Multi Pollutant Yardstick Schemes as Environmental Policy Tools

We consider environmental regulation of n risk-averse, multiple pollutant firms. We develop a “yardstick competition” scheme where the regulatory scheme depends on the dierence between a firm’s “aggregate” performance and the average “aggregate” performance of the industry. Whether this instruments dominates Pigovian taxation depends on the complete structure of the covariance matrix of the “common” random terms in measured pollution. Moreover, if the number of firms is large enough, the “yardstick scheme” is always superior to Pigovian taxation. This analysis also provides new arguments in favor of strict liability rather than negligence liability as regulatory tool.yardstick competition, multitasking, environmental regulation, asymmetric information

Monetization of Environmental Externalities (Emissions) from Bioenergy

Bioenergy from agriculture is today in the heart of sustainable development, integrating its key components: environment and climate change, energy economics and energy supply, agriculture, rural and social development. Each bioenergy production route presents externalities that must be assessed in order to compare one bioenergy route to another (bio)energy route. The lack of primary and reliable data on externalities is, nevertheless, an important nontechnological barrier to the implementation of the best (bio)energy routes. In this article, we want to monetize one environmental externality from bioenergy: emissions (GHG: CO2, CH4, N2O, O3; CO, NOx, SO2, metal, and PM). We have to monetize emissions on the basis of their effects on health, global warming, and soil and water quality. Emissions will be quantified through Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) and ECOINVENT database. Impacts on health will be monetized on the basis of mortality (number of life expectancy years lost multiplied by Value Of Life Year (VOLY)) and morbidity (number of ill persons multiplied by Cost Of Illness (COI)). Impacts on global warming will be monetized by Benefits Transfers from the Stern Review and its critics. Finally, impacts on soil and water quality will be monetized by Averting Behaviour or Defensive Expenses methods. Monetization results will be gathered, weighted, and incorporated in states and firms’ decisionmaking tools. They would enhance capacity of policy makers and managers to chose the best (bio)energy routes.Sustainable development, externality, monetization, bioenergy, emissions

A theoretical framework for incentives in the public sector

This note considers the provision of incentives in public organizations that face the following three constraints. First, no lateral entry is possible. Second, the outside opportunities of bureaucrats are independent of their performance. Third, the organization cannot design incentive schemes with stochastic wage bills. In our incentive scheme., the organization contains three jobs. Every period, the organization recruits two agents for the ``field" jobs. At the end of the period, one agent is put in retirement and the other is promoted to the ``executive" job. An agent will be promoted if he has obtained the highest performance on the managerial aspects of the ``field" job, and has passed an endogenous standard of performance on the technical aspects of this ``field" job. This system (1) provides incentives for optimal efforts in the ``field" job AND (2) improves on a purely random allocation system of the “executiveâ€. There are problems of time consistency, though.

Monetization of Environmental Externalities (Emissions) from Bioenergy

Bioenergy from agriculture is today in the heart of sustainabledevelopment, integrating its key components: environment and climate change,energy economics and energy supply, agriculture, rural and social development.Each bioenergy production route presents externalities that must be assessed inorder to compare one bioenergy route to another (bio)energy route. The lack ofprimary and reliable data on externalities is, nevertheless, an important nontechnologicalbarrier to the implementation of the best (bio)energy routes. In thisarticle, we want to monetize one environmental externality from bioenergy:emissions (GHG: CO2, CH4, N2O, O3; CO, NOx, SO2, metal, and PM). We have tomonetize emissions on the basis of their effects on health, global warming, and soiland water quality. Emissions will be quantified through Life Cycle Analysis (LCA)and ECOINVENT database. Impacts on health will be monetized on the basis ofmortality (number of life expectancy years lost multiplied by Value Of Life Year(VOLY)) and morbidity (number of ill persons multiplied by Cost Of Illness(COI)). Impacts on global warming will be monetized by Benefits Transfers fromthe Stern Review and its critics. Finally, impacts on soil and water quality will bemonetized by Averting Behaviour or Defensive Expenses methods. Monetizationresults will be gathered, weighted, and incorporated in states and firms’ decisionmakingtools. They would enhance capacity of policy makers and managers tochose the best (bio)energy routes