The current study attempts to understand the relationships among Environmental Quality (EQ), Human Development (HD) and political and governance regimes in a cross‐country framework through secondary data analysis. The underlying hypothesis is that in addition to income, as reflected from the literature on the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis, several other factors, including socioeconomic (e.g. human development and corruption) and sociopolitical (e.g. ability to exercise democratic rights) factors, may influence environmental policy‐making, and thereby environmental sustainability, in a country. The EQ (i.e. environmental sustainability) of the countries in the current study is denoted by their Environmental Performance Index (2008). Human development is represented by Human Development Index (2007). Democracy Index (2008) and Corruption Perceptions Index (2008) are considered as proxies for political transparency in a country and its susceptibility to rent‐seeking activities, respectively. The cross‐country empirical findings confirm the closer association between the socioeconomic and sociopolitical factors and sustainable development. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

No abstract

This study is an attempt to investigate the relationship between environmental quality and per capita NSDP (i.e., Environment Kuznets Curve, EKC) of 14 major Indian States in the light of their very high economic growth in the post-liberalisation period. The analysis involves first ranking the States on the basis of their environmental quality, and then checking the relationship. The analysis captures both temporal and spatial aspects of environmental quality by ranking the States in two time periods-(i) early 1990s (1990-1996) and (ii) late 1990s (1997-2001). The results indicate that the relationship between environmental quality and per capita NSDP is slanting S-shaped. Except Bihar all other States are on the upward sloping curve of the EKC. The results suggest that the economic growth is mostly at the cost of environmental quality.

Unincorporated enterprises often bypass formal regulations in general and taxation in particular. Bringing unincorporated enterprises under the taxation system is a challenge often faced by tax administrators, and it is in this regard that the present study explores the factors which influence the decision of unincorporated enterprises to register with the state value added tax (VAT)/sales tax authority across states in India. This analysis is limited to the decision regarding registration. It is not necessary that enterprises that are registered pay taxes and/or file returns—however, the process of registration does provide some information to the tax department for follow ups. The study throws up some interesting results for policymakers and tax administrators. JEL Classification: H25, H32, H26, L53

In public finance, estimation of tax potential of a government -either federal or provincial -has immense importance to understand future streams of tax revenue. Tax potential depends on tax capacity and tax effort (TE) and therefore joint estimation of both the functions is desirable. There are several frameworks to estimate tax capacity and tax efficiency (tax effort); in the present paper time variant truncated panel Stochastic Frontier Approach (SFA) is adopted to estimate the functions jointly for the period 2012-13 to 2019-20. The findings of the study could be useful for policy and especially for the sitting Fifteen Finance Commission. The results of the study show that GST capacity of states depends on size and structural composition of the economy. Introduction of GST has reduced states' GST capacity and the impact is restricted to scale only. The study has used data from GST Network (GSTN) database for the post-GST period and given all other factors at their levels, GSTN data shows lower GST capacity for high income states and higher capacity for low income states. The relationship between per capita income (PCI) of states and tax efficiency is non-linear and as PCI rises TE falls and thereafter it rises. Minor states (special category states and UTs with legislative assembly) have lower tax efficiency. Delhi and Goa have the highest GST gap and on average major states could increase their GST collection by 0.52 percent of GSVA and minor states by 1.15 percent if they increase their tax efforts.