IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lsg/lsgwps/wp110.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economy-wide impacts of REDD when there is political influence

Author

Listed:
  • Timothy Laing
  • Charles Palmer

Abstract

National-level strategies for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD), financed by international transfers, have begun to emerge. A three-sector model is developed to explore the economy-wide effects of two policies, incentive payments and taxes, implemented by a government participating in REDD. Two sectors utilise forest as an input to production, one in which forest is substitutable for labour and one in which forest and labour are complements. The government factors in two opposing types of general equilibrium effect when determining the efficient payment level: one that changes the relative price of forest and one that results from the income transfer related to the payment. Unlike taxes, payments result in unequal income transfers and a shift in relative prices. With political influence, the forestusing sectors may lobby for lower payments in order to create a larger international

Suggested Citation

  • Timothy Laing & Charles Palmer, 2013. "Economy-wide impacts of REDD when there is political influence," GRI Working Papers 110, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    • Handle: RePEc:lsg:lsgwps:wp110
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/WP110-economy-impacts-REDD-political-influence.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Delacote, Philippe & Palmer, Charles & Bakkegaard, Riyong Kim & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2014. "Unveiling information on opportunity costs in REDD: Who obtains the surplus when policy objectives differ?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 508-527.
    2. Zhihao Yu, 2005. "Environmental Protection: A Theory of Direct and Indirect Competition for Political Influence," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(1), pages 269-286.
    3. Paul J. Ferraro & R. David Simpson, 2002. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Conservation Payments," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(3), pages 339-353.
    4. Ollivier, Hélène, 2012. "Growth, deforestation and the efficiency of the REDD mechanism," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 312-327.
    5. 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.
    6. Muller, Jeffrey & Albers, Heidi J., 2004. "Enforcement, payments, and development projects near protected areas: how the market setting determines what works where," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 185-204, June.
    7. Deacon Robert T., 1995. "Assessing the Relationship between Government Policy and Deforestation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-18, January.
    8. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    9. Amacher, Gregory S., 2006. "Corruption: A challenge for economists interested in forest policy design," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 85-89, June.
    10. Pagiola, Stefano, 2008. "Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 712-724, May.
    11. Rivers, Nicholas, 2013. "Renewable energy and unemployment: A general equilibrium analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 467-485.
    12. Essi Eerola, 2004. "Forest Conservation – Too Much or Too Little? A Political Economy Model," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(4), pages 391-407, April.
    13. repec:dau:papers:123456789/12951 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Myers, Erin C., 2007. "Policies to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) in Tropical Forests: An Examination of the Issues Facing the Incorporation of REDD into Market-Based Climate Policies," RFF Working Paper Series dp-07-50, Resources for the Future.
    15. Ruben N. Lubowski & Steven K. Rose, 2013. "The Potential for REDD+: Key Economic Modeling Insights and Issues," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 67-90, January.
    16. Schleich, Joachim, 1997. "Environmental Protection With Policies For Sale," Working Papers 51207, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    17. Palmer, Charles, 2011. "Property rights and liability for deforestation under REDD+: Implications for 'permanence' in policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 571-576, February.
    18. 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.
    19. Charles Palmer, 2005. "The Nature of Corruption in Forest Management," World Economics, World Economics, 1 Ivory Square, Plantation Wharf, London, United Kingdom, SW11 3UE, vol. 6(2), pages 1-10, April.
    20. Aronsson, Thomas & Backlund, Kenneth & Sahlén, Linda, 2010. "Technology transfers and the clean development mechanism in a North-South general equilibrium model," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 292-309, August.
    21. Groom, Ben & Palmer, Charles, 2010. "Cost-effective provision of environmental services: the role of relaxing market constraints," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(2), pages 219-240, April.
    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. Andersen, Lykke E. & Groom, Ben & Killick, Evan & Ledezma, Juan Carlos & Palmer, Charles & Weinhold, Diana, 2017. "Modelling Land Use, Deforestation, and Policy: A Hybrid Optimisation-Heterogeneous Agent Model with Application to the Bolivian Amazon," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 76-90.
    2. Koch, Nicolas & Reuter, Wolf Heinrich & Fuss, Sabine & Grosjean, Godefroy, 2017. "Permits vs. offsets under investment uncertainty," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 33-47.
    3. Chiroleu-Assouline, Mireille & Poudou, Jean-Christophe & Roussel, Sébastien, 2018. "Designing REDD+ contracts to resolve additionality issues," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-17.

    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. Delacote, Philippe & Palmer, Charles & Bakkegaard, Riyong Kim & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2014. "Unveiling information on opportunity costs in REDD: Who obtains the surplus when policy objectives differ?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 508-527.
    2. Palmer, Charles & Taschini, Luca & Laing, Timothy, 2017. "Getting more ‘carbon bang’ for your ‘buck’ in Acre State, Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 214-227.
    3. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.
    4. 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.
    5. Aidt, Toke S., 1998. "Political internalization of economic externalities and environmental policy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 1-16, July.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. repec:fgv:epgrbe:v:66:n:1:a:4 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Pauli Lappi, 2021. "Lobbying for size and slice of the quota," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(5), pages 1143-1162, October.
    10. Engel, Stefanie & Palmer, Charles & Taschini, Luca & Urech, Simon, 2012. "Cost-effective payments for reducing emissions from deforestation under uncertainty," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 44837, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    11. Bonnet, Paolo & Olper, Alessandro, 2024. "Party affiliation, economic interests and U.S. governors’ renewable energy policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Uhr, Daniel & Ziero Uhr, Júlia & Mueller, Bernardo, 2012. "Como as ONGs ambientais influenciam a política ambiental brasileira?," Revista Brasileira de Economia - RBE, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil), vol. 66(1), March.
    14. Teun Schrieks & Julia Swart & Fujin Zhou & W. J. Wouter Botzen, 2023. "Lobbying, Time Preferences and Emission Tax Policy," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, March.
    15. Mallard, Graham, 2019. "Regulating whale watching: A common agency analysis," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 191-199.
    16. Per G. Fredriksson, 1999. "The Political Economy of Trade Liberalization and Environmental Policy," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(3), pages 513-525, January.
    17. 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.
    18. Daniel Cardona & Jenny De Freitas & Antoni Rubí-Barceló, 2021. "Environmental policy contests: command and control versus taxes," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(3), pages 654-684, June.
    19. 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.
    20. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 503-520.
    21. Y. Hossein Farzin & Jinhua Zhao, 2003. "Pollution Abatement Investment When Firms Lobby Against Environmental Regulation," Working Papers 2003.82, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D50 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - General
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government 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:lsg:lsgwps:wp110. 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: The GRI Administration (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/grlseuk.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.