The Experts below are selected from a list of 6204 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ryan Sandler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Welfare Impact of second best uniform pigouvian taxation evidence from transportation
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2018Co-Authors: Christopher R Knittel, Ryan SandlerAbstract:When consumers or firms don't face the true social cost of their actions, market outcomes are inefficient. In the case of negative externalities, Pigouvian taxes are one way to correct this market failure, but it may be infeasible to tax the externality directly. The alternative, taxing a related product, will be second-best. In this paper, we show that in the presence of heterogeneous externalities and elasticities, this type of indirect tax performs poorly. In our empirical application, gasoline taxes to address pollution externalities, less than a third of the deadweight loss of the externality is addressed by second-best optimal taxes.
-
the Welfare Impact of indirect pigouvian taxation evidence from transportation
National Bureau of Economic Research, 2013Co-Authors: Christopher R Knittel, Ryan SandlerAbstract:A basic tenet of economics posits that when consumers or firms don't face the true social cost of their actions, market outcomes are inefficient. In the case of negative externalities, Pigouvian taxes are one way to correct this market failure, where the optimal tax leads agents to internalize the true cost of their actions. A practical complication, however, is that the level of externality nearly always varies across economic agents and directly taxing the externality may be infeasible. In such cases, policy often taxes a product correlated with the externality. For example, instead of taxing vehicle emissions directly, policy makers may tax gasoline even though per-gallon emissions vary across vehicles. This paper estimates the implications of this approach within the personal transportation market. We have three general empirical results. First, we show that vehicle emissions are positively correlated with vehicle elasticities for miles traveled with respect to fuel prices (in absolute value)--i.e. dirtier vehicles respond more to fuel prices. This correlation substantially increases the optimal second-best uniform gasoline tax. Second, and perhaps more importantly, we show that a uniform tax performs very poorly in eliminating deadweight loss associated with vehicle emissions; in many years in our sample over 75 percent of the deadweight loss remains under the optimal second-best gasoline tax. Substantial improvements to market efficiency require differentiating based on vehicle type, for example vintage. Finally, there is a more positive result: because of the positive correlation between emissions and elasticities, the health benefits from a given gasoline tax increase by roughly 90 percent, compared to what one would expect if emissions and elasticities were uncorrelated.
Arash Beheshtian - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A comprehensive Welfare Impact analysis for road expansion projects: A case study
Case Studies on Transport Policy, 2020Co-Authors: Omid M. Rouhani, R. Richard Geddes, Arash BeheshtianAbstract:Abstract This study provides the overall social Welfare implications of key road-capacity expansion options considering free capacity, high occupancy vehicle – HOV, high occupancy toll – HOT, and toll lanes. The broad Welfare Impacts are estimated in terms of transport users, residents, the regional economy, and private-sector’s Welfare. The study uses Dallas County and Tarrant County, Texas, as a case-study region. The study result shows that the HOT option outperforms all other options. It results in an overall increase in social Welfare in net present value of $6.7 billion. Apart from that, estimation results do not clearly suggest a preferred option, but instead, depend on the criterion used. The best option in each criterion is: “Do nothing” for investment costs, “HOT” for regional economic Impact, “All-tolled” for corridor travel time, “HOT” for network-wide travel time, “Free capacity” for users’ travel costs, “All-tolled” for energy and environmental costs, and “All-tolled” for revenue. The proposed social Welfare analysis integrates these conflicting criteria by offering a unified index, and provides the best road-investment option for society.
Christopher R Knittel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Welfare Impact of second best uniform pigouvian taxation evidence from transportation
American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2018Co-Authors: Christopher R Knittel, Ryan SandlerAbstract:When consumers or firms don't face the true social cost of their actions, market outcomes are inefficient. In the case of negative externalities, Pigouvian taxes are one way to correct this market failure, but it may be infeasible to tax the externality directly. The alternative, taxing a related product, will be second-best. In this paper, we show that in the presence of heterogeneous externalities and elasticities, this type of indirect tax performs poorly. In our empirical application, gasoline taxes to address pollution externalities, less than a third of the deadweight loss of the externality is addressed by second-best optimal taxes.
