On the inclusion of indirect land use in biofuel regulations

University of Illinois Law Review

Volumn 2011, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 413-433

  Zilberman, David ^a   Hochman, Gal ^a   Rajagopal, Deepak ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957582560     PISSN: 02769948     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (93)

1. ALEXANDER E. FARRELL & DANIEL SPERLING, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, A LOWCARBON FUEL STANDARD FOR CALIFORNIA, PART 2: POLICY ANALYSIS FINAL REPORT 7 (2007), http://www.energy.ca.gov/low-carbon-fuel-standard/UC-LCFS-study-Part-2- FINAL.pdf.
2. FRED SISSINE, CONG. RESEARCH SERV., RL 34294, ENERGY INDEPENDENCE AND SECURITY ACT OF 2007: A SUMMARY OF MAJOR PROVISIONS CRS 5 - 6 (2007), http://energy.senate.gov/public/-files/RL342941.pdf.
3. SISSINE, supra note 1, at CRS-5.
4. See id.
5. FARRELL & SPERLING, supra note 1, at 12.
6. Low Carbon Fuel Standard, CAL. ENERGY COMM'N, http://www.energy.ca.gov/ low-carbon-fuel-standard/(last visited Jan. 28, 2011).
7. FARRELL & SPERLING, supra note 1, at 1.
8. See id. at 61; SISSINE, supra note 1, at CRS-7.
9. SISSINE, supra note 1, at CRS-8.
10. Harry de Gorter & David R. Just, The Social Costs and Benefits of Biofuels: The Intersection of Environmental, Energy, and Agricultural Policy, 32 APPLIED ECON. PERSP. & POL'Y 6 (2010).
11. Harvey Lapan & Gian Carlo Moschini, Biofuels Policies and Welfare: Is the Stick of Mandates Better than the Carrot of Subsidies 29-30 (Iowa State Univ. Dep't of Econ., Working Paper No. 09010, 2009), http://www2.econ.iastate. edu/research/webpapers/paper-13076-09010.pdf.
12. Gal Hochman et al., The Economics of Biofuel Policy and Biotechnology, 6 J. AGRIC. & FOOD INDUS. ORG. (SPECIAL ISSUE) 1, 5 - 8 (2008).
13. WILLIAM J. BAUMOL & WALLACE E. OATES, THE THEORY OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY 15-16 & n.7 (2d ed. 1988).
14. William J. Baumol & Wallace E. Oates, The Use of Standards and Prices for Protection of the Environment, 73 SWED. J. ECON. 42, 51 (1971).
15. Erwin H. Bulte et al., Payments for Ecosystem Services and Poverty Reduction: Concepts, Issues, and Empirical Perspectives, 13 ENV'T & DEV. ECON. 245, 245 (2008).
16. Id. at 246.
17. Baumol & Oates, supra note 13, at 46-47.
18. Id. at 46.
19. See generally Eithan Hochman & David Zilberman, Examination of Environmental Policies Using Production and Pollution Microparameter Distributions, 46 ECONOMETRICA 739-60 (1978). (Pubitemid 9064489)
20. Martin L. Weitzman, Prices vs. Quantities, 41 REV. ECON. STUD. 477, 482 (1974).
21. Robert N. Stavins & Adam B. Jaffe, Unintended Impacts of Public Investments on Private Decisions: The Depletion of Forested Wetlands, 80 AM. ECON. REV. 337, 349 (1990).
22. Id.
23. Jun Jie Wu et al., Environmental and Distributional Impacts of Conservation Targeting Strategies, 41 J. ENVTL. ECON. & MGMT. 333, 334 (2001).
24. Id. at 346.
25. Id. at 340-45.
26. See Randall G. Holcombe & Russell S. Sobel, Public Policy Toward Pecuniary Externalities, 29 PUB. FIN. REV. 304, 304 (2001).
27. Both in terms of economics and morality, "everyone shall be put to death for his own sin." Deuteronomy 24:16.
28. BAUMOL & OATES, supra note 12, at 23.
29. See FARRELL & SPERLING, supra note 1, at 61.
30. SISSINE, supra note 1, at CRS-7.
31. G.A. Keoleian, Pollution Prevention Through Life-Cycle Design, in INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION PREVENTION HANDBOOK 253-92 (Henry M. Freeman ed., 1994).
