Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T08:19:27.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Allocative Implications of Comparisons Between the Marginal Costs of Point and Nonpoint Source Pollution Abatement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

James S. Shortle
James S. Shortle*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park
Get access

Abstract

This paper examines the possible use of information on the relative marginal costs of point and nonpoint source water pollution abatement to assess the efficiency implications of shifting a greater portion of the burden for water quality protection to nonpoint sources. The inherent uncertainty about the effects of changes in resource allocation for nonpoint pollution abatement on nonpoint pollution loads is recognized in the analysis. This uncertainty is shown to result in significant limitations on the use of marginal cost comparisons even when point and nonpoint pollutants are perfect substitutes.

Type
Research Article
Information
Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , April 1987 , pp. 17 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

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

Paper No. 7603 of the Pennsylvania Agricultural Experiment Station.

References

Baumol, William J., and Oates, Wallace E. 1975. The Theory of Environmental Policy. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall, 1975.Google Scholar
Beavis, Brian, and Walker, Martin. 1983. “Achieving Environmental Standards with Stochastic Discharges.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management. 10 (1983): 103–111.Google Scholar
Decoursey, D. G. “ARS Small Watershed Model.” Collaborative Paper CP-82-89, International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis, Luxembourg, Austria, 1983.Google Scholar
Elmore, Tom, Jaksch, John, and Downing, Donna. “Point/Nonpoint Source Trading Programs for Dillon Reservoir and Planned Extensions For Other Areas.” In Perspectives on Nonpoint Source Pollution. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1985.Google Scholar
Harrington, Whinston, Krupnick, Alan J., and Peskin, Henry M. “Policies for Nonpoint-Source Water Pollution Control.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 40 (1985): 27–32.Google Scholar
Just, Richard E. and Pope, Rulon D. “Stochastic Specification of Production Functions and Economic Implications.” Journal of Econometrics. 7 (1978): 67–86.Google Scholar
National Commission on Water Quality. Report To Congress by The National Commission on Water Quality. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.Google Scholar
Savage, Roberts. “State Initiatives in Nonpoint Source Pollution Control.” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 40 (1985): 53–54.Google Scholar
Shortle, James S. and Dunn, James W. “The Relative Efficiency of Agricultural Source Water Pollution Control Policies.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 68 (1986): 668–677.Google Scholar
Thomas, Lee M., “Viewpoint: Management of Nonpoint Source Pollution: What Priority?” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 40 (1985): 33–36.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. Loading Functions for Assessment of Water Pollution From Nonpoint Sources. May, 1976.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. Environmental Research Laboratory. Effectiveness of Soil and Water Conservation Practices for Pollution Control. October, 1979.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. Office of Water Program Operations. Report to Congress: Nonpoint Pollution in the U.S. January, 1984.Google Scholar
U.S. General Accounting Office. Cleaning Up the Environment: Progress Achieved but Major Unresolved Issues Remain. July, 1982.Google Scholar