Book contents
- The Israeli Economy, 1995–2017
- The Israeli Economy, 1995–2017
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- 1 Lights and Shadows in the Market Economy
- Part I Government Policy and Macroeconomic Developments
- Part II Reforms and Their Effects
- Part III Investment in Human Capital, Productivity, and Inequality
- Part IV Key Issues in Various Sectors
- 17 The High-Tech Sector
- 18 The Israeli Housing Market: Structure, Boom, and Policy Response
- 19 Policy Tools to Promote Environmental Quality in Israel: A Comparison of Economic Tools with Direct Regulation
- Index
- References
19 - Policy Tools to Promote Environmental Quality in Israel: A Comparison of Economic Tools with Direct Regulation
from Part IV - Key Issues in Various Sectors
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 February 2021
By
Book contents
- The Israeli Economy, 1995–2017
- The Israeli Economy, 1995–2017
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- 1 Lights and Shadows in the Market Economy
- Part I Government Policy and Macroeconomic Developments
- Part II Reforms and Their Effects
- Part III Investment in Human Capital, Productivity, and Inequality
- Part IV Key Issues in Various Sectors
- 17 The High-Tech Sector
- 18 The Israeli Housing Market: Structure, Boom, and Policy Response
- 19 Policy Tools to Promote Environmental Quality in Israel: A Comparison of Economic Tools with Direct Regulation
- Index
- References
Summary
Regulators around the world are dealing with a fundamental dilemma. On the one hand, modern economic activity raises the standard of living, but on the other hand, it creates many environmental hazards that harm our quality of life. To balance these controlling effects, they are interested in bringing about social equilibrium and for the value of marginal damage to be equal to the cost of reducing it. The way to deal can be through direct command and control (CAC) or market-based economic tools. Over the years, the use of economic tools in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries increased at the expense of direct regulation, but in Israel, there is still a tendency to use direct regulation. However, since the beginning of the twenty-first century, there has been an increase in the use of economic tools in Israel as well. The chapter examines whether it is better to increase the use of economic tools at the expense of direct regulation. The examination is based on six case studies from various environmental fields in Israel. The results of the research reinforce the argument that economic tools can achieve policy objectives more effectively while driving the market to environmental improvement.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Israeli Economy, 1995–2017Light and Shadow in a Market Economy, pp. 587 - 606Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Ayalon, A., and Schechter, M. (1997). Economic Incentives in Solid Urban Waste Policy: Research Report for 1995–1996. Technion City, Haifa: Samuel Neaman Institute. [In Hebrew]Google Scholar
Ayalon, O., Avnimelech, Y., and Shechter, M. (2000). Application of a Comparative Multidimensional Life Cycle Analysis in Solid Waste Managemen Policy: The Case of Soft Drink Containers. Environmental Science & Policy, 3, 135–144.Google Scholar
Ayalon, O., Avnimelech, Y., and Shechter, M. (2001). Solid Waste Treatment as a High-Priority and Low-Cost Alternative for Greenhouse Gas Mitigation. Environmental Management, 27(5), 697–704.Google ScholarPubMed
Ayalon, O., Becker, N., and Shani, E. (2006). Economic Aspects of the Rehabilitation of the Hiriya Landfill. Waste Management, 26(11), 1313–1323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ayalon, A., Kun, E., and Segev, T. (2010). Life Cycle Analysis of Solid Urban Waste Treatment. Research 7321 for the Ministry of the Environment. Technion City, Haifa.Google Scholar
Bailey, I. (2007). Market Environmentalism: New Environmental Policy Instruments, and Climate Policy in the United Kingdom and Germany. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97(3), 530–550.Google Scholar
Bank of Israel (2009). Environmental Policy Issues, 2008 Report. www.bankisrael.gov.il/deptdata/mehkar/doch09/eng/pe_9.pdf]]g.Google Scholar
Becker, N., and Lavee, D. (2002). The Effect and Reform of Water Pricing: The Israeli Experience. International journal of Water Resource Development, 18(2), 353–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
CEWEP (2016). Landfill Tax & Bans: Confederation of European Waste-to-Energy Plants. http://cewep.eu/media/cewep.eu/org/med_557/1529_2016–10-10_cewep-landfill_inctaxesbans.pdf.Google Scholar
Eshet, T., Baron, M. G., Shechter, M., and Ayalon, O. (2007). Measuring Externalities of Waste Transfer Stations in Israel Using Hedonic Pricing. Waste Management, 27(5), 614–625.Google Scholar