32. See generally T.P. Wilson & W.R. Clarke, Food Safety and Traceability in the Agricultural Supply Chain: Using the Internet to Deliver Traceability, 3 SUPPLY CHAIN MGMT. 127 (1998).
33. Deepak Rajagopal et al., Challenge of Biofuel: Filling the Tank Without Emptying the Stomach?, ENVTL. RES. LETTERS, Oct.-Dec. 2007, at 1, 5.
34. Timothy Searchinger et al., Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change, 319 SCIENCE 1238, 1238-40 (2008).
35. See, e.g., SISSINE, supra note 1, at CRS-3.
36. See, e.g., id. at CRS-8.
37. Id. at CRS-1 to CRS-2.
38. See, e.g., Jingbo Cut et al., Welfare Impacts of Alternative Biofuel and Energy Policies (Iowa State Univ. Dep't of Econ., Working Paper No. 10016, 2010), https://www.econ.iastate.edu/sites/default/files/publications/papers/ pl1618-2010-06-09.pdf.
39. See, e.g., Ujjayant Chakravorty et al., Fuel Versus Food, 1 ANN. REV. RESOURCE ECON. 645, 647 (2009).
40. Rajagopal et al., supra note 31, at 2.
41. Hochman & Zilberman, supra note 18, at 739-40.
42. See 40 C.F.R. §§ 23903, 23907 (2007).
43. See Baumol & Oates, supra note 13, at 45.
44. See FARRELL & SPERLING, supra note 1, at 7.
45. Sonia Yeh & Daniel Sperling, Role of Low Carbon Fuel Standard in Reducing U.S. Transportation Emissions, in CUMATE AND TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS: FINDINGS FROM THE 2009 ASILOMAR CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORTATION AND ENERGY POLICY 48, 50 (Daniel Sperling & James S. Cannon eds., 2010).
46. FARRELL & SPERLING, supra note 1, at 63.
47. Id.
48. See Figure 1.
49. Bruce L. Gardner, Causes of U.S. Farm Commodity Programs, 95 J. POL. ECON. 290 (1987).
50. See Weitzman, supra note 19, at 481.
51. Searchinger et al., supra note 32, at 1239.
52. See id.
53. Thomas W. Hertel et al., Effects of U.S. Maize Ethanol on Global Land Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Estimating Market-Mediated Responses, 60 BIOSCIENCE 223, 223 (2010).
54. Wally Tyner, First and Second Generation Biofuels: Economic and Policy Issues, Presented at the Third Berkeley Bioeconomy Conference, June 24, 2010, http://www.berkeleybioeconomy.com/wpcontent/uploads//2010/07/ TYner%20Berkeley%20June%202010.pdf.
55. E.g., Rajagopal et al., supra note 31, at 2.
56. Hertel et al., supra note 50, at 223.
57. Id.
58. Searchinger et al., supra note 32, at 1239.
59. See Julian M. Alston et al., Mendel Versus Malthus: Research, Productivity and Food Prices in the Long Run 1-2 (Univ. Minn., Dep't Applied Econ., Staff Paper No. P09-1, 2009), http://agecon.search.umn.edu/bitstream/ 53400/2/SP-IP-09-01.pdf.
60. See id. at 15.
61. See, e.g., id. at 19 & n.18.
62. See Gershon Feder et al. Adoption of Agricultural Innovations in Developing Countries: A Survey, 33 ECON. DEV. & CULTURAL CHANGE 255, 286-88 (1985).
63. See David Zilberman et al., The Economics of Pesticide Use and Regulation, 253 SCIENCE 518, 518-20 (1991).
64. WILLARD W. COCHRANE, THE DEVELOPMENT OF AMERICAN AGRICULTURE: A HISTORICAL ANALYSIS 500 (2d ed. 1993).
65. Id. at 176.
66. Id. at 8.
67. GIOVANNI FEDERICO, FEEDING THE WORLD: AN ECONOMIC HISTORY OF AGRICULTURE, 1800-2000, at 1(2005).
68. Tom P. Evans et al., Threats to the Forest Transition in the Midwest United States, in REFORESTING LANDSCAPES: LINKING PATTERN AND PROCESS 178 (H. Nagendra & J. Southworth eds., 2010).
