Environmental regulation yields benefits as well as costs. Regulation is inefficient if the benefits do not match the costs. By referring to eight current case studies, the authors analyse the costs of inefficient environmental regulation in Germany. This is done partly in comparison with European Union solutions. The studies are taken from the consumer products, energy, and chemical industries.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BMU, 1996, “Mehrweganteile bei Getränken 1995 weiter auf hohem Niveau”, press release 42/96, 24 October, Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit
2.
BonusH, 1984Marktwirtschaftliche Konzepete im Umweltschutz (Eugen Ulmer, Stuttgart)
3.
BonusH, 1986, “The cooperative association as a business enterprise”Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics142310–339
4.
BreyerS, 1993Breaking the Vicious Circle—Toward Effective Risk Regulation (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
5.
Bundes-Immissionsschutz-Gesetz, 1990Bundesgesetzblatt part 1, number 23, 22 May, page 880
6.
Chemikaliengesetz, 1994Bundesgesetzblatt part 1, number 47, 29 July, page 1689
7.
DietlH, 1993Institutionen und Zeit (J C B Mohr, Tübingen)
8.
Dual System1995Jahresbericht 1995, Gesellschaft für Abfallvermeidung und Sekundärrohstoff-gewinung mbH, Frankfurter-Strasse 720–726, D-51145 Cologne
9.
EC, 1985, “European Parliament and Council Directive 85/339/EEC of 27 June 1985 on Containers of Liquids for Human Consumption”Official Journal of the European Communities L176 28 6 July, page 18
10.
EC, 1992, “European Council Directive 92/32/EEC of 30 April 1992 on amending for the seventh time Directive 67/548/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances”Official Journal of the Europen Communities L154 35 5 June, page 1
11.
EC, 1994a, “European Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on Packaging and Packaging Waste”Official Journal of the European Communities L365, 37 31 December, page 10
12.
EC, 1994b, “European Parliament and Council Directive 94/63/EC of 20 December 1994”Official Journal of the European Communities L365 37 31 December, page 24
13.
EggertsonT, 1990Cambridge Surveys of Economic Literature: Economic Behaviour and Institutions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
14.
ERL, 1991Deposit Refund Systems for Beverage Containers and Batteries, Environmental Resources Limited, for the Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of the Environment (The Stationery Office, London)
15.
EwringmannDLinscheidtBMunoAvon SchuckmannJ, 1995, “Ökonomische und umwelt-politische Beurteiling einer Pfandpflicht bei Einweggetränkeverpackungen”, RP109 04 005, on behalf of Umweltbundesamt, Postfach 330022, D-14191 Berlin
16.
FAZ1997, “Lizenzen sollen die Menge der Bierdosen und Milchkartons steuern”Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 3 March, page 15
17.
Großfeuerungs-Anlagen-Verordnung, 1983Bundesgesetzblatt part 1, number 26, 25 June, page 719
18.
HanleyNSpashC, 1993Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment (Edward Elgar, Aldershot, Hants)
19.
HohenthalC, 1996, “Mit der Quote in die Kartelle”Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 3 January, page 9
20.
JoeresE FDavidM H (Eds), 1983Land Economic Monographs 6. Buying a Better Environment—Cost-effective Regulation Through Permit Trading (University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI)
21.
JohanssonP-O, 1993Cost – Benefit Analysis of Environmental Change (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)
22.
KleinBCrawfordR GAlchianA A, 1978, “Vertical integration, appropriable rents, and the competitive contracting process”Journal of Law and Economics21297–326
23.
MeV/VdA, undated, “Für reinere Luft—Ein gemeinsames Programm der Europäischen Kommission, europäischen Automobilindustrie (ACEA), europäischen Mineralölindustrie (EUROPIA)”, Mineralölwirtschaftsverband eV/Verband der Automobilindustrie, Steindamm 71, D-20099, Hamburg
24.
MichaelisP, 1991, “Duale Abfallwirtschaft auf dem Prüfstand”Die Weltwirtschaft1117–131
25.
MichaelisP, 1993Ökonomische Aspekte der Abfallgesetzgebung (J C B Mohr, Tübingen)
TietenbergT H, 1980, “Transferable discharge permits and the control of stationary source air pollution: A Survey and synthesis”Land Economics56391–416
33.
TietenbergT H, 1985Emissions Trading: An Exercise in Reforming Pollution Policy (Resources for the Future, Washington, DC)
34.
Umweltbundesamt, 1992, “Vergleich der Umweltauswirkungen von Einweg- und Mehrwegverpackungen—Literaturstudie”, Umweltbundesamt, Postfach 33 00 22, D-14191 Berlin
35.
Umweltbundesamt, 1995, “Ökobilanzen für Getränkeverpackungen”, text 52/95, Berlin
36.
USGAO, 1990Toxic Substances: EPA's Chemical Testing Program Has Made Litte Progress, US General Accounting Office (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC)
37.
Verpackungsverordnung, 1991Bundesgesetzblatt part 1, number 36, 20 June, page 1234
38.
von WeizsäckerC C, 1993, “Strategien der Energienutzung zwischen Ökonomie und Ökologie”, in Schriften des Vereins für Sozialpolitik 224. Umweltverträgliches Wirtschaften als Problem von Wissenschaft und Politik Ed. KönigH (Duncker and Humblot, Berlin) pp 133–143
39.
WilliamsonO E, 1985The Economic Institutions of Capitalism—Firms, Markets, Relational Contracting (The Free Press, New York). 347–361
