IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v32y2000i10p1791-1806.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Balancing Competing Principles of Environmental Equity

Author

Listed:
  • Giles Atkinson

    (Department of Geography and Environment, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE, England)

  • Fernando Machado

    (Faculdade de Ciências Económicas e Empresariais, Universidade Católica Portuguesa, Palma de Cima, 1695-095 Lisboa, Portugal)

  • Susana Mourato

    (T H Huxley School of Environment, Earth Sciences and Engineering, Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, 48 Prince's Gardens, London SW7 2PE, England)

Abstract

Diverse and competing principles of equity are argued to be relevant to the burden-sharing problem for environmental improvement programmes. In this paper, a survey-based approach is used to reconcile this conflict, which is defined as sharing of the costs of an environmental programme among different individuals or groups. Respondents were asked to rank hypothetical individuals or groups on the basis of differences in relevant characteristic attributes. These attributes reflect the degree to which individuals are ‘responsible’ for the problem, ‘benefit’ from the policy change implemented, and are ‘able to pay’ for the programme. The econometric analysis of responses casts light on the magnitude of trade-offs between, for example, burden-sharing rules based on the polluter-pays principle and some of its alternatives. Our results indicate that these trade-offs do exist and, furthermore, are significant. Assessment of trade-offs in this way could be an important input into the design of mixed criteria rules for sharing burdens.

