Astrid Dannenberg, Gunnar Gutsche, Marlene C. L. Batzke, Sven Christens, Daniel Engler, Fabian Mankat, Sophia Möller, Eva Weingärtner, Andreas Ernst, Marcel Lumkowsky, G. Wangenheim, Gerrit Hornung, Andreas Ziegler
The study of norms is of paramount importance in understanding human behavior. An interdisciplinary literature, using varying definitions and conceptions, shows when and why norms emerge and spread, what form they can take, and how they are enforced. Here, we focus on theoretical and empirical literatures that treat norms as a factor influencing human behavior. We first present a new taxonomy of norms, which builds upon and merges previous taxonomies, to distinguish between different types of norms and enforcement mechanisms. We then provide a conceptual framework that identifies causes of the effects of norms based on psychological theories, which can serve as a foundation for much of the empirical economic literature measuring norm effects. Finally, we present an overview of empirical economic papers that study the effects of norms on environmentally relevant behavior, as a particularly relevant area for the study of norms. The aim of this overview is to highlight which effects have been insufficiently studied and to give a sense of the potential of norms, which should help policymakers to intervene in a more targeted way to address existing environmental problems.
{"title":"The Effects of Norms on Environmental Behavior","authors":"Astrid Dannenberg, Gunnar Gutsche, Marlene C. L. Batzke, Sven Christens, Daniel Engler, Fabian Mankat, Sophia Möller, Eva Weingärtner, Andreas Ernst, Marcel Lumkowsky, G. Wangenheim, Gerrit Hornung, Andreas Ziegler","doi":"10.1086/727588","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727588","url":null,"abstract":"The study of norms is of paramount importance in understanding human behavior. An interdisciplinary literature, using varying definitions and conceptions, shows when and why norms emerge and spread, what form they can take, and how they are enforced. Here, we focus on theoretical and empirical literatures that treat norms as a factor influencing human behavior. We first present a new taxonomy of norms, which builds upon and merges previous taxonomies, to distinguish between different types of norms and enforcement mechanisms. We then provide a conceptual framework that identifies causes of the effects of norms based on psychological theories, which can serve as a foundation for much of the empirical economic literature measuring norm effects. Finally, we present an overview of empirical economic papers that study the effects of norms on environmentally relevant behavior, as a particularly relevant area for the study of norms. The aim of this overview is to highlight which effects have been insufficiently studied and to give a sense of the potential of norms, which should help policymakers to intervene in a more targeted way to address existing environmental problems.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140480869","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Amy W. Ando, T. Awokuse, Nathan W. Chan, Jimena González-Ramírez, Sumeet Gulati, Matthew G. Interis, Sarah Jacobson, Dale T. Manning, Samuel Stolper
{"title":"Environmental and Natural Resource Economics and Systemic Racism","authors":"Amy W. Ando, T. Awokuse, Nathan W. Chan, Jimena González-Ramírez, Sumeet Gulati, Matthew G. Interis, Sarah Jacobson, Dale T. Manning, Samuel Stolper","doi":"10.1086/727693","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/727693","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138953601","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article updates our previous comprehensive meta-analysis of what drives and stops deforestation (Busch and Ferretti-Gallon 2017). By including six additional years of research, this article more than doubles the evidence base to 320 spatially explicit econometric studies published in peer-reviewed academic journals from 1996 to 2019. We find that deforestation is consistently associated with greater accessibility (as influenced by natural features such as slope and elevation and built infrastructure such as roads, cities, and cleared areas) and with higher economic returns (from agriculture, livestock, and timber). Some demographic variables are consistently associated with less deforestation (e.g., Indigenous people, poverty, and age) or more deforestation (e.g., population), and others are not associated with the level of deforestation (e.g., education and gender). Policies that directly influence allowable land-use activities are associated with less deforestation (e.g., protected areas, enforcement of forest laws, payments for ecosystem services, community forest management, and certification of sustainable commodities). But policies and institutions that primarily seek other ends are not consistently associated with more or less deforestation (e.g., democracy, general governance, conflict abatement, and land-tenure security). We introduce reforestation and forest degradation as new dependent variables alongside deforestation. Greater population is consistently associated with more forest degradation, whereas steeper slope, greater distance from cities, and lower population are consistently associated with more reforestation.
