nep-res New Economics Papers
on Resource Economics
Issue of 2017‒11‒19
five papers chosen by
Maximo Rossi
Universidad de la República

  1. The Product-Related Environmental Regulation, Innovation, and Competitiveness: Empirical Evidence from Malaysian and Vietnamese Firms By Qizhong YANG; Tsunehiro OTSUKI
  2. Who Bears the Economic Costs of Environmental Regulations? By Don Fullerton; Erich Muehlegger
  3. Economic Incentives and Conservation: Crowding-in Social Norms in a Groundwater Commons By Steven M. Smith
  4. Resource Efficiency, Environmental Policy and Eco-Innovations for a Circular Economy: Evidence from EU Firms By Giulio Cainelli; Alessio D’Amato; Massimiliano Mazzanti
  5. Environmental Engel Curves By Arik Levinson; James O'Brien

  1. By: Qizhong YANG (The Graduate School of Economics, Osaka University); Tsunehiro OTSUKI (Osaka School of International Public Policy, Osaka University)
    Abstract: This study examined the impact of two PRERs released by the EU—RoHS and REACH—on Malaysian and Vietnamese firms’ compliance. The analysis considers productivity as a realization of innovations and examines the R&D enhancement effect of PRERs. The effect of PRERs on productivity is also broken down into direct and indirect effects through R&D enhancement. The result shows that the response to REACH can create incentives to advance R&D, and productivity can increase through both direct and indirect channels. No relationship between the response to RoHS and R&D expenditure is found. Further analysis shows that firms comply with RoHS and REACH in different ways, but just the ability to continue exporting to the EU motivates compliance.
    Keywords: RoHS, REACH, Innovation, Productivity, Porter Hypothesis
    JEL: F18 O31 Q55 Q56
    Date: 2017–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osp:wpaper:17e007&r=res
  2. By: Don Fullerton; Erich Muehlegger
    Abstract: Public economics has a well-developed literature on tax incidence – the ultimate burdens from tax policy. This literature is used here to describe not only the distributional effects of environmental taxes or subsidies but also the likely incidence of non-tax regulations, energy efficiency standards, or other environmental mandates. Recent papers find that mandates can be more regressive than carbon taxes. We also describe how the distributional effects of such policies can be altered by various market conditions such as limited factor mobility, trade exposure, evasion, corruption, or imperfect competition. Finally, we review data on carbon-intensity of production and exports around the world in order to describe implications for effects of possible carbon taxation on countries with different levels of income per capita.
    Keywords: distributional effects, carbon tax, environmental policy, incidence
    JEL: H22
    Date: 2017
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ces:ceswps:_6596&r=res
  3. By: Steven M. Smith (Division of Economics and Business, Colorado School of Mines)
    Abstract: Price-based interventions can be corrective where users extract from a common resource, but may also impact existing social norms, often crowding them out. In contrast, I find a pumping tax implemented by a group of irrigators in Southern Colorado effectively crowded-in pro-conservation norms, enhancing the financial incentive's impact. Using a unique, spatially oriented panel-data set of groundwater wells, I separate the direct role of increased pumping costs from the indirect effect transmitted through altered conservation norms. To quantify conservation, I estimate how pumping at one well responds to pumping at nearby wells, instrumenting with pumping permits, and interact that behavior with a difference-in-difference framework. The fee directly accounts for approximately 61% of the reduced pumping and the remaining 39% comes from crowding-in conservation norms. I hypothesize the internal process provided a signal of group commitment and the knowledge that others are paying a fee lead to more unconditional conservers.
    Keywords: Irrigation, Groundwater, Climate Change, Conservation, Social Norms
    JEL: Q15 Q25 H23
    Date: 2017–10
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:mns:wpaper:wp201708&r=res
  4. By: Giulio Cainelli (University of Padova & SEEDS); Alessio D’Amato (University of Tor Vergata Rome & SEEDS); Massimiliano Mazzanti (University of Ferrara, IEFE Bocconi Milan & SEEDS)
    Abstract: Innovation adoption and diffusion by firms are key pillars for the EU strategy on resource-efficiency and the development of a circular economy. This paper presents new EU evidence regarding the role of environmental policy and green demand drivers to sustain the adoption of resource efficiency-oriented eco-innovations. This paper originally implements new estimators to address the endogeneity of binary framed policy and demand covariates, which typically characterise firm level survey data. Our results suggest that when endogeneity is accounted for, environmental policy is the only factor always significant in driving the adoption of innovations that reduce the use of waste and material, while demand-side and market-factors do not always play a central role. The result is an important piece of new quantitative-based knowledge, which complements the currently large case study-based evidence on the setting of sound management and policy strategies for the circular economy.
    Keywords: Eco innovation; circular economy; innovation drivers; EU; environmental regulation; market demand
    Date: 2017–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sru:ssewps:2017-24&r=res
  5. By: Arik Levinson (Department of Economics, Georgetown University); James O'Brien (Department of Economics, Gettysburg College)
    Abstract: Environmental Engel curves (EECs) plot the relationship between householdsÕ incomes and the pollution embodied in the goods and services they consume. The curves provide a basis for estimating the degree to which aggregate environmental improvements, which come in part from changing consumption patterns, can be attributed to income growth. We calculate a set of annual EECs for the United States from 1984 to 2012, revealing three clear results. First, EECs are upward sloping: richer households are indirectly responsible for more pollution. Second, EECs have income elasticities of less than one: pollution increases less than one-for-one with income. Third, EECs have been shifting down and becoming more concave over time: at every level of income households are responsible for decreasing amounts of pollution. We show that even without changes to production techniques, the pollution necessary to produce the goods and services American households consume would have declined up to 12 percent, despite a 19 percent increase in real household after-tax incomes. Most of this improvement is attributable to households consuming a less pollution-intensive mix of goods, driven about equally by two factors: household income growth represented by movement along inelastic EECs; and economy-wide changes represented by downward shifts in EECs.
    Date: 2017–08–31
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:geo:guwopa:gueconwpa~17-17-05&r=res

This nep-res issue is ©2017 by Maximo Rossi. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at http://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.