ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS eJOURNAL
"Does Collaboration Make Any Difference? Linking Collaborative Watershed Groups to Environmental Outcomes."
TYLER A SCOTT, Evans School of Public Affairs, University of Washington
This paper addresses addresses two research questions: (1) Do publicly supported collaborative environmental management groups improve environmental outcomes?; and (2) How do collaborative groups with different levels of responsibility, formalization, and representativeness compare in this regard? Using a representative watershed quality data series, the EPA’s National Rivers and Streams Assessment (NRSA) and Wadeable Streams Assessment (WSA), in conjunction with a watershed management regime database coded for this analysis, it tests the relationship between collaborative governance and watershed quality for 357 watersheds. Since these are observational data, a multilevel propensity score matching method is used to control for selection bias. Using the augmented inverse propensity weighted estimator (AIPW), I estimate the average treatment effect on the treated (ATE) for six different water quality and habitat condition metrics. Collaborative watershed groups are found to improve water chemistry and in-stream habitat conditions. I then use hierarchical linear regression modeling (HLM) to examine how group responsibilities, inclusivity with regard to membership, and formalization affect the predicted impact of a collaborative group. Groups that engage in management activities (in comparison to coordination or planning) are found to achieve greater environmental gains. Limited differentiation is found with regards to the presence of a group coordinator, increased goal specificity, or greater stakeholder diversity.
"On the Interplay between Resource Extraction and Polluting Emissions in Oligopoly"
Quaderni - Working Paper DSE N° 976
LUCA LAMBERTINI, University of Bologna - Department of Economics
This paper offers an overview of the literature discussing oligopoly games in which polluting emissions are generated by the supply of goods requiring a natural resource as an input. An analytical summary of the main features of the interplay between pollution and resource extraction is then given using a differential game based on the Cournot oligopoly model, in which (i) the bearings on resource preservation of Pigouvian tax rate tailored on emissions are singled out and (ii) the issue of the optimal number of firms in the commons is also addressed.
"Green Marketing and Its Implication in India"
DR. MOHIT SHARMA, Independent
Green marketing is the marketing of products that are presumed to be environmentally preferable to others. Thus green marketing incorporates a broad range of activities, including product modification, changes to the production process, sustainable packaging, as well as modifying advertising. Yet defining green marketing is not a simple task where several meanings intersect and contradict each other; an example of this will be the existence of varying social, environmental and retail definitions attached to this term. Other similar terms used are environmental marketing and ecological marketing.
Green, environmental and eco-marketing are part of the new marketing approaches which do not just refocus, adjust or enhance existing marketing thinking and practice, but seek to challenge those approaches and provide a substantially different perspective. In more detail green, environmental and eco-marketing belong to the group of approaches which seek to address the lack of fit between marketing as it is currently practiced and the ecological and social realities of the wider marketing environment.
Market environment is a marketing term and refers to factors and forces that affect a firm's ability to build and maintain successful relationships with customers. Three levels of the environment are: Micro (internal) environment - forces within the company that affect its ability to serve its customers. Meso environment - the industry in which a company operates and the industry's market(s). Macro (national) environment - larger societal forces that affect the microenvironment.
"Gored by a Cornucopia: The Risks to Climate Change from Laws and Policies that Incentivize Competitive But Divergent Energy Innovations"
LSU Journal of Energy Law and Resources, Vol. 2, No. 2. Spring 2015 Forthcoming
ROY ANDREW PARTAIN, Soongsil University - College of Law
This study examines the potential effects of poorly coordinated energy laws and policies; in particular, it examines the potential for existing laws and international conventions to drive the emergence of green paradox events that would increase greenhouse gas emissions and ergo increase the risk of anthropogenic climate change.
This model examines the consequences of awkwardly combined policies that encourage diverse forms of innovation in energy sources. It examines the consequences of green energy laws to encourage the development of new and lower cost alternative or renewable low carbon energy resources. It reviews international agreements to support research and development related to fossil fuels. It examines the law and policies that support energy innovation in the name of energy security. It examines the potential for free trade laws to encourage the development and trade in primary products, including fossil fuels. It considers the potential for multiple markets to develop innovations to deliver larger volumes of energy supplies. It evaluates the economic consequences of additional competitive energy supplies and finds that fossil fuel consumption might increase.
The study avoids normative analysis of what climate change response would be advisable and instead presents positive analysis that if reductions in greenhouse gas emissions were a target to be achieved that the current combination of energy law agendas might well frustrate attainment of that target by policy makers.
The argument proceeds in several steps. First, an analysis is drawn on the UN’s Framework Convention for Climate Change (UNFCCC) and its associated agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol. Analysis is presented that such international conventions to limit the risks of anthropogenic climate change do drive innovation in new and renewable energy supplies. Such innovations are intended to provide increases volumes of energy supplies at affordable prices in order to displace carbon-emitting energy supplies and thus prevent anthropogenic sources of climate risk. But the key conclusion is that these legal efforts would increase energy supplies if successful.
