Incentivizing Change: Government Leveraging Incentives To Curb Pollution

The government has a range of tools at its disposal to regulate pollution and incentivize environmentally friendly practices. Economic incentives are becoming an increasingly popular tool for addressing a wide range of environmental issues, from acid rain to climate change. These incentives can take the form of market-based approaches, such as emission taxes and fees, or subsidies for pollution control. One example is the U.S. Acid Rain Program, which successfully reduced sulfur dioxide emissions from electric utilities. Governments can also implement hybrid approaches that combine aspects of traditional regulatory methods and market-based incentive policies. These approaches offer flexibility and can be tailored to specific industries or polluters.

Subsidies for pollution control

Subsidies are a form of financial government support for activities believed to be environmentally friendly. They incentivize polluters to reduce emissions by rewarding them for doing so. This is in contrast to a traditional regulatory approach, which sets specific standards that polluters must meet. Subsidies can take the form of grants, low-interest loans, favourable tax treatment, or procurement mandates. For example, the US government has used subsidies to encourage farmers and others to conserve habitats and control pollution.

Subsidies can be an effective way to address pollution externalities. They are already used by industries and politicians, so shifting the revenue from 'perverse subsidies' that benefit companies who are largely at fault for global problems like pollution, to beneficial subsidies, would be desirable on many levels. For instance, the US government has subsidized entire industries, such as bio-fuel manufacturers, through a reduction in tax liability.

Subsidies can be used to increase pollution abatement (decrease pollution) and change the rational conclusion of a firm's cost-benefit analysis. When choosing to reduce pollution, the marginal benefit of reducing the next unit is increased. The subsidy installs additional benefits for the firm, incentivizing them to reduce pollution.

Subsidies are often given as tax credits, which reduce a firm's tax liability by a certain amount or proportion. This decreases government revenue without requiring additional expenditures. They can also be given to individuals in the form of feebates, which reduce people's tax liability when they do something beneficial for society, like installing solar panels.

However, critics of subsidies might argue that the government should not pay responsible firms to reduce their pollution. This is contrary to the 'polluter pays principle', which states that the guilty party should be responsible for correcting the negative externality. There is also a risk that firms could become dependent on the financial benefit of the subsidy, to the extent that their business model hinges on receiving it.

Tax-subsidy combinations

One example of a tax-subsidy combination is a deposit-refund system, where consumers pay a surcharge (or tax) on certain products and then receive a rebate (or subsidy) when they return the product for recycling or proper disposal. This approach has been successfully used for beverage containers, lead-acid batteries, automobile parts, and other products.

Another example of a tax-subsidy combination is taxing emissions from point sources, such as stationary industrial facilities, while also subsidizing controls on non-point sources, such as agricultural runoff or stormwater runoff. This approach can help address pollution from diverse and diffuse sources that may be challenging to regulate through traditional command-and-control approaches.

In the context of car pollution, one proposed tax-subsidy combination includes uniform taxes on gasoline, engine size, and vehicle age. This approach can incentivize the use of more fuel-efficient vehicles and discourage the use of larger, less efficient vehicles.

Marketable permit systems

There are three types of marketable permitting programs:

• Cap-and-trade programs: Regulators set a limit, or cap, on the total amount of activity that can take place. For example, a cap could be set on the total tons of a pollutant that can be emitted.
• Rate-based trading programs: Agencies limit the relative amount of activity per regulated entity or unit of regulated activity. For example, a rate-based air pollution permit market may limit the amount of pollution power plants can emit per unit of electricity generated.
• Credit trading systems: Regulators set a relative goal (e.g., no net emissions increase) and then any covered entities that want to increase emissions must purchase offsetting credits from third parties. Credits can be earned when parties limit their level of the regulated activity by more than the required amount.

Emission taxes, fees, and charges

The main drawback of emission taxes, fees, and charges is that they cannot guarantee a specific amount of pollution reduction. They can, however, ensure that polluters are penalized. Examples include pollution taxes, water user fees, wastewater discharge fees, and solid waste disposal fees.

In addition, emission taxes, fees, and charges can be used in conjunction with subsidies for pollution control. While emission taxes, fees, and charges charge polluters for emissions, subsidies reward polluters for reducing emissions. Examples of subsidies include grants, low-interest loans, favorable tax treatment, and procurement mandates.

Information disclosure

Both voluntary and mandatory information disclosure programs exist. An example of a mandatory program is the 1969 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the United States, which requires federal agencies to prepare Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) for activities that could significantly affect the environment. These statements detail potential environmental damages and outline alternative approaches to minimise adverse impacts.

Labeling schemes, on the other hand, are a type of voluntary information disclosure program. In these schemes, a non-profit organisation or government agency sets environmental sustainability standards for products. Companies that meet these standards are allowed to display the label on their products, making them more appealing to environmentally conscious consumers.

The effectiveness of information disclosure programs can be limited by political incentives. Research on Chinese cities, for example, has shown that local politicians' promotion incentives can significantly distort disclosed information on air pollution. However, high-frequency disclosure requirements can mitigate this issue by increasing the costs of manipulating the disclosed data.

Frequently asked questions