IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ils/wpaper/20110402.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Spillovers and Taxes: What Drives Strategic Competition in Environmental Policies?

Author

Listed:
  • B. Andrew Chupp

    (Department of Economics, Illinois State University)

Abstract

It has been widely shown in the literature that states act strategically when forming environmental policies. However, this strategic interaction could be the result of two different effects. In the hypothesis of tax competition, states strategically set environmental standards in order to attract a fixed amount of mobile capital. In a spillover model, states set environmental policies strategically in response to pollution that spills over from other states. The previous literature has been unable to separate the two effects. Using weighting matrices specifically tailored to each form of competition, I am able to separate the effects, showing that tax competition explains 38% of interaction in environmental policy while spillover competition explains 62%.

Suggested Citation

  • B. Andrew Chupp, 2011. "Spillovers and Taxes: What Drives Strategic Competition in Environmental Policies?," Working Paper Series 20110402, Illinois State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:ils:wpaper:20110402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economics.illinoisstate.edu/RePec/Papers/20110402.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2011
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Masayoshi Hayashi & Robin Boadway, 2001. "An empirical analysis of intergovernmental tax interaction: the case of business income taxes in Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 34(2), pages 481-503, May.
    2. Roelfsema, Hein, 2007. "Strategic delegation of environmental policy making," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 270-275, March.
    3. Besley, Timothy & Case, Anne, 1995. "Incumbent Behavior: Vote-Seeking, Tax-Setting, and Yardstick Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 25-45, March.
    4. Arik Levinson, 2001. "An Industry-Adjusted Index of State Environmental Compliance Costs," NBER Chapters, in: Behavioral and Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy, pages 131-158, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Kelejian, Harry H & Prucha, Ingmar R, 1998. "A Generalized Spatial Two-Stage Least Squares Procedure for Estimating a Spatial Autoregressive Model with Autoregressive Disturbances," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 99-121, July.
    6. Federico Revelli, 2001. "Spatial patterns in local taxation: tax mimicking or error mimicking?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(9), pages 1101-1107.
    7. Federico Revelli, 2002. "Testing the taxmimicking versus expenditure spill-over hypotheses using English data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(14), pages 1723-1731.
    8. Daniel L. Millimet & John A. List, 2003. "A Natural Experiment on the ‘Race to the Bottom’ Hypothesis: Testing for Stochastic Dominance in Temporal Pollution Trends," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 65(4), pages 395-420, September.
    9. Dijkstra, Bouwe R., 2003. "Direct regulation of a mobile polluting firm," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 265-277, March.
    10. Daniel L. Millimet, 2003. "Assessing the Empirical Impact of Environmental Federalism," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 711-733, November.
    11. James C. Murdoch & Tod Sandler & Keith Sargent, 1997. "A Tale of Two Collectives: Sulphur versus Nitrogen Oxides Emission Reduction in Europe," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(254), pages 281-301, May.
    12. Kunce, Mitch & Shogren, Jason F., 2007. "Destructive interjurisdictional competition: Firm, capital and labor mobility in a model of direct emission control," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(3), pages 543-549, January.
    13. Harry H. Kelejian & Dennis P. Robinson, 1993. "A Suggested Method Of Estimation For Spatial Interdependent Models With Autocorrelated Errors, And An Application To A County Expenditure Model," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 297-312, July.
    14. Thomas B. Fomby & Limin Lin, 2006. "A Change Point Analysis of the Impact of "Environmental Federalism" on Aggregate Air Quality in the United States: 1940--98," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 44(1), pages 109-120, January.
    15. Kunce, Mitch & Shogren, Jason F., 2002. "On Environmental Federalism and Direct Emission Control," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 238-245, March.
    16. Levinson, Arik, 1997. "A Note on Environmental Federalism: Interpreting Some Contradictory Results," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 359-366, July.
    17. Markusen, James R. & Morey, Edward R. & Olewiler, Nancy, 1995. "Competition in regional environmental policies when plant locations are endogenous," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 55-77, January.
    18. Bivand, Roger & Szymanski, Stefan, 2000. "Modelling the spatial impact of the introduction of Compulsory Competitive Tendering," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 203-219, March.
    19. Craig Brett & Joris Pinkse, 2000. "The determinants of municipal tax rates in British Columbia," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(3), pages 695-714, August.
    20. Glazer, Amihai, 1999. "Local regulation may be excessively stringent," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 553-558, September.
    21. Mitch Kunce, 2004. "Centralized versus local environmental standard setting: firm, capital, and labor mobility in an interjurisdictional model of firm-specific emission permitting," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, March.
    22. Fredriksson, Per G. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2002. "Strategic Interaction and the Determination of Environmental Policy across U.S. States," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 101-122, January.
    23. Heyndels, Bruno & Vuchelen, Jef, 1998. "Tax Mimicking Among Belgian Municipalities," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 51(1), pages 89-101, March.
