IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v16y2012icp14-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A theoretical framework for explaining the choice of instruments in environmental policy

Author

Listed:
  • Böcher, Michael

Abstract

Explaining the choice of instruments in environmental policy is an important research question for political science. Especially the fundamental change in the use of environmental policy instruments since the late 1970s in different countries needs explanations: as alternatives to command-and-control instruments, other instrumental forms (e.g., market-based or cooperative forms of governance) have been discussed and successively implemented in different countries. This paper aims – against the backdrop of German ecological tax reform – to develop an analytical framework to explain the choice of environmental policy instruments better than the most important traditional approaches (naïve instrumentalism and public choice). By using the analytical framework presented here, it is possible to study processes of environmental policy instrument choice without overestimating or underestimating factors that support and limit instrument change.

Suggested Citation

  • Böcher, Michael, 2012. "A theoretical framework for explaining the choice of instruments in environmental policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 14-22.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:16:y:2012:i:c:p:14-22
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.03.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111000311
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.03.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Buchanan, James M & Tullock, Gordon, 1975. "Polluters' Profits and Political Response: Direct Controls Versus Taxes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(1), pages 139-147, March.
    2. Christoph Böhringer & Robert Schwager, 2003. "Die Ökologische Steuerreform in Deutschland – ein umweltpolitisches Feigenblatt," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 4(2), pages 211-222, May.
    3. Herbert Simon, 2000. "Bounded rationality in social science: Today and tomorrow," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 1(1), pages 25-39, March.
    4. Kirchgassner, Gebhard & Schneider, Friedrich, 2003. "On the Political Economy of Environmental Policy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 115(3-4), pages 369-396, June.
    5. Hahn, Robert W, 1990. "The Political Economy of Environmental Regulation: Towards a Unifying Framework," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 21-47, April.
    6. Cashore, Benjamin & van Kooten, G. Cornelis & Vertinsky, Ilan & Auld, Graeme & Affolderbach, Julia, 2005. "Private or self-regulation? A comparative study of forest certification choices in Canada, the United States and Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 53-69, January.
    7. Arvind Panagariya & Paul R. Portney & Robert M. Schwab (ed.), 1999. "environmental and public economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1287.
    8. Hahn, Robert W, 1989. "Economic Prescriptions for Environmental Problems: How the Patient Followed the Doctor's Orders," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 95-114, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Introduction to the Political Economy of Environmental Regulations," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-12, Resources for the Future.
    2. Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney & Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 2004. "The Political Economy of Environmental Policy," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 1, pages 3-30, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Bruno Frey, 1992. "Pricing and regulating affect environmental ethics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(4), pages 399-414, July.
    4. Keohane, Nathaniel O. & Revesz, Richard L. & Stavins, Robert N., 1997. "The Positive Political Economy of Instrument Choice in Environmental Policy," Discussion Papers 10759, Resources for the Future.
    5. Pezzey, John C.V. & Jotzo, Frank, 2010. "Tax-Versus-Trading and Free Emission Shares as Issues for Climate Policy Design," Research Reports 95049, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    6. Boyer, M. & Laffont, J.J., 1996. "Toward a Political Theory of Environmental Policy," Cahiers de recherche 9604, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    7. Yu-Bong Lai, 2009. "Is a Double Dividend Better than a Single Dividend?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 165(2), pages 342-363, June.
    8. Don Fullerton & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2002. "Environmental Controls, Scarcity Rents, and Pre-existing Distortions," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 26, pages 504-522, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Bellanger, Manuel & Fonner, Robert & Holland, Daniel S. & Libecap, Gary D. & Lipton, Douglas W. & Scemama, Pierre & Speir, Cameron & Thébaud, Olivier, 2021. "Cross-sectoral externalities related to natural resources and ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    10. N Hanley & S Hallett & I Moffatt, 1990. "Research Policy and Review 33. Why is More Notice not Taken of Economists' Prescriptions for the Control of Pollution?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 22(11), pages 1421-1439, November.
    11. Sven Rudolph & Friedrich Schneider, 2013. "Political barriers of implementing carbon markets in Japan: A Public Choice analysis and the empirical evidence before and after the Fukushima nuclear disaster," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 15(2), pages 211-235, April.
    12. Richard Schmalensee & Robert N. Stavins, 2019. "Policy Evolution under the Clean Air Act," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(4), pages 27-50, Fall.
    13. Bovenberg, A. Lans & Goulder, Lawrence H., 2002. "Environmental taxation and regulation," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 23, pages 1471-1545, Elsevier.
    14. Kort, P.M., 1992. "The Effects of Marketable Pollution Permits on the Firm's Optimal Investment Policies," Papers 9242, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
    15. L. Kenneth Hubbell & Thomas M. Selden, 1994. "Central Planning, Internal Security, and the Environment," Public Finance Review, , vol. 22(3), pages 291-310, July.
    16. Daniel Halbheer & Sarah Niggli & Armin Schmutzler, 2006. "What Does it Take to Sell Environmental Policy? An Empirical Analysis of Referendum Data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 33(4), pages 441-462, April.
    17. Strunz, Sebastian & Schindler, Harry, 2018. "Identifying Barriers Toward a Post-growth Economy – A Political Economy View," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 68-77.
    18. Kirchgässner, Gebhard, 2014. "On the Process of Scientific Policy Advice - With Special Reference to Economic Policy," Economics Working Paper Series 1438, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    19. Strunz, Sebastian & Schindler, Harry, 2017. "Identifying barriers towards a post-growth economy: A political economy view," UFZ Discussion Papers 6/2017, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    20. Rauscher, Michael, 2001. "International trade, foreign investment, and the environment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 29, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:16:y:2012:i:c:p:14-22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.