EU (2016). EU Energy in Figures Statistical Pocketbook. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/pocketbook_energy-2016_web-final_final.pdf.Google Scholar
Feinerman, E., Finkelshtain, I., and Kan, I. (2004). On a Political Solution to the NIMBY Conflict. The American Economic Review, 94(1), 369–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelshtain, I., and Kislev, Y. (1997). Prices versus Quantities: The Political Perspective. Journal of Political Economy, 105(1), 83–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedler, E. (2001). Water Reuse: An Integral Part of Water Resources Management: Israel as a Case Study. Water Policy, 3, 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haruvy, N. (1998). Wastewater Reuse: Regional and Economic Considerations, Resources. Conservation and Recycling, 23, 57–66.Google Scholar
Hepburn, C. (2006). Regulation by Prices, Quantities or Both: A Review of Instrument Choice. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22(2), 226–247.Google Scholar
Kan, I., Ayalon, O., and Federman, R. (2010). On the Efficiency of Composting Organic Wastes. Agricultural Economics, 41(2), 151–163.Google Scholar
Karsin, A. (2009). Effective Implementation of Environmental Policy: Encouraging Compliance and Streamlining Enforcement. Jerusalem: Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, Center for Environmental Policy. [In Hebrew]Google Scholar
Lavee, D. (2010). A Cost–Benefit Analysis of a Deposit-Refund Program for Beverage containers in Israel. Waste Management, 30(2), 338–345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavee, D. (2011). A Cost–Benefit Analysis of Alternative Wastewater Treatment Standards: A Case Study in Israel. Water and Environment Journal, 25(4), 504–512.Google Scholar
Lavee, D. (2014). Is the Upgrading of Wastewater Treatment Facilities to Meet More Stringent Standards Economically Justified? The Case of Israel. Water Resources, 41(5), 564–573.Google Scholar
Lavee, D., and Becker, N. (2009). A Cost–Benefit Analysis of Accelerated Vehicle Retirement. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 52(6), 777–795.Google Scholar
Lavee, D., and Joseph-Ezra, H. (2015). The Development and Use of Economic Instruments in Environmental Policy: The Case of Israel. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 17(2), 1–23.Google Scholar
Lavee, D., and Menachem, O. (2018). Identifying Policy Measures for Reducing Expected Air Pollution Across Israel and Analyzing Their Expected Effects. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 20(1), 1850001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lavee, D., and Nardiya, S. (2013). A Cost Evaluation Method for Transferring Municipalities to Solid Waste Source-Separated System. Waste Management, 33(5), 1064–1072.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lavee, D., Moshe, A., Menachem, O., Hubner, V., and Tenanzap, K. (2015). Analyzing Current and Expected Air Quality and Pollutant Emissions Across Israel. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 226(12), Article number 416.Google Scholar
MSC (2014). An Analysis of the Effects of Passage of S.379 on Litter, Recycling, Employment, and State and Local Financing. Boston: MSC (Massachusetts Siera Club).Google Scholar
Nissim, I., Shohat, T., and Inbar, Y. (2005). From Dumping to Sanitary Landfills: Solid Waste Management in Israel. Waste Management, 25(3), 323–327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
OECD (2016). Car Purchase Tax: Green Tax Reform in Israel. Working Party on Integrating Environmental and Economic Policies, June 30, 2016.Google Scholar
Olivieri, A., Seto, E., Cooper, R., Cahn, M., Colford, J., Crook, J., Debroux, J., Mandrell, R., Suslow, T., Tchobanoglous, G., Hultquist, R., Spath, D., and Mosher, J. (2014). Risk-Based Review of California’s Water-Recycling Criteria for Agricultural Irrigation. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 140(6). DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)EE.1943-7870.0000833. http://ucanr.edu/datastoreFiles/234–2791.pdf.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seroa Da Motta, R., Alban, T., Saade, Hazin L., Feres, J. G., Nauges, X. C., and Saade, Hazin A., eds. (2004). Economic Instruments for Water Management: The Cases of France, Mexico, and Brazil. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Water Authority (2010). National Long-Term Master Plan for the Water Sector, Policy Paper. 2nd edn. Tel Aviv: Water Authority, Planning Division. [Hebrew]Google Scholar
Water Authority (2015). Government Water and Sewage Municipality, Activity Report for 2014. Tel Aviv: Water Authority, Planning Division.Google Scholar
Zito, A. R., Jordan, A. J., and Wurzelx, R. (2011). Escaping the Regulatory State? Issues of Policy Instruments in the EU Environmental Policy Context. Paper prepared for the Sixth ECPR Annual Conference in Reykavik, Iceland 2011.Google Scholar