The second step will be to examine the role of energy security laws, i.e., those laws that support the secure supply of energy resources against adverse conditions. Such targets might include securing petroleum volumes or energy alternative such as nuclear energy. Some of those motives might be to protect energy prices from market forces or they might be motivate by desires to support militarized forces. The laws of the United States will be used as an example. First, the role of the federal government’s civilian Department of Energy to support energy innovations will be presented; it will be shown that it supports research and development in both fossil fuels and alternative energy resources. Next, the role of the Department of Defense in sponsoring energy innovation will be examined; similarly it will be shown that the Department is engaged in supporting both fossil fuels and alternatives. Finally, the role of U.S. tax policy to incentivize innovation in energy technologies will be presented. The tax code will be shown to reveal broad supports for both fossil fuel and alternative energy industries.
The third step of the analysis is the inspection of certain international agreements that sustain or encourage the development of fossil fuels, including petroleum, coal, and natural gas. The Energy Charter Treaty is examined; its policies to support and encourage the sustained development of fossil fuels are detailed. Similarly, the Statute and Solemn Declarations of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries are studied to determine their legal commitments to develop fossil fuel innovations and supplies. It will be found that OPEC’s commitments include sustained research and development plans and a firm set of obligations to ensure that petroleum remain in future supply, affordable to the consumer against other fuel sources, and that petroleum is protected against discrimination in the market-place.
The fourth step will consider the role of various international trade conventions to support market conditions and free competition conditions. The WTO/GATT system of agreements will be examined to reveal their support of open trade and of competitive market conditions. To the extent that energy supplies will be available and exportable, it will be shown that for those states engaged in such international trade arrangements, the energy supplies will both be marketable in transboundary settings and be faced with price competition in un-protected markets.
The fifth step integrates the previous four findings into a finding of a potential green paradox event: the combined results of multiple legal policies to encourage energy innovations could result in increased energy supplies that would price compete, potentially resulting in increased greenhouse gas emissions, ergo, a kind of a green paradox.
A sixth step evaluates what steps might be taken to de-bug the scenario, as it were. First, a sketch is provided of potential means to better align the international agreements and laws. Second, an examination of specific qualities of innovations might provide a solution to operate within the nexus of the existing laws; i.e., what types of innovations could be favored that might enable the in-place legal circumstances to functions without giving rise to a green paradox event.
Finally, a summary of the results and a conclusion is provided.
"The Future of Emissions Trading"
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. 5(5): 569-576, 2014
JONAS MECKLING, University of California, Berkeley
Over the past 15 years, carbon markets have been set up by private and public actors at various geographic scales and with varying financial scope. The history of the early stage of carbon markets reveals a mixed record: the instrument diffused widely across the globe, while existing carbon markets performed rather slow, though anecdotal evidence suggests positive side effects on climate policymaking. Going forward, three key driving forces are likely to shape the future of emissions trading: (1) the source and sustainability of political demand for climate action in general and carbon markets in particular, (2) the governance of operating carbon markets including questions of bureaucratic capacity and regulatory capture, and (3) the pattern of market globalization, which encompasses issues of carbon price comparability, market linkage, and expansion. Depending on how these driving forces and fault lines play out, a number of scenarios are possible, ranging from strongly embedded and effective carbon markets to their collapse. The trajectory to any one of these scenarios could be characterized by tipping points, which are likely to come about incrementally.
About this eJournal
This eJournal distributes working and accepted paper abstracts in the full range of subjects that comprise Environmental Economics. Topics include economic causes and consequences of environmental changes; tax and regulatory policies that affect the environment; markets for pollution rights and related issues; government policies toward the environment; valuation of environmental resources, "green accounting" and intergovernmental cooperation in environmental policy.
To submit your research to SSRN, sign in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, click the My Papers link on left menu and then the Start New Submission button at top of page.
If your organization is interested in increasing readership for its research by starting a Research Paper Series, or sponsoring a Subject Matter eJournal, please email: RPS@SSRN.com
Economics Research Network (ERN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
ERN SUBJECT MATTER EJOURNALS
MICHAEL C. JENSEN
Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP), Inc., Harvard Business School, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)
Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for ERN-Sub.
Environmental Economics eJournal
Professor, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign - Department of Finance, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), CESifo (Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute)
LAWRENCE H. GOULDER
Shuzo Nishihara Professor of Environmental and Resource Economics, Stanford University - Department of Economics, Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), University Fellow, Resources for the Future
WILLIAM D. NORDHAUS
Yale University - Department of Economics, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
PAUL R. PORTNEY
University of Arizona - Eller College of Management
ROBERT N. STAVINS
Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government, Harvard University - Harvard Kennedy School (HKS), University Fellow, Resources for the Future, Research Associate, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)
Mitchell Family Professor of Economics, Colby College - Department of Economics