Question
Asked 28th Sep, 2022
  • Independent QLC researcher

How can market structure of Pollution production markets, Pollution reduction markets, and Pollution management markets be represented analytically?

In a world with two components, the economy and the environment such as the world of environmentally dirty markets, the nature of each components in any model determines the nature of that market, which raises the question: How can the market structure of Pollution production markets, Pollution reduction markets, and Pollution management markets be represented analytically?
Think about it, what do you think?

All Answers (2)

13th Oct, 2022
Yusuf Toyin Yusuf
Kwara State University
Market for pollution can be represented analytically or in an econometric model to be suitable for estimation by following these two theories of pollution; the neoclassical theory by (AC Pigou, Marshall and Ronald Coase) and Materials-Balance theory by Ayres and Kness and Ayres and D'Arge. I also suggest this model to capture the effect of pollution which is adapted from the work Biala and Babatunde (2010), Externality effects of sachet water consumption and the choice of policy instrument in Nigeria: Evidence from Kwara state. In their study they adopted the model of Cropper and Oates (1992). The model goes thus: U= U(X, Q); X= X(L, E, Q); and Q=Q(E)
U= utility,
X= bundle of goods,
Q= level of pollution,
E= waste emision, and
L= bundles of convectional inputs like capital and labour.
13th Oct, 2022
Lucio Muñoz
Independent QLC researcher
Good day Yusuf, thank you for writing.
The context on which this question is based is:
“In a world with two components, the economy and the environment such as the world of environmentally dirty markets, the nature of each component in any model determines the nature of that market…”
And based on this context the question is: How can the market structure of Pollution production markets, Pollution reduction markets, and Pollution management markets be represented analytically?
They are 3 different types of markets, different model/market structure, different price structure, different choice structure, and different cost structure. But the question for simplicity is focused only on their different market structure and how to represent it analytically...
If you would like to share your ideas on how this question can be answered, please do it.
Respectfully yours;
Lucio

Similar questions and discussions

Do defining sustainability as sustainable development requires alternative academic facts?
Question
33 answers
  • Lucio MuñozLucio Muñoz
Those who read the 1987 Brundtland Commission Report know that it was about sustainable development solutions to the social and environmental sustainability issues embedded in the traditional market model due to the assumption of social and environmental externality neutrality that had led to social problems(poverty, over population) and environmental problems(Pollution, environmental degradation) that the commission highlighted as the reason for the need to go, not half way from business as usual, but away from business as usual, and they gave us the definition of sustainable development, not of sustainability…..
But look at the UN related page below and its content:
“ Sustainability
Sustainable development requires an integrated approach that takes into consideration environmental concerns along with economic development.
In 1987, the United Nations Brundtland Commission defined sustainability as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Today, there are almost 140 developing countries in the world seeking ways of meeting their development needs, but with the increasing threat of climate change, concrete efforts must be made to ensure development today does not negatively affect future generations.
The Sustainable Development Goals form the framework for improving the lives of populations around the world and mitigating the hazardous man-made effects of climate change. SDG 13: Climate Action, calls for integrating measures to prevent climate change within development frameworks. SDG 14: Life Below Water, and SDG 15: Life on Land, also call for more sustainable practices in using the earth’s natural resources. “
See we know, a) sustainability(optimization based) is not sustainable development (maximization based); b) The commission gave us a definition of sustainable development and not of sustainability as they saw the social and environmental issues created by the traditional market in terms of sustainable development thinking; c) that is why we have sustainable development goals, NOT sustainability goals.
We know the sustainability model is different than the sustainable development model and according to the model inconsistency principle sustainability and sustainable development can not be equated or defined one as the other or the other as the one.
But the UN defines sustainability as sustainable development there, a scientific inconsistency as it violates the theory-practice consistency principle.
Which raises the question, Do defining sustainability as sustainable development requires alternative academic facts? If yes, Why?
I think YES, what do you think?
Feel free to provide your own view when answering the question.
Is the goal of dwarf green markets like climate change markets to reach a level of natural environmental immunity through pollution management?
Question
5 answers
  • Lucio MuñozLucio Muñoz
The choices usually in conflict are, should we fix the root cause of the problem or should we just manage the problem?
The case of the pandemic shows that there were those who opposed the solution of the problem with Covid 19 vaccines to attack the root cause (the virus) of the problem to minimize severity of infection or chances of hospitalization or changes of death; and those who just wanted the Covid 19 to be managed in such a way as to facilitate the reaching of natural immunity regardless of death levels or severity of consequences of just managing the Covid 19 problem.
In the case of the Covid 19 problem most countries if not all, chose to attack the root cause problem with the vaccine.
In the case of the environmental pollution problem, the international and local community is focused since 2012 on managing the pollution generation problem instead of fixing the root cause of the pollution generation problem(distorted market prices).
In the case of the pollution generation problem most countries if not all, chose to avoid fixing the root cause pollution generation problem with green markets in 2012 as the environmental cost internalization as vaccine, and went instead with the way of managing the pollution generation problem with environmental pollution management based markets.
And this raises the question, is the goal of dwarf green markets like climate change markets to reach a level of natural environmental immunity locally and globally through pollution management? While leaving the root cause of the pollution generation problem unfixed?
What do you think? Yes, then why? No, then why not?

Related Publications

Article
In a world faced with accelerating climate change, economic instability and resource limits, it is urgent to find better indicators of progress towards sustainability. The available indicators mostly succeed at measuring unsustainable trends that can be targeted by management action, but fall short of defining or ensuring sustainability. A recent r...
Article
The question "what are the determinants of growth?' can be tackled in two ways. From a microeconomic perspective, having defined a production function, it is clear that growth being the rate of change of output, is explained by growth of the inputs. From a macroeconomic perspective, however, the question becomes: "changes in which aggregates are as...
Got a technical question?
Get high-quality answers from experts.