933–2977.Google Scholar
  14. 13.
    Richard D. Horan and James S. Shortle (2011) “Economic and Ecological Rules for Water Quality Trading”, Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 47: 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 14.
    Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2010) Paying for Biodiversity: Enhancing the Cost-Effectiveness of Payments for Ecosystem Services. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lawrence H. Goulder (2004) Induced Technological Change and Climate Policy. Arlington: Pew Center on Global Climate Change.Google Scholar
  17. See also Daron Acemoglu, et al. (2012) “The Environment and Directed Technical Change”, American Economic Review, 102(1): 131–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 17.
    Acemoglu et al. (2012), op. cit.; Goulder (2004), op. cit.; Asian Development Bank (ADB) and Asian Development Bank Institute (ADBI) (2013) Low-Carbon Green Growth in Asia: Policies and Practices. Manila: ADB and ADBI;Google Scholar
  19. W.-S. Hwang, I. Oh and J.-D. Lee (2014) “The Impact of Korea’s Green Growth Policies on the National Economy and Environment”, BEJ. Economic Analysis and Policy, 14(4): 1585–1614;Google Scholar
  20. C. Lu, Q. Ton and X. Liu (2010) “The Impacts of Carbon Tax and Complementary Policies”, Energy Policy, 38: 7278–7285;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. M. Blesl, et al. (2010) “Effects of Climate and Energy Policy Related Measures and Targets on the Future Structure of the European Energy System in 2020 and Beyond”, Energy Policy, 38: 6278–6292;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Carolyn Fischer and Richard Newell (2008) “Environmental and Technology Policies for Climate Mitigation”, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 55: 142–162;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. David Popp (2010) “Innovation and Climate Policy”, NBER Working Paper 15673. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 18.
    Harry Huizinga, Wolf Wagner and Johannes Voget “Lessons from the taxation of cross-border banking for new financial taxes.” VoxEU.org, 11 July 2011. Available at: http://www.voxeu.org/article/why-banks-are-under-taxed-and-what-do-about-it. See also Harry Huizinga, Johannes Voget, and Wolf Wagner (2014) “International Taxation and Cross-Border Banking”, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 6(2): 94–125.Google Scholar
  25. 20.
    P. B. Spahn (2010) “A Double Dividend”, The Broker, 22(Oct/Nov): 8–14.Google Scholar
  26. 21.
    Thornton Matheson (2011) “Taxing Financial Transactions: Issues and Evidence”, IMF Working Paper WP/11/54t. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund, March 2011.Google Scholar
  27. 23.
    Matheson (2011), op. cit.; John Grahl and Photis Lysandorij (2014) “The European Commission’s Proposal for a Financial Transactions Tax: A Critical Assessment”, Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(2): 234–249;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thornton Matheson (2012) “Security Transaction Taxes: Issues and Evidence”, International Journal of Tax and Public Finance, 19: 884–912;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Richard T. Page (2010) “Foolish Revenge or Shrewd Regulation? Financial-Industry Tax Law Reforms Proposed in the Wake of the Financial Crisis”, Tulane Law Review, 85: 191–214;Google Scholar
  30. Daniel Shaviro (2012) “The Financial Transactions Tax versus (?) The Financial Activities Tax”, Law & Economics Research Paper Series Working Paper No. 12–04. New York University School of Law, March 2012.Google Scholar
  31. 24.
    International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2010) A Fair and Substantial Contribution by the Financial Sector. Final Report for the G-20, June, Washington DC: IMF.. Available at: http://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/062710b.pdfGoogle Scholar
  32. 29.
    Claudia Goldin and Lawrence F. Katz (2008) The Race Between Education and Technology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  33. 32.
    See Edward B. Barbier (2011) Scarcity and Frontiers: How Economies Have Developed Through Natural Resource Exploitation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. 33.
    Gavin Wright and Jesse Czelusta (2004) “Why Economies Slow: The Myth of the Resource Curse”, Challenge, 47(2): 6–38, pp. 34–36.Google Scholar
  35. 34.
    Ronald Findlay and Mats Lundahl (1999) “Resource-Led Growth — A Long-Term Perspective: The Relevance of the 1870–1914 Experience for Today’s Developing Economies”, UNU/WIDER Working Paper No. 162. Helsinki: WIDER, pp. 31–32.Google Scholar
  36. 35.
