贸易自由化与减少污染的选择

IF 2.2 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS
Takumi Haibara
{"title":"贸易自由化与减少污染的选择","authors":"Takumi Haibara","doi":"10.1017/s1355770x24000068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>It is well known that a consumer price-neutral reform of consumption taxes and import tariffs is welfare-improving. This paper shows that such price controls are inferior to quantity controls in terms of welfare improvement. The paper next turns to a comparison of different abatement strategies. Whether or not policy changes should fix private abatement or public abatement relates to the level of earmarking, and depends on the relationship between private production and public abatement. There are cases in which increased public abatement <span>only</span> improves welfare by more than both increased private and public abatement together. The paper recommends that environmental earmarking in the form of public abatement should be delivered to cushion price hikes and sustain private energy consumption.</p>","PeriodicalId":47751,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Development Economics","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trade liberalization and the choice of pollution abatement\",\"authors\":\"Takumi Haibara\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s1355770x24000068\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>It is well known that a consumer price-neutral reform of consumption taxes and import tariffs is welfare-improving. This paper shows that such price controls are inferior to quantity controls in terms of welfare improvement. The paper next turns to a comparison of different abatement strategies. Whether or not policy changes should fix private abatement or public abatement relates to the level of earmarking, and depends on the relationship between private production and public abatement. There are cases in which increased public abatement <span>only</span> improves welfare by more than both increased private and public abatement together. The paper recommends that environmental earmarking in the form of public abatement should be delivered to cushion price hikes and sustain private energy consumption.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47751,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environment and Development Economics\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environment and Development Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355770x24000068\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Development Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355770x24000068","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

众所周知,消费者价格中立的消费税和进口关税改革可以改善福利。本文表明,就改善福利而言,这种价格控制不如数量控制。接下来,本文将对不同的减排策略进行比较。政策变化应固定私人减排还是公共减排,这与指定用途的程度有关,并取决于私人生产与公共减排之间的关系。在某些情况下,增加公共减排对福利的改善程度仅高于同时增加私人减排和公共减排的改善程度。本文建议,应以公共减排的形式提供环境专用资金,以缓解价格上涨和维持私人能源消费。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trade liberalization and the choice of pollution abatement

It is well known that a consumer price-neutral reform of consumption taxes and import tariffs is welfare-improving. This paper shows that such price controls are inferior to quantity controls in terms of welfare improvement. The paper next turns to a comparison of different abatement strategies. Whether or not policy changes should fix private abatement or public abatement relates to the level of earmarking, and depends on the relationship between private production and public abatement. There are cases in which increased public abatement only improves welfare by more than both increased private and public abatement together. The paper recommends that environmental earmarking in the form of public abatement should be delivered to cushion price hikes and sustain private energy consumption.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
4.80%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Environment and Development Economics is positioned at the intersection of environmental, resource and development economics. The Editor and Associate Editors, supported by a distinguished panel of advisors from around the world, aim to encourage submissions from researchers in the field in both developed and developing countries. The Journal is divided into two main sections, Theory and Applications, which includes regular academic papers and Policy Options, which includes papers that may be of interest to the wider policy community. Environment and Development Economics also publishes occasional Policy Fora (discussions based on a focal paper). From time to time the journal publishes special issues based on a particular theme.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信