IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sie/siegen/105-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The 'materials balance approach' to pollution: its origin, implications and acceptance

Author

Abstract

In their seminal paper on "production, consumption and externalities" (AER, 1969), Ayres and Kneese initiated a research program on comprehensive analysis and management of residuals and pollution based on two pillars: the study of the residuals-generating materials flow subject to the mass balance principle and the concept of pervasive (pollution) externality. The present paper aims at (i) recalling the origin of that program, (ii) sheding some light on its principal implications from today's perspective and (iii) giving a tentative assessment on how it has been received by environmental and resource economists over the last decades. It is argued that while the externality approach to pollution gained widespread acceptance, the research community was rather reluctant in following Ayres and Kneese's 'material balance approach'. It is shown that neglecting the mass balance principle may - but need not always - lead to flawed policy advice.

Suggested Citation

  • Rüdiger Pethig, 2003. "The 'materials balance approach' to pollution: its origin, implications and acceptance," Volkswirtschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 105-03, Universität Siegen, Fakultät Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Wirtschaftsinformatik und Wirtschaftsrecht.
    • Handle: RePEc:sie:siegen:105-03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.wiwi.uni-siegen.de/vwl/repec/sie/papers/105-03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eichner, Thomas & Pethig, Rudiger, 2001. "Product Design and Efficient Management of Recycling and Waste Treatment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 109-134, January.
    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. Ebert, Udo & Welsch, Heinz, 2011. "Optimal environmental taxes and standards: Implications of the materials balance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2454-2460.
    2. Andreas Eder, 2022. "Environmental efficiency measurement when producers control pollutants under heterogeneous conditions: a generalization of the materials balance approach," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 57(2), pages 157-176, April.
    3. Empora, Neophyta & Mamuneas, Theofanis P. & Stengos, Thanasis, 2020. "Output and pollution abatement in a U.S. state emission function," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 44-65, February.
    4. K Hervé Dakpo, 2016. "On modeling pollution-generating technologies: a new formulation of the by-production approach," Working Papers SMART 16-06, INRAE UMR SMART.
    5. Ke Wang & Zhifu Mi & Yi‐Ming Wei, 2019. "Will Pollution Taxes Improve Joint Ecological and Economic Efficiency of Thermal Power Industry in China?: A DEA‐Based Materials Balance Approach," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 23(2), pages 389-401, April.
    6. Eder, Andreas, 2021. "Environmental efficiency measurement when producers control pollutants under heterogeneous conditions: a generalization of the materials balance approach," Discussion Papers DP-75-2021, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    7. Finn R. Førsund, 2018. "Multi-equation modelling of desirable and undesirable outputs satisfying the materials balance," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 67-99, February.
    8. Lauwers, Ludwig, 2009. "Justifying the incorporation of the materials balance principle into frontier-based eco-efficiency models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1605-1614, April.
    9. Robin Hahnel, 2017. "Environmental Sustainability in a Sraffian Framework," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 49(3), pages 477-488, September.
    10. Neophyta Empora & Theofanis Mamuneas, 2011. "The Effect of Emissions on U.S. State Total Factor Productivity Growth," Review of Economic Analysis, Digital Initiatives at the University of Waterloo Library, vol. 3(2), pages 149-172, October.
    11. Forsund, Finn R., 2009. "Good Modelling of Bad Outputs: Pollution and Multiple-Output Production," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 3(1), pages 1-38, August.
    12. Kenneth Løvold Rødseth, 2017. "Axioms of a Polluting Technology: A Materials Balance Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(1), pages 1-22, May.
    13. Abad, Arnaud & Briec, Walter, 2019. "On the axiomatic of pollution-generating technologies: Non-parametric production analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(1), pages 377-390.
    14. Niu, Yiran & Boussemart, Jean-Philippe & Shen, Zhiyang & Vardanyan, Michael, 2024. "Performance evaluation using multi-stage production frameworks: Assessing the tradeoffs among the economic, environmental, and social well-being," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 318(3), pages 1000-1013.
    15. repec:zbw:inwedp:752021 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Dakpo, K Hervé, 2016. "On modeling pollution-generating technologies: a new formulation of the by-production approach," Working Papers 245191, Institut National de la recherche Agronomique (INRA), Departement Sciences Sociales, Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement (SAE2).
    17. Andreas Eder, 2021. "Environmental efficiency measurement when producers control pollutants under heterogeneous conditions: a generalization of the materials balance approach," Working Papers 752021, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Institute for Sustainable Economic Development.
    18. Chapple, Wendy & Paul, Catherine J. Morrison & Harris, Richard, 2005. "Manufacturing and corporate environmental responsibility: cost implications of voluntary waste minimisation," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 347-373, September.
    19. Kenneth Rødseth & Eirik Romstad, 2014. "Environmental Regulations, Producer Responses, and Secondary Benefits: Carbon Dioxide Reductions Under the Acid Rain Program," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(1), pages 111-135, September.
    20. Eder, Andreas, 2020. "Environmental efficiency measurement when producers control pollutants under heterogeneous conditions: A generalization of the materials balance approach," FORLand Working Papers 26 (2020), Humboldt University Berlin, DFG Research Unit 2569 FORLand "Agricultural Land Markets – Efficiency and Regulation".
    21. Pethig, Rudiger, 2006. "Non-linear production, abatement, pollution and materials balance reconsidered," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(2), pages 185-204, March.
    22. Kenneth Løvold Rødseth, 2017. "Environmental regulations and allocative efficiency: application to coal-to-gas substitution in the U.S. electricity sector," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 129-142, April.
    23. Pantelis Kalaitzidakis & Theofanis P. Mamuneas & Thanasis Stengos, 2018. "Greenhouse Emissions and Productivity Growth," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-14, July.
    24. Neophyta Empora, 2017. "Air pollution spillovers and U.S. state productivity growth," University of Cyprus Working Papers in Economics 06-2017, University of Cyprus Department of Economics.