    24. Heyndels, Bruno & Vuchelen, Jef, 1998. "Tax Mimicking Among Belgian Municipalities," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 51(n. 1), pages 89-101, March.
    25. Wellisch Dietmar, 1995. "Locational Choices of Firms and Decentralized Environmental Policy with Various Instruments," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 290-310, May.
    26. Kunce, Mitch & Shogren, Jason F., 2005. "On interjurisdictional competition and environmental federalism," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 212-224, July.
    27. James C. Murdoch & Morteza Rahmatian & Mark A. Thayer, 1993. "A Spatially Autoregressive Median Voter Model of Recreation Expenditures," Public Finance Review, , vol. 21(3), pages 334-350, July.
    28. Oates, Wallace E. & Schwab, Robert M., 1988. "Economic competition among jurisdictions: efficiency enhancing or distortion inducing?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 333-354, April.
    29. Case, Anne C. & Rosen, Harvey S. & Hines, James Jr., 1993. "Budget spillovers and fiscal policy interdependence : Evidence from the states," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 285-307, October.
    30. Bivand, Roger & Szymanski, Stefan, 1997. "Spatial dependence through local yardstick competition:: theory and testing," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 257-265, August.
    31. John A. List & Shelby Gerking, 2000. "Regulatory Federalism and Environmental Protection in the United States," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(3), pages 453-471, August.
    32. Jan K. Brueckner, 2003. "Strategic Interaction Among Governments: An Overview of Empirical Studies," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(2), pages 175-188, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Mary-Françoise Renard & Hang Xiong, 2012. "Strategic Interactions in Environmental Regulation Enforcement: Evidence from Chinese Provinces," CERDI Working papers halshs-00672449, HAL.
    2. Revelli, Federico, 2006. "Performance rating and yardstick competition in social service provision," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 459-475, February.
    3. Fredriksson, Per G. & List, John A. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2004. "Chasing the smokestack: strategic policymaking with multiple instruments," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 387-410, July.
    4. Jan K. Brueckner, 2003. "Strategic Interaction Among Governments: An Overview of Empirical Studies," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(2), pages 175-188, April.
    5. Federico Revelli, 2005. "On Spatial Public Finance Empirics," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 12(4), pages 475-492, August.
    6. Revelli Federico, 2002. "Neighborhood effects in social service provision. Competition or reflection?," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 200206, University of Turin.
    7. Revelli, Federico, 2003. "Reaction or interaction? Spatial process identification in multi-tiered government structures," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 29-53, January.
    8. Yanqing Jiang, 2014. "Spatial Strategic Interaction In Environmental Protection: An Empirical Study Of The Chinese Provinces," Review of Urban & Regional Development Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 203-216, November.
    9. Fredriksson, Per G. & Matschke, Xenia & Minier, Jenny, 2010. "Environmental policy in majoritarian systems," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 177-191, March.
    10. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2013. "What Do We Know About Corporate Tax Competition?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 66(3), pages 745-774, September.
    11. Levinson, Arik, 2003. "Environmental Regulatory Competition: A Status Report and Some New Evidence," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 56(1), pages 91-106, March.
    12. Bordignon, Massimo & Cerniglia, Floriana & Revelli, Federico, 2003. "In search of yardstick competition: a spatial analysis of Italian municipality property tax setting," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(2), pages 199-217, September.
    13. Massimo Bordignon & Floriana Cerniglia & Federico Revelli, 2002. "In Search for Yardstick Competition: Property Tax Rates and Electoral Behavior in Italian Cities," CESifo Working Paper Series 644, CESifo.
    14. Lars P. Feld, 2006. "Regulatory Competition and Federalism in Switzerland: Diffusion by Horizontal and Vertical Interaction," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-22, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    15. Fredrik Andersson & Rikard Forslid, 2003. "Tax Competition and Economic Geography," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 279-303, April.
    16. Fredriksson, Per G. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2002. "Strategic Interaction and the Determination of Environmental Policy across U.S. States," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 101-122, January.
    17. Sylvie Charlot & Sonia Paty, 2010. "Do Agglomeration Forces Strengthen Tax Interactions?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(5), pages 1099-1116, May.
    18. Fredriksson, Per G. & Millimet, Daniel L., 2002. "Is there a 'California effect' in US environmental policymaking?," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 737-764, November.
    19. Ruiz, Fernando & Gerard, Marcel, 2008. "Is there evidence of strategic corporate tax interaction among EU countries?," MPRA Paper 10094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Fredriksson, Per G. & Mani, Muthukumara & Wollscheid, Jim R., 2006. "Environmental federalism : a panacea or Pandora's box for developing countries?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3847, The World Bank.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tax Competition; Spillovers; Environmental Policy;
    All these keywords.

    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:ils:wpaper:20110402. 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: B. Andrew Chupp (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://economics.illinoisstate.edu .

    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.