{"title":"What Drives and Stops Deforestation, Reforestation, and Forest Degradation? An Updated Meta-analysis","authors":"Jonah Busch, Kalifi Ferretti-Gallon","doi":"10.1086/725051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725051","url":null,"abstract":"This article updates our previous comprehensive meta-analysis of what drives and stops deforestation (Busch and Ferretti-Gallon 2017). By including six additional years of research, this article more than doubles the evidence base to 320 spatially explicit econometric studies published in peer-reviewed academic journals from 1996 to 2019. We find that deforestation is consistently associated with greater accessibility (as influenced by natural features such as slope and elevation and built infrastructure such as roads, cities, and cleared areas) and with higher economic returns (from agriculture, livestock, and timber). Some demographic variables are consistently associated with less deforestation (e.g., Indigenous people, poverty, and age) or more deforestation (e.g., population), and others are not associated with the level of deforestation (e.g., education and gender). Policies that directly influence allowable land-use activities are associated with less deforestation (e.g., protected areas, enforcement of forest laws, payments for ecosystem services, community forest management, and certification of sustainable commodities). But policies and institutions that primarily seek other ends are not consistently associated with more or less deforestation (e.g., democracy, general governance, conflict abatement, and land-tenure security). We introduce reforestation and forest degradation as new dependent variables alongside deforestation. Greater population is consistently associated with more forest degradation, whereas steeper slope, greater distance from cities, and lower population are consistently associated with more reforestation.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46490956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article discusses the nature and current approach to environmental justice analysis for US Environmental Protection Agency regulations and highlights key data and analytic challenges where economists could play a role in filling these gaps.
{"title":"Environmental Justice Analysis for EPA Rulemakings: Opportunities and Challenges","authors":"A. Wolverton","doi":"10.1086/724721","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/724721","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the nature and current approach to environmental justice analysis for US Environmental Protection Agency regulations and highlights key data and analytic challenges where economists could play a role in filling these gaps.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48749776","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Daniel Raimi, E. Grubert, Jake Higdon, G. Metcalf, Sophie Pesek, Devyani Singh
The need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions requires curtailing coal, oil, and natural gas production and consumption. However, these fuels are major revenue sources for governments. Here, we develop a novel estimate of the revenues generated by fossil fuels for all governments in the United States. Then we estimate how those revenues change under three stylized scenarios through 2050. The first is business as usual (BAU), without further controlling emissions. The second is to limit the increase in global average temperature to 2°C. The third and most ambitious climate goal is to limit the increase to 1.5°C. We estimate that fossil fuels generate $138 billion annually for US governments. Although revenues decline under all three scenarios, they fall more quickly under the ambitious climate policy. Taxes on refined petroleum products are the largest source of revenue and decline under all scenarios. Oil and gas production is the second largest and is relatively stable under the BAU and 2°C scenarios but declines rapidly under the 1.5°C scenario. Under all scenarios, coal revenues decline rapidly, approaching zero by 2040 under the 1.5°C and 2°C scenarios. These revenue shortfalls will be concentrated in certain regions. At the same time, recent estimates of climate damages easily exceed the revenue losses described in this analysis. This highlights the need for policy makers to adopt emissions-reduction strategies and also address revenue shortfalls. The policy tools to accomplish both goals are relatively straightforward. However, implementing them will require overcoming considerable political challenges.
{"title":"The Fiscal Implications of the US Transition Away from Fossil Fuels","authors":"Daniel Raimi, E. Grubert, Jake Higdon, G. Metcalf, Sophie Pesek, Devyani Singh","doi":"10.1086/725250","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725250","url":null,"abstract":"The need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions requires curtailing coal, oil, and natural gas production and consumption. However, these fuels are major revenue sources for governments. Here, we develop a novel estimate of the revenues generated by fossil fuels for all governments in the United States. Then we estimate how those revenues change under three stylized scenarios through 2050. The first is business as usual (BAU), without further controlling emissions. The second is to limit the increase in global average temperature to 2°C. The third and most ambitious climate goal is to limit the increase to 1.5°C. We estimate that fossil fuels generate $138 billion annually for US governments. Although revenues decline under all three scenarios, they fall more quickly under the ambitious climate policy. Taxes on refined petroleum products are the largest source of revenue and decline under all scenarios. Oil and gas production is the second largest and is relatively stable under the BAU and 2°C scenarios but declines rapidly under the 1.5°C scenario. Under all scenarios, coal revenues decline rapidly, approaching zero by 2040 under the 1.5°C and 2°C scenarios. These revenue shortfalls will be concentrated in certain regions. At the same time, recent estimates of climate damages easily exceed the revenue losses described in this analysis. This highlights the need for policy makers to adopt emissions-reduction strategies and also address revenue shortfalls. The policy tools to accomplish both goals are relatively straightforward. However, implementing them will require overcoming considerable political challenges.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46477701","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Natural gas flaring and methane emissions (F&M) are linked environmental issues for US shale oil and gas operations. Flaring refers to burning natural gas when regulatory, infrastructure, and market constraints make it infeasible to capture it when drilling for oil. In this paper, we lay out an agenda for researchers and policy makers. We describe why F&M are linked, both physically and in terms of policy. Following an interdisciplinary literature review on measurement of F&M, we marshal detailed industry data to identify constraints in the natural gas system that are correlated with upstream F&M. We then discuss the economic and physical causes of F&M. Moving on to the external costs imposed by F&M, we calculate that the climate costs of estimated methane emissions are an order of magnitude larger than the climate costs of reported flaring after accounting for hydrocarbon content and flare efficiency. Finally, we discuss both existing policies and economic insights relevant to future policies.
