IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae12/126901.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The U.S. Ethanol and Commodity Policy Labyrinth: Looking into Welfare Space to Analyze Policies that Combine Multiple Instruments

Author

Listed:
  • Bullock, David S.
  • Couleau, Anabelle

Abstract

We analyze complicated ethanol/commodity policies not just in (q, p) space, but also in “policy space” and “welfare space.” Specific advantages of conducting policy analysis in welfare and policy spaces are (1) it makes clearer the distributional consequences of policy change instead of focusing solely on the aggregate welfare consequences of policy change; (2) it can be used to analyze the effects of many (even infinitely many) policies instead of just a few; and (3) it makes clearer what it means for policies to be more/less “efficient,” and for policy instruments to make each other more/less “efficient.” We show the usefulness of our framework to critique various conclusions that have recently been expressed in the literature on ethanol policies that employ multiple instruments.

Suggested Citation

  • Bullock, David S. & Couleau, Anabelle, 2012. "The U.S. Ethanol and Commodity Policy Labyrinth: Looking into Welfare Space to Analyze Policies that Combine Multiple Instruments," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126901, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae12:126901
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.126901
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/126901/files/Bullock%20.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.126901?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. Gardner Bruce, 2007. "Fuel Ethanol Subsidies and Farm Price Support," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-22, December.
    2. Bruce A. Babcock, 2008. "Distributional Implications of U.S. Ethanol Policy ," Review of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 30(3), pages 533-542.
    3. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    4. Jean-Marc Bourgeon & David Tréguer, 2010. "Killing two birds with one stone: US and EU biofuel programmes," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 37(3), pages 369-394, September.
    5. Schmitz Andrew & Moss Charles B. & Schmitz Troy G., 2007. "Ethanol: No Free Lunch," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-28, December.
    6. de Gorter, Harry & Just, David R. & Tan, Qinwen, 2009. "The Socially Optimal Import Tariff and Tax Credit for Ethanol with Farm Subsidies," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(1), pages 65-77, April.
    7. Mindy L. Baker, 2008. "Welfare Changes from the U.S. Ethanol Tax Credit: The Role of Uncertainty and Interlinked Commodity Markets," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 08-wp483, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    8. Bruce Gardner, 1983. "Efficient Redistribution through Commodity Markets," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 65(2), pages 225-234.
    9. Kola, Jukka, 1993. "Efficiency of Supply Control Programmes in Income Redistribution," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 20(2), pages 183-198.
    10. Lapan, Harvey E. & Moschini, GianCarlo, 2009. "Biofuels Policies and Welfare: Is the Stick of Mandates Better Than the Carrot of Subsidies?," Staff General Research Papers Archive 13076, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    11. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    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. Vorotnikova, Ekaterina & Seale, James L, 2014. "U.S. Ethanol Mandate Is a Hidden Subsidy to Corn Producers," 2014 Annual Meeting, February 1-4, 2014, Dallas, Texas 162551, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    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. Bullock, David S., 2012. "Dangers of Using Political Preference Functions in Political Economy Analysis: Examples from U.S. Ethanol Policy," 2012 First Congress, June 4-5, 2012, Trento, Italy 124118, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA).
    2. Basak Bayramoglu & Jean-François Jacques, 2016. "The economic and environmental effects of a biofuel mandate policy: the case of France [Les effets économiques et environnementaux d’une politique d’incorporation obligatoire de biocarburants : le ," Post-Print hal-02877013, HAL.
    3. repec:ags:ijag24:347272 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Dong Hee Suh & Charles B. Moss, 2017. "Dynamic adjustment of ethanol demand to crude oil prices: implications for mandated ethanol usage," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1587-1607, June.
    5. Sparks, G.D. & Ortmann, G.F., 2011. "Global biofuel policies: A review," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 50(2), September.
    6. Bullock David S. & Couleau Anabelle, 2014. "Policy Analysis in Welfare and Policy Spaces: Applications to the Labyrinthine U.S. Ethanol Policy Literature," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 35-51, January.
    7. JunJie Wu & Christian Langpap, 2015. "The Price and Welfare Effects of Biofuel Mandates and Subsidies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(1), pages 35-57, September.
    8. Du, Xiaodong, 2008. "Essays on land cash rents, biofuels, and their interactions," ISU General Staff Papers 200801010800001979, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    9. Bullock, D. S. & Salhofer, K., 1998. "Measuring the social costs of suboptimal combinations of policy instruments: A general framework and an example," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 249-259, May.
    10. Fertő, Imre, 1998. "Az agrárpolitika politikai gazdaságtana I. A kormányzati politikák modellezése a mezőgazdaságban [The political economy of agrarian politics. Part I. Modeling of governmental policies in agricultur," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(3), pages 223-246.
    11. Brian C. Murray & Maureen L. Cropper & Francisco C. de la Chesnaye & John M. Reilly, 2014. "How Effective Are US Renewable Energy Subsidies in Cutting Greenhouse Gases?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(5), pages 569-574, May.
    12. Moszoro Marian W., 2018. "Public–Private Monopoly," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 18(2), pages 1-15, April.
    13. Jin-Hyuk Kim, 2013. "A simple model of copyright levies: implications for harmonization," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(6), pages 992-1013, December.
    14. Bielen, David A. & Newell, Richard G. & Pizer, William A., 2018. "Who did the ethanol tax credit benefit? An event analysis of subsidy incidence," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 1-14.
    15. Serra, Teresa, 2011. "Volatility spillovers between food and energy markets: A semiparametric approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1155-1164.
    16. Virginie Doumax, 2010. "The French Biodiesel Production: An Assessment of the Impacts and Interaction Effects of Policy Instruments," CAE Working Papers 87, Aix-Marseille Université, CERGAM.
    17. Saitone, Tina L. & Sexton, Richard J. & Sexton, Steven E., 2008. "Market Power in the Corn Sector: How Does It Affect the Impacts of the Ethanol Subsidy?," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(2), pages 1-26.
    18. Salhofer, K., 1996. "Efficient income redistribution for a small country using optimal combined instruments," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 191-199, February.
    19. repec:lic:licosd:27911 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Mark Skidmore & Chad Cotti & James Alm, 2013. "The Political Economy of State Government Subsidy Adoption: The Case of Ethanol," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 162-180, July.
    21. Ngo Long & Gerhard Sorger, 2010. "A dynamic principal-agent problem as a feedback Stackelberg differential game," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 18(4), pages 491-509, December.
    22. Moschini, GianCarlo & Cui, Jingbo & Lapan, Harvey E., 2012. "Economics of Biofuels: An Overview of Policies, Impacts and Prospects," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 1(3), pages 1-28, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:iaae12:126901. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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.