中国矿山地质环境恢复治理激励机制探索研究

目前,中国矿山地质环境恢复治理形势依然严峻,国家高度重视矿山地质环境恢复与治理工作,财政部、国土资源部不断加大矿山地质环境治理资金,但目前资金缺口仍然很大。文章通过梳理中国矿山地质环境恢复治理激励机制建设创新做法,总结各省开展矿山地质环境恢复治理"五结合"激励模式实践探索,并针对我们矿山地质环境治理目前存在的主要困难和问题提出了引入市场机制出台土地使用权,及尽快出台国家层面的鼓励政策等多方面的优惠政策等建议。     

农户从事生态循环农业意愿与行为的决定:市场收益还是政策激励?

发展生态循环农业是我国新时期转变农业发展方式的战略选择,农户是生态循环农业的经营主体和利益相关者,厘清农户参与生态循环农业的根本动机,对于制定有效的生态循环农业推广措施具有重要意义。文章基于湖北省391份农户调查数据,首先,在文献回顾的基础上提出市场收益、政策激励对农户生态循环农业从事意愿与行为影响路径的基本假设,并利用OLS方法分析市场收益和政策激励对农户从事生态循环农业意愿与行为的影响;其次,运用优势分析法评估市场收益类变量和政策激励类变量影响农户意愿与行为过程中的相对重要性;最后,通过交互效应检验市场收益类变量和政策激励类变量间的交互作用。结果表明:收入预期对农户从事生态循环农业的意愿与行为均有直接的积极影响,是促进农户从事生态循环农业的最重要的因素;焚烧秸秆惩罚政策和废弃物资源化补贴政策对农户从事生态循环农业的意愿有积极影响,沼气池建设补贴政策和废弃物资源化补贴政策对农户生态循环农业行为有促进作用;收入预期与废弃物资源化补贴政策在影响农户生态循环农业行为的过程中存在互补效应。本研究认为,市场收益是刺激农户采纳生态循环农业生产模式的首要因素,因此,要着力完善生态农业市场体系,增强生态农产品的市场竞争力,提升农户对生态循环农业的盈利信心;另外,政策激励对于农户采纳生态循环农业具有促进作用,应该做到约束与激励并行,同时注意加强农业政策的科学设计与落实执行。     

NAFTA and member country strategies for maritime trade and marine invasive species

Maritime shipping has two vectors of spreading marine invasive species: ballast water inside the ship and biofouling on the hulls outside the ship. While some attention has focused on ballast water, virtually none is focused on biofouling. This paper offers a quantitative analysis of economic incentives for shippers and regulating ports to address both pollution vectors. The strategies to address the vectors are induced by incentive mechanisms involving liability, subsidies and taxes. Results show these offer ample incentives in order to truly foster abatement of both vectors. Data from North America's Pacific coast is included in the analysis.     

Impact of a Community‐Based Payment for Environmental Services Intervention on Forest Use in Menabe,Madagascar

Abstract: Despite the growing interest in conservation approaches that include payments for environmental services (PES), few evaluations of the influence of such interventions on behaviors of individuals have been conducted. We used self‐reported changes in six legal and illegal forest‐use behaviors to investigate the way in which a PES for biodiversity conservation intervention in Menabe, Madagascar, influenced behavior. Individuals (n =864) from eight intervention communities and five control communities answered questions on their forest‐use behaviors before and after the intervention began, as well as on their reasons for changing and their attitudes to various institutions. The payments had little impact on individuals’ reported decisions to change behaviors, but it had a strong impact on individuals’ attitudes. Payments appeared to legitimize monitoring of behaviors by the implementing nongovernmental organization (NGO), but did not act as a behavioral driver in their own right. Although there were no clear differences between changes in behaviors in the intervention and control communities, the intervention did influence motivations for change. Fear of local forest associations and the implementing NGO were strong motivators for changing behavior in communities with the PES intervention, whereas fear of the national government was the main reason given for change in control communities. Behavioral changes were most stable where fear of local organizations motivated the change. Our results highlight the interactions between different incentives people face when making behavioral decisions and the importance of considering the full range of incentives when designing community‐based PES interventions.     

