IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fth/helsec/491.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Forest Conservation - Too Much or Too Little? A Political Economy Model

Author

Listed:
  • Eerola, E.

Abstract

This paper studies the formation of forest conservation policy when the government is influenced by an environmental lobby and an industrial lobby representing a non-competitive forest industry. Lobbying is modelled as a common agency game which is extended to allow for asymmetries in lobbying technologies. When the forest product is exported the politically determined conservation policy always departs from the socially optimal policy in favor of the more efficient lobby. But when the forest product is destined for domestic markets conservation may ve excessive from the social point of view even though the industrial lobby has more efficient lobbying technology than the environmental lobby.

Suggested Citation

  • Eerola, E., 2000. "Forest Conservation - Too Much or Too Little? A Political Economy Model," University of Helsinki, Department of Economics 491, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:fth:helsec:491
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barnett, A H, 1980. "The Pigouvian Tax Rule under Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 1037-1041, December.
    2. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Menu Auctions, Resource Allocation, and Economic Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(1), pages 1-31.
    3. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    4. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1996. "Electoral Competition and Special Interest Politics," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 63(2), pages 265-286.
    5. Giovanni Maggi & Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 1999. "Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1135-1155, December.
    6. Schleich, Joachim, 1999. "Environmental quality with endogenous domestic and trade policies1," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 53-71, March.
    7. Faure-Grimaud, Antoine & Laffont, Jean-Jacques & Martimort, David, 1999. "The endogenous transaction costs of delegated auditing," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 43(4-6), pages 1039-1048, April.
    8. Jean-Jacques Laffont & Jean Tirole, 1993. "A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262121743, April.
    9. Fredriksson, Per G., 1997. "The Political Economy of Pollution Taxes in a Small Open Economy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 44-58, May.
    10. Devashish Mitra, 2016. "Endogenous Lobby Formation and Endogenous Protection: A Long-Run Model of Trade Policy Determination," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Political Economy of Trade Policy Theory, Evidence and Applications, chapter 1, pages 3-21, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Aidt, Toke S., 1998. "Political internalization of economic externalities and environmental policy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 1-16, 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. Gaoussou DIARRA & Sébastien MARCHAND, 2011. "Does Pervasive Corruption Matter For Firm's Demand for Good Governance in Developing Countries?," Working Papers 201112, CERDI.
    2. Mallard, Graham, 2019. "Regulating whale watching: A common agency analysis," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 191-199.
    3. Qianqian Shao & Thorsten Janus & Maarten J. Punt & Justus Wesseler, 2018. "The Conservation Effects of Trade with Imperfect Competition and Biased Policymakers," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    4. Marchand, Sébastien, 2016. "The colonial origins of deforestation: an institutional analysis," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 318-349, June.
    5. Laing, Timothy & Palmer, Charles, 2015. "Economy-wide impacts of REDD when there is political influence," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 107-126.
    6. Graham Mallard, 2014. "Static Common Agency And Political Influence: An Evaluative Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 17-35, February.
    7. Philippe Delacote, 2011. "How concessions’ size may influence systemic corruption in forest harvesting: A theoretical assessment," Working Papers - Cahiers du LEF 2011-05, Laboratoire d'Economie Forestiere, AgroParisTech-INRA.
    8. Sébastien MARCHAND, 2010. "Historical and Comparative Institutional Analysis: Evidences from Deforestation," Working Papers 201016, CERDI.
    9. Isabelle Cadoret & Fabio Padovano, 2018. "Derterminants and consequences of the stringency of environmental policies: an empirical test," Economics Working Paper from Condorcet Center for political Economy at CREM-CNRS 2018-04-ccr, Condorcet Center for political Economy.

    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. Olper, Alessandro, 2017. "The political economy of trade-related regulatory policy: environment and global value chain," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 5(3), February.
    2. Conconi, P., 2000. "Green and Producer Lobbies: Enemies or Allies?," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 570, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    3. Fredriksson, Per G. & Neumayer, Eric & Damania, Richard & Gates, Scott, 2005. "Environmentalism, democracy, and pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 343-365, March.
    4. Conconi, Paola, 2003. "Green lobbies and transboundary pollution in large open economies," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 399-422, March.
    5. Chad Lawley & Hartley Furtan, 2008. "The Political Trade‐Off Between Environmental Stringency And Economic Development In Rural America," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 547-566, August.
    6. Graham Mallard, 2014. "Static Common Agency And Political Influence: An Evaluative Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 17-35, February.
    7. Schleich, Joachim, 1999. "Environmental quality with endogenous domestic and trade policies1," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 53-71, March.
    8. Catola, Marco & D'Alessandro, Simone, 2020. "Market competition, lobbying influence and environmental externalities," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    9. Jussila Hammes, Johanna, 2011. "Path dependence: Biofuels policy under uncertainty about greenhouse gas emissions," Working Papers 2011:1, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute (VTI).
    10. Giovanni Facchini, 2004. "The political economy of international trade and factor mobility," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 1-32, February.
    11. Mazza, Isidoro & van Winden, Frans, 2008. "An endogenous policy model of hierarchical government," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 133-149, January.
    12. Toke Aidt, 2004. "The rise of environmentalism, pollution taxes and intra-industry trade," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-12, January.
    13. Dapeng Cai & Jie Li, 2020. "Pollution for Sale: Firms’ Characteristics and Lobbying Outcome," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(3), pages 539-564, November.
    14. Voss, Achim & Schopf, Mark, 2021. "Lobbying over exhaustible-resource extraction," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    15. Cassing, James H. & Long, Ngo Van, 2021. "Trade in trash: A political economy approach," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    16. Fünfgelt, Joachim & Schulze, Günther G., 2016. "Endogenous environmental policy for small open economies with transboundary pollution," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 294-310.
    17. Martimort, David, 2019. ""When Olson Meets Dahl": From Inefficient Groups Formation to Inefficient Policy-Making," CEPR Discussion Papers 13843, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Eliste, Paavo & Fredriksson, Per G., 2002. "Environmental Regulations, Transfers, and Trade: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 234-250, March.
    19. Joan Canton, 2009. "Environmentalists' Behaviour and Environmental Policies policies," Working Papers 2009.76, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    20. Houda Haffoudhi, 2005. "Political-support lobbies responses to international environmental agreements," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques j05053, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    FOREST POLICY ; GOVERNMENT ; ENVIRONMENT;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry

    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:fth:helsec:491. 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: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/valhefi.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.