IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envpol/v4y2001i4p219-233.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost benefit analysis of the sulfur dioxide emissions control policy in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Ikuho Kochi
  • Shunji Matsuoka
  • Mushtaq Memon
  • Hiroaki Shirakawa

Abstract

This study attempted to examine the economic efficiency of the sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ) emissions control policy in Japan using a cost-benefit analysis (CBA). The SO 2 emissions control policy is divided into three stages by epochal policy decisions. Reducing the incidence of chronic bronchitis and asthma are the two main policy benefits considered in this study, and they are estimated mainly based on the cost of illness approach. Policy costs have been derived from private sector investments for pollution control to meet the pollution standards under command and control (CAC) regulations. The estimated results, using a social discount rate of 2.5%, indicate a cost-benefit ratio of 5.39 in stage 1 (1968–1973), 1.18 in stage 2 (1974–1983), and 0.41 in stage 3 (1984–1993). This result indicates that the CAC in Japan used to have strong efficiency but that this efficiency has decreased over time. Our paper suggests that it is necessary to reconsider policy approaches in light of policy efficiency and in moving from SO 2 to new target priority pollutants. Copyright Springer Japan 2001

Suggested Citation

  • Ikuho Kochi & Shunji Matsuoka & Mushtaq Memon & Hiroaki Shirakawa, 2001. "Cost benefit analysis of the sulfur dioxide emissions control policy in Japan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(4), pages 219-233, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envpol:v:4:y:2001:i:4:p:219-233
    DOI: 10.1007/BF03354017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF03354017
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF03354017?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. Helfand, Gloria E, 1991. "Standards versus Standards: The Effects of Different Pollution Restrictions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 622-634, June.
    2. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    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. Don Fullerton & Garth Heutel, 2007. "Who bears the burden of a tax on carbon emissions in Japan?," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(4), pages 255-270, December.
    2. George Halkos & Shunsuke Managi & Kyriaki Tsilika, 2018. "Measuring air polluters’ responsibility in transboundary pollution networks," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(3), pages 619-639, July.

    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. Unnevehr, Laurian J. & Jensen, Helen H., 1999. "The economic implications of using HACCP as a food safety regulatory standard," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 625-635, December.
    2. Ikuho Kochi & Shunji Matsuoka & Mushtaq Ahmed Memon & Hiroaki Shirakawa, 2001. "Cost benefit analysis of the sulfur dioxide emissions control policy in Japan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 4(4), pages 219-233, December.
    3. Brozovic, Nicholas & Sunding, David L. & Zilberman, David, 2004. "Prices versus Quantities Reconsidered," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20257, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Kort, Peter M., 1995. "Optimal investment policies for a polluting firm in an uncertain environment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 82-96, August.
    5. Stephan P. Goetz & Donald J. Kemlage, 1996. "TSD Facilities Location And Environmental Justice," The Review of Regional Studies, Southern Regional Science Association, vol. 26(3), pages 285-300, Winter.
    6. Katrin Millock, 1999. "Endogenous Monitoring: a New Challenge for the Regulation of Energy Externalities," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 68(4), pages 635-646.
    7. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    8. Inés Macho-Stadler, 2008. "Environmental regulation: choice of instruments under imperfect compliance," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, March.
    9. Sam Fankhauser & Cameron Hepburn, 2009. "Carbon markets in space and time," GRI Working Papers 3, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    10. Michael R. Caputo & Dmitriy Popov, 2014. "Comparative Statics Of A Monopolistic Firm Facing Rate-Of-Return And Command-And-Control Pollution Constraints," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(S1), pages 17-35, December.
    11. Cinzia Di Novi, 2007. "An Economic Evaluation of Life-Style and Air-pollution-related Damages: Results from the BRFSS," JEPS Working Papers 07-001, JEPS.
    12. Managi, Shunsuke & Opaluch, James J. & Jin, Di & Grigalunas, Thomas A., 2006. "Stochastic frontier analysis of total factor productivity in the offshore oil and gas industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 204-215, November.
    13. Bonacina, Monica & Gulli`, Francesco, 2007. "Electricity pricing under "carbon emissions trading": A dominant firm with competitive fringe model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4200-4220, August.
    14. Quintano, Claudio & Mazzocchi, Paolo & Rocca, Antonella, 2021. "Evaluation of the eco-efficiency of territorial districts with seaport economic activities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    15. Oliver Fromm, 2000. "Ecological Structure and Functions of Biodiversity as Elements of Its Total Economic Value," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(3), pages 303-328, July.
    16. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2006. "Environmental Morale and Motivation," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    17. Shouqiang Wang & Peng Sun & Francis de Véricourt, 2016. "Inducing Environmental Disclosures: A Dynamic Mechanism Design Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 371-389, April.
    18. Brita Bye & Karine Nyborg, 1999. "The Welfare Effects of Carbon Policies: Grandfathered Quotas versus Differentiated Taxes," Discussion Papers 261, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    19. Panos Hatzipanayotou & Sajal Lahiri & Michael S. Michael, 2002. "Can cross–border pollution reduce pollution?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 805-818, November.
    20. Arguedas, Carmen & Rousseau, Sandra, 2009. "A note on the complementarity of uniform emission standards and monitoring strategies," Working Papers 2009/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.

    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:spr:envpol:v:4:y:2001:i:4:p:219-233. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.