A supplemental text for courses in environmental economics, environmental science, and environmental politics. Writing style is nontechnical and accessible. This second edition is revised to account for changes in the institutional, legal, and regulatory framework of environmental policy, with updated chapters on EPA and federal regulation, air and water pollution policy, and hazardous and toxic substances. There are new chapters on market-based environmental policies, global climate change, and solid waste. Portney is president and senior fellow of Resources for the Future. Stavins is professor of business and government and faculty chair of the Environment and Natural Resources Program at Harvard University. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR
The full effects of decisions made today about many environmental policies -including climate change and nuclear waste- will not be felt for many years. For issues with long-term ramifications, analysts often employ discount rates to compare present and future costs and benefits. This is reasonable, and discounting has become a procedure that raises few objections. But are the methods appropriate for measuring costs and benefits for decisions that will have impacts 20 to 30 years from now the right ones to employ for a future that lies 200 to 300 years in the future? This landmark book argues that methods reasonable for measuring gains and losses for a generation into the future may not be appropriate when applied to a longer span of time. Paul Portney and John Weyant have assembled some of the world's foremost economists to reconsider the purpose, ethical implications, and application of discounting in light of recent research and current policy concerns. These experts note reasons why conventional calculations involved in discounting are undermined when considering costs and benefits in the distant future, including uncertainty about the values and preferences of future generations, and uncertainties about available technologies. Rather than simply disassemble current methodologies, the contributors examine innovations that will make discounting a more compelling tool for policy choices that influence the distant future. They discuss the combination of a high shout-term with a low long-term diescount rate, explore discounting according to more than one set of anticipated preferences for the future, and outline alternatives involving simultaneous consideration of valuation, discounting and political acceptability.
While more than 2,700 emergency removals of hazardous materials have taken place under Superfund, implementing the long-term cleanup program has been the object of considerable controversy. One of the most contentious issues is whether the liability standards in the law should be revised. The authors analyze the pros and cons associated with the current liability approach, as well as with a variety of alternative strategies.
The purpose of this volume is to demonstrate how contemporary institutional economic analysis can be applied to the resolution of economic problems. All of the essays in this book challenge the conventional wisdom in the problem areas addressed. They advocate policy positions that often run contrary to views widely held by academic economists and policy makers alike. The general literature of institutional economics is unorthodox, beginning with its methodological foundations and continuing through the kind of policy analysis found in these pages. The orthodox tradition in economics is commonly characterized as "neoclassical economics." Neoclassical economics fosters the myth that only "the market" can efficiently allocate a society's economic resources and equitably distribute its income. It provides the intellectual defense for in which "free markets" are championed over democratic capitalist ideology policy formation, which it contends is neither efficient nor equitable. For both professional economists and policy makers of a conservative political persuasion, neoclassical economics writes the script for a morality play in which the market is the "good guy" and the government is the "bad guy." As such, it undermines the belief that free societies can enhance economic welfare through the use of democratic processes in the formulation of economic policies.
One of the difficulties associated with Superfund—the federal government's program for cleaning up toxic waste sites in the United States—is the poor understanding we have about who is actually bearing its costs. While it is known that the tax on chemical and petroleum feedstocks raises about $570 million annually for the Superfund Trust Fund and the corporate environmental tax raises another $460 millino each year, further reliable data are only now becoming available. Researchers are beginning to understand how much potentially responsible parties and their insurers are spending on both transaction costs and on-site cleanups. Unfortunately, this is only the first part of the puzzle. Ultimately, these costs are borne by individuals--as consumers of the products or services provided or as share- or bond-holders, employees, or managers of the company. To date, no one has attempted to estimate the distribution of initial costs under the Superfund liability system or examined carefully the indirect effects of the costs of the Superfund program on other industries. In this book, the authors develop information on who pays the costs and who bears the burden under the current liability scheme in Superfund on a site-by-site basis. They look at short-term financial implications of changes in liability and taxes on key sectors affected by Superfund: chemicals, oil, mining, wood preserving, and commercial property-casualty insurers. They analyze the incidence of different taxing mechanisms and compare and contrast the financial effects on specific industries of the current Superfund program and of several alternative lability and tax-based funding mechanisms available. The alternative liability approaches examined include a scenario in which liability is eliminated for all sites created before Superfund was enacted, as well as a scenario in which parties are released from liability at sites where municipal and industrial wastes were codisposed. Because any change in liability will require a corollary change in trust fund revenues, the authors also assess the economic implications of a variety of taxes that could be used to finance the creation of a larger trust fund for site cleanups. These include an increase in the corporate environmental tax and the implemenation of new taxes, such as an excise tax on commercial insurance. Don Fullerton is a professor of economics and public policy at Carnegie Mellon, H. John Heinz III School of Public Policy and Management. Robert E. Litan, is a senior fellow at Brookings, and formerly was deputy assistant attorney general in the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Paul R. Portney is vice president and senior fellow at resources for the Future. Katherine N. Probst is a fellow in the Center for Risk Management at Resources for the Future.
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.