Analyzing the impact of tax-based vs. rent-based funding on the effectiveness of environmental protection policies

The necessity of government intervention, particularly through public spending, to address market failure in providing public goods like environmental quality is widely recognized. However, the effectiveness of fiscal environmental policies in improving the environment remains unclear. This paper aims to explore the impact of funding sources for government expenditures on environmental quality. Using a Ramsey growth model, we investigate the consequences of two alternative funding sources for environmental protection: Taxes and natural resources rents. The model highlights that along the balanced growth path, financing environmental spending through taxes enhances environmental quality, while funding from natural resources rents leads to its deterioration. Furthermore, the model emphasizes the crucial role of socio-political institutions governing the economy in understanding the link between environmental protection expenditures and environmental outcomes. To test the model's propositions, we utilize a panel dataset of 76 countries spanning from 1995 to 2018. Our empirical findings corroborate the notion that the funding sources of environmental protection expenditures significantly impact environmental outcomes. Additionally, the results indicate that higher institutional quality, such as greater state capacity, enhances the effectiveness of the government's environmental spending in improving environmental quality. Our findings offer valuable insights for policymakers and researchers seeking to design effective strategies for environmental preservation and sustainable growth.