-
the Welfare Impact of indirect pigouvian taxation evidence from transportation
National Bureau of Economic Research, 2013Co-Authors: Christopher R Knittel, Ryan SandlerAbstract:A basic tenet of economics posits that when consumers or firms don't face the true social cost of their actions, market outcomes are inefficient. In the case of negative externalities, Pigouvian taxes are one way to correct this market failure, where the optimal tax leads agents to internalize the true cost of their actions. A practical complication, however, is that the level of externality nearly always varies across economic agents and directly taxing the externality may be infeasible. In such cases, policy often taxes a product correlated with the externality. For example, instead of taxing vehicle emissions directly, policy makers may tax gasoline even though per-gallon emissions vary across vehicles. This paper estimates the implications of this approach within the personal transportation market. We have three general empirical results. First, we show that vehicle emissions are positively correlated with vehicle elasticities for miles traveled with respect to fuel prices (in absolute value)--i.e. dirtier vehicles respond more to fuel prices. This correlation substantially increases the optimal second-best uniform gasoline tax. Second, and perhaps more importantly, we show that a uniform tax performs very poorly in eliminating deadweight loss associated with vehicle emissions; in many years in our sample over 75 percent of the deadweight loss remains under the optimal second-best gasoline tax. Substantial improvements to market efficiency require differentiating based on vehicle type, for example vintage. Finally, there is a more positive result: because of the positive correlation between emissions and elasticities, the health benefits from a given gasoline tax increase by roughly 90 percent, compared to what one would expect if emissions and elasticities were uncorrelated.
Omid M. Rouhani - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A comprehensive Welfare Impact analysis for road expansion projects: A case study
Case Studies on Transport Policy, 2020Co-Authors: Omid M. Rouhani, R. Richard Geddes, Arash BeheshtianAbstract:Abstract This study provides the overall social Welfare implications of key road-capacity expansion options considering free capacity, high occupancy vehicle – HOV, high occupancy toll – HOT, and toll lanes. The broad Welfare Impacts are estimated in terms of transport users, residents, the regional economy, and private-sector’s Welfare. The study uses Dallas County and Tarrant County, Texas, as a case-study region. The study result shows that the HOT option outperforms all other options. It results in an overall increase in social Welfare in net present value of $6.7 billion. Apart from that, estimation results do not clearly suggest a preferred option, but instead, depend on the criterion used. The best option in each criterion is: “Do nothing” for investment costs, “HOT” for regional economic Impact, “All-tolled” for corridor travel time, “HOT” for network-wide travel time, “Free capacity” for users’ travel costs, “All-tolled” for energy and environmental costs, and “All-tolled” for revenue. The proposed social Welfare analysis integrates these conflicting criteria by offering a unified index, and provides the best road-investment option for society.
David W Macdonald - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
mechanical performance of rat mouse and mole spring traps and possible implications for Welfare performance
PLOS ONE, 2012Co-Authors: Sandra E Baker, Stephen A Ellwood, V L Tagarielli, David W MacdonaldAbstract:Lethal spring traps are widely used for killing small mammals in the UK. Many require government approval, based primarily on humaneness. However, mole traps and break-back traps for rats and mice are exempt; those available vary widely in price and apparent quality. The EU is considering implementing a Trapping Directive that would alter UK legislation, and a recent report advised the EU that trapping legislation should cover all trapped species and encourage improvement of traps. Mechanical trap performance is often used as an indicator of Welfare Impact. We examined the mechanical evidence for scope to improve the Welfare standards of rat, mouse and mole spring traps. We measured mechanical performance among a range of rat, mouse and mole traps. Impact momentum values varied 6-8 fold, and clamping force values 4-5.5 fold, among traps for killing each species. There was considerable overlap in the performance of rat and mouse traps. Trap-opening angle and spring type were related to Impact momentum and clamping force in traps for both species. There was no relationship between price and mechanical performance in traps for any species, except talpa mole traps. We are unable to judge the direct Welfare Impact of the traps tested, but rather the potential Welfare threat associated with their exemption from approval. The wide variation in mechanical performance in traps for each species, overlap in performance between rat and mouse traps and increasing availability of weaker plastic rodent traps indicate considerable scope for improving the humaneness of spring traps for rats, mice and moles. We conclude that all such traps should be subject to the UK approval process. New Welfare categories might improve trap standards further. Our results could also help improve rodent trap design and assist consumers in selecting more powerful traps. Many thousands of rats, mice and moles might benefit.