    Paul A. David and Gavin Wright (1997) “The Genesis of American Resource Abundance”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 6: 203–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    For further discussion of the long-run natural resource management and development strategies of Botswana, Malaysia and Thailand, see in particular Barbier (2011), op. cit.; Edward B. Barbier (2005) Natural Resources and Economic Development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ian Coxhead and Sisira Jayasuriya (2003) The Open Economy and the Environment: Development, Trade and Resources in Asia. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Atsushi Iimi (2007) “Escaping from the Resource Curse: Evidence from Botswana and the Rest of the World”, IMF Staff Papers, 54: 663–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Glenn-Marie Lange and Matthew Wright (2004) “Sustainable Development and Mineral Economies: The Example of Botswana”, Environment and Development Economics, 9(4): 485–505;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Maria Sarraf and Moortaza Jiwanji (2001) “Beating the Resource Curse: The Case of Botswana”, Environmental Economics Series. The World Bank Environment Department. Washington DC: The World Bank;Google Scholar
  42. and Jeffrey R. Vincent, Razali M. Ali and Associates (1997) Environment and Development in a Resource-Rich Economy: Malaysia under the New Economic Policy. Harvard Institute for International Development: Harvard University Press. However, it should also be noted that, in all three economies, important sectors and populations have yet to gain significantly from improving the sustainability of the main primary producing sectors. In Malaysia, there is concern about the continuing destruction of forests, especially in the more remote Sabah and Sarawak Provinces, and the expansion of oil palm plantations. In Thailand, the loss of mangroves, growing pollution problems and the failure to instigate development in upland regions are major issues. Botswana has still to grapple with a stagnant agricultural sector, large numbers of people living in fragile environments and widespread rural poverty. Finding ways to broaden the economy-wide benefits and improve the sustainability of resource-dependent economies is an ongoing challenge for such small open economies.Google Scholar
  43. 38.
    Barbier (2005) and (2011), op. cit.; Sarraf and Jiwanji (2001), op. cit.; Thorvaldur Gylfason (2001) “Nature, Power, and Growth”, Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 48(5): 558–588;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Frederick van der Ploeg (2011) “Natural Resources: Curse or Blessing?”, Journal of Economic Literature, 49: 366–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 40.
    Edward B. Barbier (2012) “Natural Capital, Ecological Scarcity and Rural Poverty”, Policy Research Working Paper No. 6232. Washington, DC: The World Bank, October.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 41.
    World Bank (2008) Word Development Report 2008: Agricultural Development. Washington DC: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  47. 42.
    C. Elbers, T. Fujii, P. Lanjouw, B. Özler and W. Yin (2007) “Poverty Alleviation Through Geographic Targeting: How Much Does Disaggregation Help?”, Journal of Development Economics, 83: 198–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 43.
    D. Coady, M. Grosh and J. Hoddinott (2004) “Targeting Outcomes Redux”, World Bank Research Observer, 19(1): 61–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 44.
    K. Higgins, K. Bird and D. Harris (2010) “Policy Responses to the Spatial Dimensions of Poverty”, ODI Working Paper 328. London: Overseas Development Institute, p. 20.Google Scholar
  50. 45.
    Barbier (2005), op. cit.; Barbier, E. B. (2010) “Poverty, Development and Environment”, Environment and Development Economics, 15: 635–660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. David Carr (2009) “Population and Deforestation: Why Rural Migration Matters”, Progress in Human Geography, 33: 355–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Jill L. Caviglia-Harris and D. Harris (2008) “Integrating Survey and Remote Sensing Data to Analyze Land Use Scale: Insights from Agricultural Households in the Brazilian Amazon”, International Regional Science Review, 31: 115–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ian Coxhead, Gerald E. Shively and X. Shuai (2002) “Development Policies, Resource Constraints, and Agricultural Expansion on the Philippine Land Frontier”, Environment and Development Economics, 7: 341–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. S. Dercon, et al. (2009) “The Impact of Agricultural Extension and Roads on Poverty and Consumption Growth in Fifteen Ethiopian Villages”, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 91: 1007–1021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. M. Maertens, M. Zeller and R. Birner (2006) “Sustainable Agricultural Intensification in Forest Frontier Areas”, Agricultural Economics, 34: 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 46.
