Hostname: page-component-5cf477f64f-54txb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-01T16:30:18.369Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Green Economics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2020

John Kay  and
Aubrey Silberston
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We all recognise environmental problems—the pollution of air and rivers, the destruction of rain forests, global warming. The article argues that environmental problems are less the result of inappropriate values than of an incorrect calculus, and that economic evaluation and economic instruments have a major role to play in the correction of that calculus.

The green prescription of lower growth as a means of reducing environmental damage is dismissed—if higher output is often the cause of the problem, it is also what enables us to afford to deal with it. Policy should start from an adequate evaluation of the costs and benefits of action and inaction; the article instances nitrate in water, where the costs of rectification seem out of proportion to any likely benefit. Market mechanisms—such as taxes and tradeable licences—are often the best way of tackling environmental problems; but economists are sometimes as naive about their general applicability as non-economists about the effectiveness of prescriptive regulation.

Type
Articles
Information
National Institute Economic Review , Volume 135 , February 1991 , pp. 50 - 64
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 National Institute of Economic and Social Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The Review is pleased to give hospitality to the deliberations of the CLARE Group but is not necessarily in agreement with the views expressed. Members of the CLARE Group are M.J. Artis, A.J.C. Britton, W.A. Brown, C.H. Feinstein, C.A.E. Goodhart, D.A. Hay, J.A. Kay, R.C.O. Matthews, M.H. Miller, P.M. Oppenheimer, M.V. Posner, W.B. Reddaway, J.R. Sargent, M.F-G Scott, Z.A. Silberston, J.H.B. Tew, J.S. Vickers, S. Wadhwani.

References

Beesley, M.E. and Foster, C. (1968), ‘The Victoria Line’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society.Google Scholar
Coase, R.H. (1960), ‘The problem of social cost’, Journal of Law & Economics, October.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dasgupta, P. and Heal, G. (1979), The Control of Resources, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Department of the Environment (1989), Digest of Environmental Pollution and Water Statistics, HMSO.Google Scholar
Department of the Environment (1990), This Common Inheritance, Cm 1200, HMSO.Google Scholar
House of Lords Environmental Committee (1989), EC Nitrate in Water, No. 73, Vol 1, HMSO.Google Scholar
Environmental Resources Ltd (1983), Acid rain: Report for the Commission of the European Communities, Graham and Trotman, LondonGoogle Scholar
Green Party (1989), ‘Don't let your world turn grey’, European Election Manifesto, The Green Party, LondonGoogle Scholar
Hahn, R. (1989), ‘Economic prescriptions for environmental problems: how the patient followed the doctor's orders’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol 3, No 2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hahn, R. and Hester, G. (1989), ‘Where did all the markets go?: an analysis of EPA's emission trading program’, Yale Journal on Regulation, 6.Google Scholar
Helm, D.R. and Pearce, D.W. (1990), ‘Economic Policy towards the Environment’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Spring.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, C. (1974), ‘Option Values in the economics of irreplaceable assets’, Review of Economic Studies, pp.89–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansson, P.O. (1987), The Economic Theory and Measurement of Environmental Benefits, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layfield, F. (1987), Sizewell B Public Enquiry, Report by Sir Frank Layfield, Department of Energy, HMSO.Google Scholar
London Economics (1990), Policy Responses to the Nitrate Problem, London Economics, London.Google Scholar
Muzando, T.R., Miranda, K.M., Bovenberg, A.L. (1990), ‘Public Policy and the Environment’, IMF Working Paper, WP/90/56.Google Scholar
Newbery, D. (1990), ‘Acid Rain’, Economic Policy, pp.298–346,.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oecd (1989), Economic Instruments for Environmental Protection, Paris.Google Scholar
Nordhaus, W.D. and Tobin, J. (1972), Is Growth Obsolete?, Columbia University Press, for NBER, New York.Google Scholar
Pearce, David, Anil Markandya and Edward Barbier, B. (1989), Blueprint for a Green Economy, Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
Pigou, A.C. (1920), The Economics of Welfare, MacMillan.Google Scholar
Repello, R., Wells, M., Beer, C. and Rassin, F. (1985), Wasting assets: natural resources in the national income accounts, World Resources Institute, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Roskill, A. (Chairman) (1970), Report on the Siting of a Third London Airport.Google Scholar
Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (1972), Pollution in some British Estuaries and Coastal Waters, 3rd Report, (includes Minority Report by Zuckerman and Beckerman), HMSO.Google Scholar
Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (1988), Best Practicable Environmental Option, 12th Report, HMSO.Google Scholar
Russell, Jeremy (1990), Environmental Issues in Eastern Europe: Setting an Agenda, Royal Institute of International Affairs, London.Google Scholar
Tietenberg, T.H. (1988), Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, 2nd Edition, Scott Foresman and CoGoogle Scholar
Tietenberg, T.H. (1990), ‘Economic instruments for environmental regulation’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 6(1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Unep (1989/90), Environmental Data Report, 2nd edition, Blackwells, Oxford.Google Scholar
Weitzman, M.L. (1975), ‘Prices vs Quantities’, Review of Economic Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Resources Institute, World Resources 1988/89, Basic Books Inc, New York.Google Scholar
World Commission on Environment and Development (1987), (the Brundtland Commission), Our Common Future, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar