2010
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-010-9398-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sustainability in Uncertain Economies

Abstract: Comprehensive wealth, Project evaluation, Resilience, Sustainable development, Uncertainty,

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
(30 reference statements)
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, in our model the regulator's objective function differs from the usual Pindyck (2000, 2002) social damage, because it takes into account both the firms' profits, the consumers' surplus, the social damage from pollution and the net governmental revenues from the environmental policies, allowing us to discuss the implications of the above policy interventions (i.e., taxes, emission standards, auctioned permits and freely allocated permits) from the point of view of social welfare. Our paper extends and generalizes previous work on uncertainty affecting the policies to control pollution (i.e., Conrad, 2000; Pindyck, 2000, 2002; Saphores and Carr, 2000; Xepapadeas, 2001; Van Soest, 2005; Nishide and Ohyama, 2009; Agliardi, 2011) by considering an industry in which firms compete à la Cournot, while the above-mentioned papers have been concerned with a purely decision-theoretic framework. Since our analysis compares four policy instruments, it is also more exhaustive than most of them.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…Moreover, in our model the regulator's objective function differs from the usual Pindyck (2000, 2002) social damage, because it takes into account both the firms' profits, the consumers' surplus, the social damage from pollution and the net governmental revenues from the environmental policies, allowing us to discuss the implications of the above policy interventions (i.e., taxes, emission standards, auctioned permits and freely allocated permits) from the point of view of social welfare. Our paper extends and generalizes previous work on uncertainty affecting the policies to control pollution (i.e., Conrad, 2000; Pindyck, 2000, 2002; Saphores and Carr, 2000; Xepapadeas, 2001; Van Soest, 2005; Nishide and Ohyama, 2009; Agliardi, 2011) by considering an industry in which firms compete à la Cournot, while the above-mentioned papers have been concerned with a purely decision-theoretic framework. Since our analysis compares four policy instruments, it is also more exhaustive than most of them.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 59%
“…There are various indicators and assessment methodologies for evaluating in practice the performance of industries, cities and countries, at global, national and regional level, related to economic and environmental sustainability (see e.g. Singh et al 2012, providing a recent overview of a great number of indicators that are already common practice for policy-making; Blanchet and Fleurbaey 2013, which favor a dimension by dimension dashboard approach; Xepapadeas and Vouvaki 2008;Agliardi 2011;Pinar et al 2014;Agliardi et al 2015, for detailed discussions of environmental sustainability). In this paper we propose a novel methodology which allows us to assess temporal trends and industry contributions to air and water pollution and to identify the cases where externalities affect the overall pollution.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Non-renewability of the population distinguishes the present model from the conventional ones for renewable resources. Several researchers have approached optimal management of non-renewable resources from social and economic viewpoints indicating their high importance [3,16,18,35,37,50,63].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%