Supra-Regional vs. Regional Regulators in the Water Pollution Mitigation: Optimal Exemption Policies

François Destandau, A. Rozan, S. Spaeter
{"title":"Supra-Regional vs. Regional Regulators in the Water Pollution Mitigation: Optimal Exemption Policies","authors":"François Destandau, A. Rozan, S. Spaeter","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2430209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Through the Water Framework Directive, the European Commission urges its Mem- ber states to reach a level of \"good status\" of water for 2015. This level can be different from the regional first-best. Neither the supra-regional regulator (European Commission) nor the regional regulator (Member State) knows perfectly this firstbest. Each region can estimate it thanks to a cost-benefit analysis (CBA). If the estimated first-best is lower than the \"good status\" level, the region can ask to be exempted from reaching the latter. In this paper, we show that regional regulators do not always invest largely in CBA in optimum, although under-investment increases the probability of being urged to reach the highest level of water quality. Besides, the optimal exemption policy announced by the supra-regional regulator, which depends on the CBA's investment, shall also depend on the local risk preferences and environmental vulnerability. If the exemption policy is uniform across the regions, we obtain that more risk averse and/or more environmentally vulnerable populations invest less in the CBA, contrary to the first intuition. Policy implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":445990,"journal":{"name":"Protected Lands Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Protected Lands Law & Policy eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2430209","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Through the Water Framework Directive, the European Commission urges its Mem- ber states to reach a level of "good status" of water for 2015. This level can be different from the regional first-best. Neither the supra-regional regulator (European Commission) nor the regional regulator (Member State) knows perfectly this firstbest. Each region can estimate it thanks to a cost-benefit analysis (CBA). If the estimated first-best is lower than the "good status" level, the region can ask to be exempted from reaching the latter. In this paper, we show that regional regulators do not always invest largely in CBA in optimum, although under-investment increases the probability of being urged to reach the highest level of water quality. Besides, the optimal exemption policy announced by the supra-regional regulator, which depends on the CBA's investment, shall also depend on the local risk preferences and environmental vulnerability. If the exemption policy is uniform across the regions, we obtain that more risk averse and/or more environmentally vulnerable populations invest less in the CBA, contrary to the first intuition. Policy implications are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
水污染缓解中的超区域与区域监管:最优豁免政策
通过水框架指令,欧盟委员会敦促其成员国在2015年达到“良好状态”的水水平。这个水平可以不同于区域第一。无论是超区域监管机构(欧盟委员会)还是区域监管机构(成员国)都不完全了解这一点。每个地区都可以通过成本效益分析(CBA)来估算。如果估计的第一最佳低于“良好状态”水平,该地区可以要求豁免达到后者。在本文中,我们表明,尽管投资不足增加了被敦促达到最高水质水平的可能性,但区域监管机构并不总是大量投资于最优的CBA。此外,跨区域监管机构公布的最优豁免政策除了取决于CBA的投资外,还应取决于当地的风险偏好和环境脆弱性。如果豁免政策在各地区是统一的,我们得到风险厌恶和/或环境脆弱的人群对CBA的投资较少,这与第一种直觉相反。讨论了政策影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Rethinking Venice from an Ecosystem Services Perspective Covenanting for Nature: A Comparative Study of the Utility and Potential of Conservation Covenants The Logic of State Authority on the Control of Agrarian Resource (Socio-Anthropological and Islamic Perspective) Perverse Incentives and Safe Harbors in the Endangered Species Act: Evidence from Timber Harvests Near Woodpeckers Property and Land
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1