1 / 16

Market-Based Environmental Laws: Balancing Efficiency and Equity in North Carolina

This case study explores the effectiveness of market-based environmental laws, focusing on the Environmental Justice and Toxics Release Inventory in North Carolina. It discusses the implementation of policies like green taxes and cap-and-trade, highlighting their pros and cons in addressing environmental issues. The study delves into the distributional inequality aspect, emphasizing the importance of balancing economic efficiency with social equity. Data analysis from Census 2000 and emissions reports demonstrate the impact of these laws on income, race, and education levels in the state.

irma
Télécharger la présentation

Market-Based Environmental Laws: Balancing Efficiency and Equity in North Carolina

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Are Market-Based Environmental Laws Really the Best Thing Since Sliced Bread? A Case Study of Environmental Justice and The Toxics Release Inventory in North Carolina JacyGaige Urban Economics, 2010

  2. October 2009 - Lindsay Graham and John Kerry form bipartisan team to push a climate bill in the Senate June 2010 – Landmark climate bill passes in the House mandating cuts in GHG through cap-and trade July 2010 – Harry Reid announces the Senate bill won't be put for a vote this term

  3. Mass. v. EPA (2007) Holding that the Environmental Protection Agency must regulate Carbon Dioxide under the Clean Air Act because it is a pollutant that may “reasonably be expected to endanger public health or welfare”

  4. What are “market-based environmental laws”? Green taxes, Cap-and-trade, information disclosure laws, and hybrids Pros: Efficiency, Incentives Cons: Distributional inequality Morality (right to pollute)

  5. Toxics Release Inventory (1986) Factories of a certain size producing certain products 600 named chemicals, including Carcinogens and Persistent Bio-accumulative Toxins (PBTs) such as Mercury, Lead, and Dioxins Waste streams to air, water, and land + accidental spills The only requirement is to report

  6. In 2008, releases included: 486 million pounds of Lead 6.2 million pounds of Mercury 5 million pounds of other PBT chemicals

  7. From 2007 to 2008 total reported emissions in the U.S decreased by 257 million pounds, or 6% Since the first reporting year in 1988, emissions have decreased by a total of 65%

  8. Why does distributional inequality matter? Concentrations Slower Action Symbolic power of the law But.... Causation Flexibility Incentives

  9. Data: Census 2000, Block group data for Income, Race and Education 2008 Total On-site Emissions for all sites in North Carolina * Timing * Aggregation Process: Map, Buffer Analysis and Regression

  10. Yi = α + β1x1 + β2x2 + β3x3 + ∑i Yi = total on-site emissions in pounds x1 = median household income x2 = percent of population that is white x3 = average number of years of education

  11. Source | SS df MS Number of obs = 558 -------------+------------------------------ F( 3, 554) = 2.80 Model | 3.6117e+12 3 1.2039e+12 Prob > F = 0.0394 Residual | 2.3826e+14 554 4.3007e+11 R-squared = 0.0149 -------------+------------------------------ Adj R-squared = 0.0096 Total | 2.4187e+14 557 4.3424e+11 Root MSE = 6.6e+05 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ sum_on_sit | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- avg_vari_1 | -582.9771 1526.642 -0.38 0.703 -3581.692 2415.738 lnavg_vari_2 | 296613.1 180326.7 1.64 0.101 -57594.58 650820.9 avg_vari_3 | -16780.81 5847.036 -2.87 0.004 -28265.88 -5295.735 _cons | -2744068 1797765 -1.53 0.127 -6275337 787200.6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More Related