Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Instead of analyzing production of a good producing pollution, we are analyzing production of pollution abatement Abatement, A, is usually measured in percentage terms
Benefits of pollution abatement = reduction in external costs, i.e. damage reduction, MSB = marginal social benefits Costs of pollution abatement:
Costs of installing and using abatement technologies, MAC = marginal abatement cost Costs of enforcing regulations, MCE = marginal enforcement costs Marginal social cost of abatement, MSC = MAC + MEC
A 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Q. What is the allocatively efficient quantity of pollution abatement? A. Quantity at which MSB = MSC of abatement.
In this example, the quantity would be 50%, the cost for the last unit of abatement would be $135.
Change in abatement costs Inefficiency of standard setting Two regions with differing MSB Two pollution sources with differing MSC
MSB = 360-4.5*A MSC = 2.7*A MSC = 1.5*A A is the percent of pollution abated
A 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Q. What is the allocatively efficient quantity of abatement when abatement costs decrease? A. The newly efficient quantity is 60% and the cost of the last unit of abatement is $90.
What is the net social loss if a government regulatory authority sets the level of abatement at 30%?
Is it reasonable to assume that the benefits of abatement are identical everywhere in the US?
In this example there are two regions, each with its own MSB function:
A 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
MSB2 134 94 54 14
What are the efficiency consequences if a uniform standard of 30% reduction was set for each region?
300
MSC
What are the efficiency consequences if a uniform standard of 30% reduction was set for each region? Region 1 has too little abatement since MSB>MSC for additional abatement Region 2 has too much abatement since MSB<MSC at 30% Standards that are uniform across regions will likely be inefficient.
If the cost of abatement among sources differs, is it efficient to have each abate by the same amount? Lets reinterpret the example of lowering MSC over time, so that each cost curve represents two different sources during the same period of time
Pollution abatement model example two sources with differing abatement costs
Analysis of abatement
400 350 MSB 300 MSC firm 1 250 200 MSC firm 2 150 100 50 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Percent pollution abated
Pollution abatement model example two sources with differing abatement costs
The firm with the lower abatement costs should abate more! A uniform standard among sources therefore would be inefficient.
cost effective allocation of a standard among sources with differing abatement costs no consideration of benefits in standard setting
If standard is set at a total of 50 units and this was split between the two firms, what is the MAC at each?
What would cost effective solution be? 30 units at firm 1 20 units at firm 2 MAC = $90 at each source