    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. Asuncion Arner Guerre, 2022. "The Extended Producer Responsibility for Waste Oils," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 12(2), pages 210-217, March.
    2. Walls, Margaret, 2003. "The Role of Economics in Extended Producer Responsibility: Making Policy Choices and Setting Policy Goals," Discussion Papers 10855, Resources for the Future.
    3. Richard Benjamin & Jeffrey Wagner, 2006. "Reconsidering the law and economics of low-level radioactive waste management," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, December.
    4. Bernard, Sophie, 2011. "Remanufacturing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 337-351.
    5. Fleckinger, Pierre & Glachant, Matthieu, 2010. "The organization of extended producer responsibility in waste policy with product differentiation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 57-66, January.
    6. Richard Benjamin & Jeffrey Wagner, 2006. "Reconsidering the law and economics of low-level radioactive waste management," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, December.
    7. Marco Runkel, 2003. "Product Durability and Extended Producer Responsibility in Solid Waste Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(2), pages 161-182, February.
    8. Chen, Chialin & Liu, Lucy Qian, 2014. "Pricing and quality decisions and financial incentives for sustainable product design with recycled material content under price leadership," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(PC), pages 666-677.
    9. Egger, Peter H. & Keuschnigg, Christian, 2024. "Resource dependence, recycling, and trade," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    10. Don Fullerton & Thomas C. Kinnaman, 2024. "The Economics of Recycling Heterogeneity," NBER Working Papers 32981, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Yasuyuki Sugiyama & Patcharin Koonsed, 2019. "International recycling firm joint ventures and optimal recycling standards," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 21(3), pages 427-449, July.
    12. Jayashree Mahajan & Asoo J Vakharia, 2016. "Waste Management: A Reverse Supply Chain Perspective," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 41(3), pages 197-208, September.
    13. Calcott, Paul & Walls, Margaret, 2005. "Waste, recycling, and "Design for Environment": Roles for markets and policy instruments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 287-305, November.
    14. García-Barragán, Juan F. & Eyckmans, Johan & Rousseau, Sandra, 2019. "Defining and Measuring the Circular Economy: A Mathematical Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 369-372.
    15. Matthew Gunter, 2007. "Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Household and Municipal Recycling?," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 4(1), pages 83-111, January.
    16. Eugénie Joltreau, 2022. "Extended Producer Responsibility, Packaging Waste Reduction and Eco-design," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 527-578, November.
    17. Thomas Eichner, 2005. "Imperfect Competition In The Recycling Industry," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(1), pages 1-24, February.
    18. Don Fullerton, 2024. "The Circular Economy," CESifo Working Paper Series 11109, CESifo.
    19. Reyer Gerlagh & Etienne Lorang, 2024. "Material Source and Waste Taxes in Competitive Equilibrium," CESifo Working Paper Series 11091, CESifo.
    20. Samakovlis, Eva, 2004. "Revaluing the hierarchy of paper recycling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 101-122, January.

    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:sie:siegen:105-03. 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: Michael Gail (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwsiede.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.