Simplifying the intertemporal allocation of a stock resource to a two-period model fails to account for the unequal relationship between time periods, and, more seriously, does not account for an increase in stock scarcity as the number of periods is increased. Discounting mitigates the problem, but the appropriateness of this to natural resources is under challenge. A multiperiod model shows the future costs of present use increasing well beyond normal time horizons. An optimal conservation tax may be large, even indefinitely so.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ButlinJ A, 1981Economics and Resources Policy (Longman, Harlow, Essex).
2.
ClarkC W, 1976Mathematical Bioeconomics (John Wiley, New York).
3.
GroutP, 1981, “Social welfare and exhaustible resources” in Economics and Resources Policy Ed. ButlinJ A, (Longman, Harlow, Essex) pp 88–109.
4.
HelliwellD R, 1974, “Discount rates in land use planning”Forestry47147–152.
5.
KulaE, 1981, “Future generations and discounting rules in public sector investment appraisal”Environment and Planning A13899–910.
6.
LecomberR, 1979The Economics of Natural Resources (Macmillan, London).
7.
McInerneyJ, 1976, “The simple analytics of natural resource economics”Journal of Agricultural Economics2731–52.
8.
NashC A, 1973, “Future generations and the social rate of discount”Environment and Planning5611–617.
9.
PageT, 1977, “Equitable use of the resource base”Environment and Planning A915–22.
PigouA C, 1920The Economics of Welfare (Macmillan, London).
12.
PriceC, 1973, “To the future: With indifference or concern? The social discount rate and its implications for land use”Journal of Agricultural Economics24393–398.
