14.12.2012 Views

Public Policy: Using Market-Based Approaches - Department for ...

Public Policy: Using Market-Based Approaches - Department for ...

Public Policy: Using Market-Based Approaches - Department for ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

SUBSIDIES<br />

In some cases, instead of taxing pollution, governments have introduced<br />

subsidies <strong>for</strong> pollution abatement. This can include subsidies <strong>for</strong> using lowemissions<br />

technology. However, the long-term effects of such subsidies have<br />

been poor. In some cases, the subsidy may induce so much entry that in the long<br />

run there is an increase the total amount of pollutant emitted. 238 For this reason,<br />

taxes on the emission of pollution are often preferable to subsidies <strong>for</strong> lowpollution<br />

technology.<br />

Opening access to natural monopolies<br />

UNDUE GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION<br />

As we noted in Part III, regulated access is only likely to be appropriate in a very<br />

limited number of cases. In practice, the majority of cases of regulated access<br />

have been in previously nationalised monopolies. There are good reasons <strong>for</strong><br />

this. The provision of access at a regulated price necessarily involves an<br />

appropriation by government of some of the assets of a private firm. If the firm<br />

has acquired these assets through legitimate investment in the market, then the<br />

use of regulated access can deter investment. Any short-term benefit in terms of<br />

price, will likely be more than out-weighed by the long-term effects on firms’<br />

incentives <strong>for</strong> investment.<br />

ASYMMETRIC INFORMATION<br />

If regulated access is, however, deemed appropriate, then it should be granted<br />

at an appropriate level. This will normally be at a level that bears some relation<br />

to cost. In setting this level, the regulator is at a disadvantage compared with the<br />

regulated firm. The regulated firm will have more in<strong>for</strong>mation about its own<br />

costs than an external regulator possess. Moreover, it faces an obvious incentive<br />

to have the access charge as high as possible. The result can be an incentive <strong>for</strong><br />

the regulated firm to inflate its costs, with the consequence of an inefficiently<br />

high access charge. Moreover, even if a correct access charge were set, the<br />

process <strong>for</strong> acquiring and analysing the necessary in<strong>for</strong>mation can be costly.<br />

COST OF REGULATION<br />

Section 12 – Issues in the implementation of market mechanisms<br />

In the case of natural monopoly, the efficiency losses from allowing one private<br />

firm to supply the market and extract monopoly rent may be less than the cost<br />

of regulation. This is suggested by Harberger’s empirical estimates of the cost of<br />

monopoly in the US, which suggests the deadweight loss from monopoly is of<br />

a relatively small magnitude.<br />

238 Baumol, W. and W. Oates, (1988), The Theory of Environmental <strong>Policy</strong>, Second Edition, Cambridge, England:<br />

Cambridge University Press.<br />

Kohn, R. (1985) ‘A General Equilibrium Analysis of the Optimal Number of Firms in a Polluting Industry,’<br />

Canadian Journal of Economics 18(2).<br />

193

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!