Pollution, Property and Prices

Winch, David M.; Dales, J. H.

doi:10.2307/133647

Cited by 170 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In his article (Dales [1968b]), he refers twice to Coase but, again, only on the issue of the definition of property rights, and especially on the distinction between the ownership of a good and ownership on the right to use the good (p. 792 and p. 795). 23 And the several recensions of Dales's book (Fox [1971], Mackintosh [1971], Sewell [1969], Willis [1971], Winch [1969]) did not even mention Coase. ownership were possible.…”

Section: The Lack Of Property Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency without Optimality: A Pragmatic Compromise for Environmental Policies in the Late 1960s

Berta¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the late 1960s, new environmental policies emerged which attempted to reach predetermined pollution standards in a cost-effective way: i.e., the ‘standard-and-tax’ approach proposed by William J. Baumol and Wallace E. Oates and the permits market approach proposed by John Dales. This paper describes the early history of the two approaches, and compares them. Although they flow from different traditions, namely Pigovian versus Coasean, and are often contrasted in the literature, these cost-effective solutions emerged at the same time and for the same reasons. First, they both tried to promote incentives-based policies against traditional regulations; second, they criticized the optimal Pigovian tax, which raised the contentious issue of measuring pollution damage. More broadly, they emerged as a kind of pragmatic compromise, fed by a common attempt to move toward more practical policies: reaching efficiency without optimality, while relying on standards whose setting is a matter for political decision.

show abstract

Section: The Lack Of Property Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency without Optimality: A Pragmatic Compromise for Environmental Policies in the Late 1960s

Berta¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Emissions trading originated in the United States. American economist Dales first put forward the theory of emission trading in 1968 (Winch & Dales, 2002), and then Germany, Britain, Australia and other countries have implemented the emission trading in practice.…”

Section: Emission Rightsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Ecological Compensation Model for Liuxi River Basin Based on Emission Rights

Pan¹,

Tan²,

Mao³

et al. 2019

JMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researches on standards of ecological compensation will raise awareness of protecting the ecological environment in the basin and maintain the economy’s and society’s sustainable development. This paper constructed an ecological compensation model on the Liuxi River Basin in Guangzhou, China. Data and statistics were acquired from the statistical yearbook in Guangzhou Statistical Information Network, including the total GDP, total wastewater discharge amount and total population of Guangzhou for 13 years (1995, 2000, 2005–2015). Then, SPSS was used to fit the scatter plot of volume of wastewater discharged per capita and GDP per capita, and the most accurate regression equation was selected. Most importantly, an ecological compensation model was constructed based on emission rights and it was then used to calculate the annual eco-compensation fee for Conghua, where the river’s upper part is located. The results showed that the amount of ecological compensation in 2017 was 33.821 billion Chinese Yuan, which should be used to compensate Conghua for the emission rights it had given up for protecting water quality of the Liuxi River. This study provided an effective reference to the government’s decision on continuous improvement of the “Guangzhou Ecological Compensation Plan for Liuxi River Basin”.

show abstract

“…Like Baumol and Oates, Dales acknowledged Kneese's work and the progress made in pricing damage and the cost of water pollution. 24 He also referred to a survey of benefit-cost analysis by Alan R. Prest and Ralph Turvey (1965), which mainly provided 22 And the several recensions of Dales's book (Fox 1971;Mackintosh 1971;Sewell 1969;Willis 1969;Winch 1969) did not even mention Coase.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency Without Optimality: Environmental Policies and Pollution Pricing in the Late 1960s

Berta¹

2020

J Hist Econ Thought

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the late 1960s, new environmental policies emerged that attempted to reach predetermined pollution standards in a cost-effective way: i.e., the “standard-and-tax” approach proposed by William J. Baumol and Wallace E. Oates, and the permits market approach proposed by John Dales. This paper describes the early history of the two approaches, and compares them. Although today they refer to different traditions, namely Pigovian versus Coasean, and are often contrasted in the literature, these cost-effective solutions emerged at the same time and for the same reasons. First, they both tried to promote incentives-based policies against traditional regulations; second, they criticized the optimal Pigovian tax, which raised the contentious issue of measuring pollution damage. More broadly, they emerged as a kind of pragmatic compromise, fed by a common attempt to move toward more practical policies: reaching efficiency without optimality, while relying on standards whose setting is a matter for political decision.

show abstract

Pollution, Property and Prices

Cited by 170 publications

References 0 publications

Efficiency without Optimality: A Pragmatic Compromise for Environmental Policies in the Late 1960s

Efficiency without Optimality: A Pragmatic Compromise for Environmental Policies in the Late 1960s

An Ecological Compensation Model for Liuxi River Basin Based on Emission Rights

Efficiency Without Optimality: Environmental Policies and Pollution Pricing in the Late 1960s

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About