Fiscal incentives for Australian bushland

The clearing of over 80% of the native vegetation from Australian agricultural areas has contributed significantly to the degradation classification applied to more than half this land. Soil erosion, siltation, and salinity damage continue to increase yearly. This situation not only threatens the productivity of the farm sector but has contributed to the estimated loss of 78 species of native flora, endangerment of an additional 2206 species, and the loss of 20 species of Australia's marsupials.Private returns diverge from social returns because the action (or inaction) of farmers has an impact upon others, both now and in the future. There is justification, therefore, for the public sector to intervene on behalf of society in an attempt to influence private decision making for the social good. This article argues for increased incentives from the public sector in Australia to encourage the voluntary cooperation of farmers to improve the balance between development and conservation. In contrast to the essentially temporary nature of man-made measures such as flood-mitigating capital works, increasing the area set aside to native bushland offers scope for the permanent stewardship of the resource—land.     

Waste reduction through variable charging programs: its sustainability and contributing factors

 In this study, we analyzed the sustainability and determinant factors of waste reduction through variable charging schemes. We drew three main conclusions from the study. (1) Waste reduction was achieved by variable charging and was sustained over an average of at least 10 years. The results regarding the sustainability of the price effect were inconclusive. (2) The main factors contributing to the combustible waste reduction achieved through variable charging were two-tier pricing and the price of waste bags. The effect of two-tier pricing programs was positive. (3) Waste paper recycling and variable charging reinforce each other to promote waste reduction. Received: September 3, 2001 / Accepted: January 13, 2002     

CASE STUDIES OF AGRICULTURAL WATER CONSERVATION1

Farmers from four irrigation districts in Texas and California were questioned about water conservation practices they are now using, those they plan to adopt, and potential incentives that government might offer to induce still further water conservation on their part. While responses differed somewhat from place to place and among individual farmers, the general results were: a) farmers reported that “water conservation” is not new to them, it is something they practice regularly; b) recent innovations such as laser controlled land leveling devices have permitted some substantial water use reductions in recent years; and c) even greater incentive mechanisms that government could provide and that farmers would accept as useful incentives, such as long term low interest loans for water saving equipment, would probably not be able to reduce water use in agriculture much further than 15 percent below current levels. It is recommended nonetheless that Federal agencies and local water districts and individuals should nonetheless pursue water conservation training and education programs, demonstrations of conjunctive use and water banking opportunities for water saving, and increased loan programs for installation of water saving equipment.     

Providing the Spark: Impact of financial incentives on battery electric vehicle adoption

To overcome adoption barriers and promote battery electric vehicles (BEVs) as an energy efficient consumer transportation option, a number of states offer subsidies to consumers for BEVs. We use a national data set of vehicle registrations and state-level financial incentives to assess the impact of vehicle purchase subsidies on adoption using both difference-in-differences and synthetic controls methods. We find that incentives offered as direct purchase rebates generate increased levels of new BEV registrations at a rate of approximately 8 percent per thousand dollars of incentive offered. Between 2011 and 2015, vehicle rebate incentives are associated with an increase in overall BEV registrations of approximately 11 percent. Our findings indicate incentives offered as state income tax credits do not have a statistically significant effect on BEV adoptions, though we caution this may be a result of limited temporal variation in BEV incentives across our sample. Responses to rebate incentives do not differ significantly by the make of the vehicle purchased (i.e., Tesla and non-Tesla vehicles). We combine our results with recent assessments of marginal environmental costs of electric vehicle charging and measure net welfare effects of BEV subsidy programs. Our analysis indicates these programs are not welfare-improving if only considering benefits associated with avoided emissions. Additional benefits associated with long-term market growth, production cost savings, network externalities, or accelerated innovation could substantially impact the net welfare outcomes.