{"title":"The Economics of Natural Gas Flaring and Methane Emissions in US Shale: An Agenda for Research and Policy","authors":"M. Agerton, Ben Gilbert, G. Upton","doi":"10.1086/725004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725004","url":null,"abstract":"Natural gas flaring and methane emissions (F&M) are linked environmental issues for US shale oil and gas operations. Flaring refers to burning natural gas when regulatory, infrastructure, and market constraints make it infeasible to capture it when drilling for oil. In this paper, we lay out an agenda for researchers and policy makers. We describe why F&M are linked, both physically and in terms of policy. Following an interdisciplinary literature review on measurement of F&M, we marshal detailed industry data to identify constraints in the natural gas system that are correlated with upstream F&M. We then discuss the economic and physical causes of F&M. Moving on to the external costs imposed by F&M, we calculate that the climate costs of estimated methane emissions are an order of magnitude larger than the climate costs of reported flaring after accounting for hydrocarbon content and flare efficiency. Finally, we discuss both existing policies and economic insights relevant to future policies.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48329309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What are the links among climate change, epidemics, and socioeconomic inequality? Although the recent pandemic has focused attention on the effects of epidemics on economic outcomes, and a separate literature in climate science and environmental health has linked global environmental change to an increase in infectious disease epidemics, there is relatively little work connecting these two strands of literature. We explore the links among climate change, epidemics, and group-based inequality by first reviewing the scientific literature modeling the effects of global warming on infectious disease epidemics. We highlight the ways in which climate variables (such as temperature, precipitation, and wind speeds) and adaptive human behavior (such as migration) in response to climate events may facilitate the spread of infectious disease. We then examine the effects of climate-induced epidemics on gender inequality using evidence from the African meningitis belt. The results show that epidemics can worsen outcomes for groups in already economically precarious circumstances, thereby widening group-based socioeconomic inequality. Effective policies to combat the negative effects of epidemics must be mindful not to increase existing group-based inequalities and should aim to reduce these inequalities by minimizing damage for members of the most marginalized groups in societies.
{"title":"Climate Change, Epidemics, and Inequality","authors":"B. Archibong, Francis Annan","doi":"10.1086/725211","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725211","url":null,"abstract":"What are the links among climate change, epidemics, and socioeconomic inequality? Although the recent pandemic has focused attention on the effects of epidemics on economic outcomes, and a separate literature in climate science and environmental health has linked global environmental change to an increase in infectious disease epidemics, there is relatively little work connecting these two strands of literature. We explore the links among climate change, epidemics, and group-based inequality by first reviewing the scientific literature modeling the effects of global warming on infectious disease epidemics. We highlight the ways in which climate variables (such as temperature, precipitation, and wind speeds) and adaptive human behavior (such as migration) in response to climate events may facilitate the spread of infectious disease. We then examine the effects of climate-induced epidemics on gender inequality using evidence from the African meningitis belt. The results show that epidemics can worsen outcomes for groups in already economically precarious circumstances, thereby widening group-based socioeconomic inequality. Effective policies to combat the negative effects of epidemics must be mindful not to increase existing group-based inequalities and should aim to reduce these inequalities by minimizing damage for members of the most marginalized groups in societies.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46922370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Editor’s Introduction","authors":"Spencer Banzhaf","doi":"10.1086/725631","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725631","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135095872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Word from the Editor","authors":"C. Kling","doi":"10.1086/724391","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/724391","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47946984","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：