IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wej/wldecn/183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does European Union Environmental Policy Pass a Cost–Benefit Test?

Author

Listed:
  • David Pearce

Abstract

Most European Union countries are committed to some form of regulatory impact assessment, and in some cases these assessments involve the formal use of cost–benefit analysis. The European Treaty of Union also calls for a comparison of costs and benefits for all European regulations. Despite this, only a limited number of regulations have been subject to cost–benefit analysis. Using a variety of sources, this paper investigates whether or not a selection of major environmental regulations would pass a cost–benefit test. The general answer is that, while some do, most do not. This finding has major implications for the efficiency of European environmental legislation, and reflects on the willingness of Member States to sign up to inefficient regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • David Pearce, 2004. "Does European Union Environmental Policy Pass a Cost–Benefit Test?," World Economics, World Economics, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE, vol. 5(3), pages 115-137, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wej:wldecn:183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.worldeconomics.com/Journal/Papers/Article.details?ID=183
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jan Zápal, 2007. "The Relation Between the Cyclically Adjusted Budget Balance and the Growth Accounting Method of Deriving Net Fiscal Effort," Czech Economic Review, Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, Institute of Economic Studies, vol. 1(3), pages 324-334, November.
    2. Richard S. J. Tol, 2021. "Europe’s Climate Target for 2050: An Assessment," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 56(6), pages 330-335, November.
    3. Cecere, Grazia & Mancinelli, Susanna & Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2014. "Waste prevention and social preferences: the role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 163-176.
    4. Mazzanti, Massimiliano & Montini, Anna & Zoboli, Roberto, 2006. "Municipal Waste Production, Economic Drivers, and 'New' Waste Policies: EKC Evidence from Italian Regional and Provincial Panel Data," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 12053, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    5. Dieter Helm, 2005. "Economic Instruments and Environmental Policy," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 36(3), pages 205-228.
    6. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Anna Montini & Francesco Nicolli, 2008. "Embedding Landfill Diversion in Economic, Geographical and Policy Settings Panel based evidence from Italy," Working Papers 2008.71, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    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:wej:wldecn:183. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Ed Jones (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.