Transaction Costs and Environmental Policy: An Assessment Framework and Literature Review

Krutilla, Kerry; Krause, Rachel M.

doi:10.1561/101.00000035

Cited by 92 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 135 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…is is a more narrow de nition than in some other work which considers the overall cost of establishing, managing, monitoring and enforcing a policy (Krutilla and Krause, 2010;Joas and Flachsland, 2014). 7 Heindl (2012) nds that information-procurement alone -the biggest upfront cost to entering active trading -costs rms about 17 employee-workdays.…”

Section: De Nition Of Transaction Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Offset Credits in the EU ETS: A Quantile Estimation of Firm-Level Transaction Costs

Naegele

2015

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in AbstractInternational o set certi cates trade at lower prices than European Union Allowances (EUAs), although they are substitutes within the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) for CO 2 . Firms therefore had a strong incentive to use the cheaper certi cates. However, a considerable number of rms did not use their allowed o set quota and, by doing so, seemingly forwent pro ts. While most of the literature on emissions trading evaluates the e ciency of regulation in a frictionless world, in practice rms incur costs when complying with regulation. In order to assess the relevance of managerial and information-related transaction costs, this study examines the use of international o set credits in the EU ETS. It establishes a model of rm decision under xed entry costs and estimates the size of transaction costs rationalizing rm behavior using semi-parametric binary quantile regressions. Comparing binary quantile results with probit estimates shows that high average transaction cost result from a strongly skewed underlying distribution. I nd that for most rms the bulk of transaction costs stems from participation in the EU ETS in general, rather than additional participation in the o set trade.JEL : C25, D23, H23, Q58.

show abstract

Section: De Nition Of Transaction Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Offset Credits in the EU ETS: A Quantile Estimation of Firm-Level Transaction Costs

Naegele

2015

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Factors such as incomplete information, political entanglement, naïve faith in science and effects of multilevel government all impact on individual or governmental attempts to reorganize successfully , and can prevent desirable outcomes (Vörösmarty et al 2010). Yet, the ultimate objective for river basin managers should be to achieve a set of institutional and/or (re)organizational arrangements that: minimize the sum of impacts on transaction costs (Challen 2000); minimize the costs of failing to meet targets (Eggers 2006); monetize and differentiate institutional options for cost-benefit assessments (Krutilla and Krause 2011); or identify the transaction cost-lowering option over time (Marshall 2013).…”

Section: Public Transaction Costs As a Basis For Economic Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Water Scarcity at a River Basin Scale with Economic Instruments

Gómez

Pérez-Blanco

Adamson

et al. 2018

Water Econs. Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a conceptual framework for both assessing the role of economic instruments, and reshaping them in order to enhance their contribution to the goals of managing water scarcity. Water management problems stem from the mismatch between a multitude of individual decisions, on the one hand, and the current and projected status of water resources on the other. Economics can provide valuable incentives that drive individual decisions, and can design efficient instruments to address water governance problems in a context of conflicting interests and relevant transaction costs. Yet, instruments such as water pricing or trading are mostly based on general principles of welfare economics that are not readily applicable to assets as complex as water. A flaw in welfare economic approaches lies in the presumption that economic instruments may be good or || Corresponding author. This is an Open Access article published by World Scientific Publishing Company. It is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY) License. Further distribution of this work is permitted, provided the original work is properly cited.Water Economics and Policy, Vol. 4, No. 1 (2018) bad on their own (e.g., finding the "right" price). This vision changes radically when we focus on the problem, instead of the instrument. In this paper, we examine how economic instruments to achieve welfare-enhancing water resource outcomes can realize their full potential in basin-scale management contexts. We follow a political economy perspective that views conflicts between public and private interest as the main instrumental challenge of water management. Our analysis allows us to better understand the critical importance of economic instruments for reconciling individual actions towards collective ambitions of water efficiency, equity and sustainability with lessons for later-adopting jurisdictions. Rather than providing panaceas, the successful design and implementation of economic instruments as key river basin management arrangements involves high transaction costs, wide institutional changes and collective action at different levels.

show abstract

“…It is important to pay attention to these costs because of the competitiveness issues connected with the regulatory burden on the private sector as well as the cost-effectiveness viewpoint of different types of environmental regulation. Costs of environmental regulation have been increasingly studied (Jaffe et al, 1995;Goulder et al, 1999;Ryan, 2012) including solely transaction costs (Krutilla and Krause, 2011;McCann, 2013) to enable regulatory impact assessment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the Regulatory Burden: Pollutant Release and Transfer Reporting Costs

Vejchodská¹,

Slavíková²,

Malý³

2016

Prague Economic Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental information disclosure instruments inevitably also carry information costs. It is important to pay attention to these costs because of the competitiveness issues connected with the regulatory burden of the private sector or the overall cost-effectiveness of different types of environmental regulation from the public sector point of view. We undertake an ex-post analysis to quantify and analyse reporting costs of private sector induced by the European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register (E-PRTR). We focus on the case of the Czech Republic. The average annual reporting costs, additional to other reporting duties, are € 365 per facility. The Czech PRTR comprises 8 times more facilities than required by the European law, and thereby increases correspondingly the total reporting costs. The best predictor variable of the costs is the need for measuring or calculating additional releases or transfers beyond the information requirements of other registers.

show abstract

Transaction Costs and Environmental Policy: An Assessment Framework and Literature Review

Cited by 92 publications

References 135 publications

Offset Credits in the EU ETS: A Quantile Estimation of Firm-Level Transaction Costs

Offset Credits in the EU ETS: A Quantile Estimation of Firm-Level Transaction Costs

Managing Water Scarcity at a River Basin Scale with Economic Instruments

Evaluating the Regulatory Burden: Pollutant Release and Transfer Reporting Costs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About