This website uses cookies.

By clicking the "Accept" button or continuing to browse our site, you agree to first-party and session-only cookies being stored on your device to enhance site navigation and analyze site performance and traffic. For more information on our use of cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Journal of Economic Perspectives
  4. Search Results
  5. Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?

Journal of Economic Perspectives

ISSN 0895-3309 (Print) | ISSN 1944-7965 (Online)

Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?

  • Karen Palmer
  • Wallace E. Oates
  • Paul R. Portney
Journal of Economic Perspectives
vol. 9, no. 4, Fall 1995
(pp. 119–132)
Download Full Text PDF
(Complimentary)

Abstract

This paper takes issue with the Porter-van der Linde claim that traditional benefit-cost analysis is a fundamental misrepresentation of the environmental problem. They contend that stringent environmental measures induce innovative efforts leading to improvements in abatement and production technologies that offset the costs of the regulations. Drawing both on basic economic theory and existing data on control costs, the authors argue that such offsets are special cases. The data indicate offsets are minuscule relative to control costs. There is no free lunch here: environmental programs must justify their costs by the benefits that improved environmental quality provides to society.

Citation

Palmer, Karen, Wallace E. Oates, and Paul R. Portney. 1995. "Tightening Environmental Standards: The Benefit-Cost or the No-Cost Paradigm?" Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9 (4): 119–132. DOI: 10.1257/jep.9.4.119

JEL Classification

  • Q28 Renewable Resources and Conservation: Government Policy
There are no comments for this article.
Login to Comment