Suggested Citation

  • Giles Atkinson & Fernando Machado & Susana Mourato, 2000. "Balancing Competing Principles of Environmental Equity," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(10), pages 1791-1806, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:32:y:2000:i:10:p:1791-1806
    DOI: 10.1068/a32106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a32106
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a32106?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goodwin, P B, 1990. "Demographic Impacts, Social Consequences, and the Transport Policy Debate," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 6(2), pages 76-90, Summer.
    2. Henk Folmer & H. L. Gabel & Hans Opschoor (ed.), 1995. "Principles of Environmental and Resource Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 168.
    3. Eyckmans, Johan, 1997. "Nash Implementation of a Proportional Solution to International Pollution Control Problems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 314-330, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Schaafsma, Marije & Eigenbrod, Felix & Gasparatos, Alexandros & Gross-Camp, Nicole & Hutton, Craig & Nunan, Fiona & Schreckenberg, Kate & Turner, Kerry, 2021. "Trade-off decisions in ecosystem management for poverty alleviation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    2. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    3. Fischhendler, Itay, 2007. "Escaping the "polluter pays" trap: Financing wastewater treatment on the Tijuana-San Diego border," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 485-498, August.
    4. R. Turner, 2007. "Limits to CBA in UK and European environmental policy: retrospects and future prospects," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 253-269, May.
    5. Mzek, Tareq & Samdin, Zaiton & W. Mohamad, Wan Norhidayah, 2022. "Assessing visitors' preferences and willingness to pay for the Malayan Tiger conservation in a Malaysian National Park: A choice experiment method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    6. Nikolaos Thomopoulos & Susan Grant-Muller, 2013. "Incorporating equity as part of the wider impacts in transport infrastructure assessment: an application of the SUMINI approach," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 315-345, February.
    7. repec:sae:envval:v:14:y:2005:i:4:p:483-501 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Scarborough, Helen & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2006. "Estimating intergenerational utility distribution preferences," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139899, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. Paucar-Caceres, A. & Bandala, E.R. & Wright, G.H., 2017. "The impact of global climate change on water quantity and quality: A system dynamics approach to the US–Mexican transborder regionAuthor-Name: Duran-Encalada, J.A," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 256(2), pages 567-581.
    10. Clément, Valérie & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Rulleau, Bénédicte, 2015. "Perceptions on equity and responsibility in coastal zone policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 284-291.
    11. Brady, Michael P. & Chouinard, Hayley H. & Wandschneider, Philip R., 2017. "Me, the Poor or the Environment: Evaluating the Relative Strength of Social and Environmental Preferences," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258548, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Beilei Cai & Trudy Cameron & Geoffrey Gerdes, 2010. "Distributional Preferences and the Incidence of Costs and Benefits in Climate Change Policy," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(4), pages 429-458, August.
    13. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: evidence from a choice experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112963, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Thomopoulos, Nikolaos & Grant-Muller, Susan, 2013. "Incorporating equity as part of the wider impacts in transport infrastructure assessment: an application of the SUMINI approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60073, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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. Na Li Dawson & Kathleen Segerson, 2008. "Voluntary Agreements with Industries: Participation Incentives with Industry-Wide Targets," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 97-114.
    2. John Duggan & Joanne Roberts, 2002. "Implementing the Efficient Allocation of Pollution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1070-1078, September.
    3. Johan Eyckmans & Henry Tulkens, 2006. "Simulating Coalitionally Stable Burden Sharing Agreements for the Climate Change Problem," Springer Books, in: Parkash Chander & Jacques Drèze & C. Knox Lovell & Jack Mintz (ed.), Public goods, environmental externalities and fiscal competition, chapter 0, pages 218-249, Springer.
    4. Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh & Peter Nijkamp, 1998. "Advances in Environmental Economics: Analysis and Modelling," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 98-094/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Kerry Turner, R., 1997. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz: Meadows: a pluralistic and interdisciplinary perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 299-302, September.
    6. Peifang Yang & Daniel T. Kaffine, 2016. "Community-Based Tradable Permits for Localized Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 773-788, December.
    7. Thomas Sterner & Jeroen van den Bergh, 1998. "Frontiers of Environmental and Resource Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 243-260, April.
    8. Eshet, Tzipi & Ayalon, Ofira & Shechter, Mordechai, 2006. "Valuation of externalities of selected waste management alternatives: A comparative review and analysis," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 46(4), pages 335-364.
    9. Birol, Fatih & Keppler, Jan Horst, 2000. "Prices, technology development and the rebound effect," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6-7), pages 457-469, June.
    10. Brousseau, Eric & Dedeurwaerdere, Tom & Jouvet, Pierre-Andre & Willinger, Marc (ed.), 2012. "Global Environmental Commons: Analytical and Political Challenges in Building Governance Mechanisms," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199656202.
    11. Silvia Teizzi, 1999. "External Effects of Agricultural Production in Italy and Environmental Accounting," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(4), pages 459-472, June.
    12. Vanessa Oltra & Maider Saint Jean, 2005. "The dynamics of environmental innovations: three stylised trajectories of clean technology," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 189-212.
    13. Kandelaars, Patricia P. A. A. H. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M., 1997. "Dynamic analysis of materials-product chains: An application to window frames," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 41-61, July.
    14. Gilles Grolleau & Naoufel Mzoughi & Luc Thiébaut, 2004. "Les instruments volontaires :. Un nouveau mode de régulation de l'environnement ?," Revue internationale de droit économique, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(4), pages 461-481.
    15. Matthew McGinty, 2020. "Leadership and Free-Riding: Decomposing and Explaining the Paradox of Cooperation in International Environmental Agreements," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(2), pages 449-474, October.
    16. del Río González, Pablo, 2009. "The empirical analysis of the determinants for environmental technological change: A research agenda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 861-878, January.
    17. Pablo del Río González, 2005. "Analysing the factors influencing clean technology adoption: a study of the Spanish pulp and paper industry," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(1), pages 20-37, January.
    18. Hamamoto, Mitsutsugu, 2006. "Environmental regulation and the productivity of Japanese manufacturing industries," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 299-312, November.
    19. repec:bla:jindec:v:48:y:2000:i:3:p:331-48 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. J. N. Pan & Sheau-Chiann Chen, 2013. "Correlated Risk Assessment and Its Managerial Applications," Diversity, Technology, and Innovation for Operational Competitiveness: Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Technology Innovation and Industrial Management,, ToKnowPress.
    21. van der Vlist, Arno J. & Withagen, Cees & Folmer, Henk, 2007. "Technical efficiency under alternative environmental regulatory regimes: The case of Dutch horticulture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 165-173, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:envira:v:32:y:2000:i:10:p:1791-1806. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.