    Coxhead et al. (2002), op. cit.; Dercon et al. (2009), op. cit.; Maertens et al. (2006), op. cit.; M. R. Bellon, et al. (2005) “Targeting Agricultural Research to Benefit Poor Farmers: Relating Poverty Mapping to Maize Environments in Mexico”, Food Policy, 30: 476–492;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. A. Dillon, M. Sharma and X. Zhang (2011) “Estimating the Impact of Rural Investments in Nepal”, Food Policy, 36: 250–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Erin Sills and Jill L. Caviglia-Harris (2008) “Evolution of the Amazonian Frontier: Land Values in Rondônia, Brazil”, Land Use Policy, 26: 55–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 47.
    World Bank (2008), op. cit.; Christopher B. Barrett (2008) “Smallholder Market Participation: Concepts and Evidence from Eastern and Southern Africa”, Food Policy, 33: 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 48.
    Bellon et al. (2005), op. cit.; Dercon et al. (2009), op. cit.; Dillon et al. (2011), op. cit.; A. Ansoms and A. McKay (2010) “A Quantitative Analysis of Poverty and Livelihood Profiles: The Case of Rural Rwanda”, Food Policy, 35: 584–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. B. Cunguara and I. Darnhofer (2011) “Assessing the Impact of Improved Agricultural Technologies on Household Income in Rural Mozambique”, Food Policy, 36: 378–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. D. Müller and Z. Zeller (2002) “Land Use Dynamics in the Central Highlands of Vietnam: A Spatial Model Combining Village Survey Data with Satellite Imagery Interpretation”, Agricultural Economics, 27: 333–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. S. K. Pattanayak, et al. (2003) “Taking stock of agroforestry adoption studies”, Agroforestry Systems, 57: 173–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. T. Yamano and Y. Kijima (2010) “The Association of Soil Fertility and Market Access with Household Income: Evidence from Rural Uganda”, Food Policy, 35: 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 50.
    S. V. Lall, H. Selod and Z. Shalizi (2006) “Rural-Urban Migration in Developing Countries: A Survey of Theoretical Predictions and Empirical Findings”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3915, May 2006. Washington DC: The World Bank, p. 48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 51.
    See, for example, C. L. Gray (2009) “Rural Out-Migration and Smallholder Agriculture in the Southern Ecuadorian Andes”, Population and Environment, 30: 193–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. C. Greiner and P. Sakdapolrak (2013) “Rural-Urban Migration, Agrarian Change, and the Environment in Kenya: A Critical Review of the Literature”, Population and Environment, 34: 524–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. M. Mendola (2008) “Migration and Technological Change in Rural Households: Complements or Substitutes?”, Journal of Development Economics, 85: 150–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. M. Mendola (2012) “Review Article: Rural Out-Migration and Economic Development at Origin: A Review of the Evidence”, Journal of International Development, 24: 102–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. L. K. VanWey, G. R. Guedes and A. O. D’Antona (2012) “Out-Migration and Land-Use Change in Agricultural Frontiers: Insights from Altamira Settlement Project”, Population and Environment, 34: 44–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 57.
    David W. Pearce (2007) “Do We Really Care About Biodiversity?” Environmental and Resource Economics, 37: 313–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 58.
    For further discussion, see Edward B. Barbier (2012) “Can Global Payments for Ecosystem Services Work?”, World Economics, 13: 157–172.Google Scholar
  73. 61.
    United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2006) Human Development Report 2006. Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis. New York: UNDP.Google Scholar
  74. 62.
    R. E. Just and S. Netanyahu (1998) “International Water Resource Conflicts: Experience and Potential”, chapter 1 in R. E. Just and S. Netanyahu (eds), Conflict and Cooperation on Transboundary Water Resources, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, pp. 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 63.
    E. Stephen Draper and James E. Kundell (2007) “Impact of Climate Change on Trans-Boundary Water Sharing”, Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 133(5): 405–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 64.
    Meredith A. Giordano and Aaron T. Wolf (2003) “Sharing Waters: Post-Rio International Water Management”, Natural Resources Forum, 27: 163–171;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Aaron T. Wolf (2007) “Shared Waters: Conflict and Cooperation”, Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 32: 3.1–3.29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 67.
    Anik Bhaduri and Edward B. Barbier (2008) “International Water Transfer and Sharing: The Case of the Ganges River”, Environment and Development Economics, 13: 29–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 68.
    Edward B. Barbier and Anik Bhaduri (2015) “Transboundary Water Issues”, Chapter 18 in Robert Halvorsen and David Layton (eds), Handbook on the Economics of Natural Resources. Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, pp. 502–528.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Edward B. Barbier 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edward B. Barbier
    • 1
  1. 1.University of WyomingUSA

Personalised recommendations