69. COCHRANE, supra note 61, at 500.
70. DAVID HOSANSKY, THE ENVIRONMENT A TO Z 48 (2001).
71. See John Miranowski, Economies and Policy of Biofuel and Land Use, Presented at the Third Berkeley Bioeconomy Conference, June 24, 2010, http://www.berkeleybioeconomy.com/wpcontent/uploads//2010/07/ Miranowski-BerkeleyConfernce.pdf.
72. See Steven Sexton et al., The Role of Biotechnology in a Sustainable Biofuel Future, 12 AGBIOFORUM 130, 136 (2009).
73. Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a grampositive, soil-dwelling bacterium. Genes of this bacterium are inserted into plants to generate toxins that control insects.
74. See Sexton et al., supra note 69, at 134, 136.
75. See id. at 136-37.
76. See id. at 137-38.
77. Eduardo J. Trigo & Eugenio J. Cap, The Impact of the Introduction of Transgenic Crops in Argentinean Agriculture, 6 AGBIOFORUM 87, 88 (2003).
78. See NAT'L RESEARCH COUNCIL, THE IMPACT OF GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CROPS ON FARM SUSTAINABILITY IN THE UNITED STATES 135-86 (2010).
79. R. Lai, Soil Carbon Sequestration Impacts on Global Climate Change and Food Security, 304 SCIENCE 1623, 1623-24 (2004).
80. See NAT'L RESEARCH COUNCIL, supra note 75, at 213-36.
81. Searchinger et al., supra note 32, at 1238.
82. Joaquim J.M. Guilhoto & Silvio Massaru Ichihara, Biofuel and Land Use in Brazil: Economic and Social Perspective, Presented at the Third Berkeley Bioeconomy Conference, June 24, 2010, http://www.berkeleybioeconomy.com/wpctent/ uploads//2010/07/Guilhoto- Biofuel%20&%20Land%20Brazil%20Berkeley%20June%2010.pdf.
83. See Jordi Diez, 21 GOVERNANCE 471, 471-72 (2008) (reviewing KATHRYN HOCHSTETLER & MARGARET B. KECK, GREENING BRAZIL: ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVISM IN STATE AND SOCIETY (2007)).
84. Philip M. Fearnside, Conservation Policy in Brazilian Amazonia: Understanding the Dilemmas, 31 WORLD DEV. 757, 757 (2003).
85. Deepak Rajagopal & David Zilberman, Review of Environmental, Economic and Policy Aspects of Biofuels 7-10 (World Bank Policy Research, Working Paper No. 4341, 2007), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract- id=1012473.
86. See id. at 48-51.
87. W. David Montgomery & Anne E. Smith, Price, Quantity, and Technology Strategies for Climate Change Policy, in HUMAN-INDUCED CLIMATE CHANGE: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY ASSESSMENT 328 (Michael E. Schiensinger et al. eds, 2007).
88. See Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, The Options Approach to Capital Investment, HARV. BUS. REV., May-June 1995, at 105, 106-07 (1995).
89. See id. at 107-08.
90. Gershon Feder & Andrew Schmitz, Learning by Doing and Infant Industry Protection: A Partial Equilibrium Approach, 43 REV. ECON. STUD. 175, 175 (1976).
91. Adam J. Liska et al., Improvements in Life Cycle Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Corn-Ethanol, 13 J. INDUS. ECOLOGY 58 (2008).
92. Steven Hamburg, The Contribution of Forests to Bioenergy: Implications for Mitigating Climate Change, Presented at the Third Berkeley Bioeconomy Conference, June 24, 2010, http://www.berkeleybioeconomy.com/wpcontent/uploads// 2010/07/Hamburg%20Berkeley%20forest%20bioenergy.pdf.
93. See generally Roger A. Sedjo & R. David Simpson, Land Use: Forest, Agriculture, and Biodiversity Competition, in 3 HANDBOOK OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS 2979-3007 (2007).