IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/1993010108000011434.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Environmental pollution control under alternative incentive structures

Author

Listed:
  • Govindasamy, Ramu

Abstract

The present study examines environmental pollution control under alternative incentive structures with an emphasis on the effectiveness and practicality of alternative policy tools. The focus is on three instruments for controlling pollution: (1) Environmental Bonds; (2) Budget Balancing Incentive Mechanisms; and (3) Environmental Rank Order Tournaments;Environmental bonds typically require more information for implementation than either budget balancing incentive mechanisms or rank order tournaments. However, there is a trade-off between the cost savings from acquiring information and the potential costs from committing an error in assigning pollution control responsibility;Paper I examines the limits to environmental bonds. It identifies three major limitations to environmental bonds: (1) government moral hazard; (2) liquidity constraints; and (3) legal restrictions. Liquidity constraints are a major factor in reducing the attractiveness of applying environmental bonds to the agricultural sector;An additional limitation associated with environmental bonds is that it requires monitoring of individual firms. Xepapadeas (1991) introduced a budget balancing incentive scheme for risk neutral firms, combining subsidies and a random penalty. Paper II shows that, contrary to Xepapadeas, risk aversion is a necessary condition to attain compliance. Using Holmstrom (1982) and Rasmusen (1987), the paper proves that the compliance can be achieved only if the firms are sufficiently risk averse. It also shows that the compliance with the social objectives can be improved by shifting the probability of detection and the fine from a high risk averse firm to a low risk averse firm. The paper also shows that the increase in number of firms has a negative effect on compliance;The problem with the random penalty mechanism is that the firm which is in compliance with optimal pollution abatement objectives, set by the regulator, may still get penalized when the ambient concentration exceeds the optimal level. Rank order tournament is an alternative budget balancing incentive mechanism that induces optimal pollution control effort through tournament among the firms and provides solutions to both complete monitoring and random penalization problems. It is shown that in case of risk neutral firms, rank order tournament can be designed to yield the same efficiency conditions as that of Pigouvian tax when the relation between effort and abatement is nonlinear.

Suggested Citation

  • Govindasamy, Ramu, 1993. "Environmental pollution control under alternative incentive structures," ISU General Staff Papers 1993010108000011434, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:1993010108000011434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/cf40ac8a-963d-46dc-87a2-8ea811c320fa/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Costanza, Robert & Perrings, Charles, 1990. "A flexible assurance bonding system for improved environmental management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 57-75, April.
    2. Eric Rasmusen, 1987. "Moral Hazard in Risk-Averse Teams," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(3), pages 428-435, Autumn.
    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. Angelo Antoci & Simone Borghesi & Marcello Galeotti, 2013. "Environmental options and technological innovation: an evolutionary game model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 247-269, April.
    2. Karp, Larry, 1998. "Nonpoint Source Pollution Taxes and Excessive Tax Burden," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt4z62b52k, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    3. Dunia López-Pintado & Juan D. Moreno-Ternero, 2011. "On the optimal management of teams under budget constraints," Working Papers 11.11, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    4. Dass, Nishant & Nanda, Vikram & Wang, Qinghai, 2013. "Allocation of decision rights and the investment strategy of mutual funds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 254-277.
    5. Mitchell, Paul David, 1999. "The theory and practice of green insurance: insurance to encourage the adoption of corn rootworm IPM," ISU General Staff Papers 1999010108000013154, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    6. Roland Kirstein & Birgit Will, 2006. "Efficient compensation for employees' inventions," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 129-148, April.
    7. Matthias Lang, 2023. "Stochastic contracts and subjective evaluations," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 54(1), pages 104-134, March.
    8. Dovers, Stephen R., 1995. "A framework for scaling and framing policy problems in sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 93-106, February.
    9. Gerard, David, 2000. "The law and economics of reclamation bonds," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 189-197, December.
    10. Goldsmith, Peter D. & Turan, Nesve A. & Gow, Hamish R., 2003. "Food Safety In The Meat Industry: A Regulatory Quagmire," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 6(1), pages 1-13.
    11. Breton, Michele & St-Amour, Pascal & Vencatachellum, Desire, 2003. "Dynamic production teams with strategic behavior," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 875-905, March.
    12. Antoci, Angelo & Borghesi, Simone & Russu, Paolo, 2012. "Environmental protection mechanisms and technological dynamics," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 840-847.
    13. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2007. "Punishing the Innocent along with the Guilty: The Economics of Individual versus Group Punishment," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 81-106, January.
    14. Claude Meidinger & Jean-Louis Rullière & Marie-Claire Villeval, 2000. "Free-Riding and Fairness in Principal -Multi-Agent Relationships: Experimental Evidence," Post-Print halshs-03718476, HAL.
    15. Breton, Michèle & St-Amour, Pascal & Vencatachellum, Désiré, 1998. "Birds of a Feather: Teams as a Screening Mechanism," Cahiers de recherche 9808, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    16. De Marco, Giuseppe & Immordino, Giovanni, 2013. "Partnership, reciprocity and team design," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 39-58.
    17. Bose, Arup & Pal, Debashis & Sappington, David E.M., 2010. "Asymmetric treatment of identical agents in teams," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(7), pages 947-961, October.
    18. Keshab Bhattarai, 2015. "Financial Deepening and Economic Growth in Advanced and Emerging Economies," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(1), pages 178-195, February.
    19. Hourcade, Jean-Charles & Salles, Jean-Michel & Thery, Daniel, 1992. "Ecological economics and scientific controversies. Lessons from some recent policy making in the EEC," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 211-233, December.
    20. Philip Lawn, 2000. "Ecological Tax Reform: Many Know Why But Few Know How," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 143-164, June.

    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:isu:genstf:1993010108000011434. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.