Economic Instruments for Water Management: The Cases of France, Mexico and Brazil

Economic Instruments for Water Management: The Cases of France, Mexico and Brazil

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 1-151

  da Motta, Ronaldo Seroa ^a   Thomas, Alban ^b,c   Hazin, Lillian Saade ^d   Feres, José Gustavo ^a   Nauges, Céline ^b   Hazin, Antonio Saade ^d  

^a Institute for Applied Economic Research (IPEA)   (Brazil)

^b French Institute for Research in Agriculture   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^d NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84896152899     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4337/9781845423612     Document Type: Book

References (87)

1. Acquatella, J. (2001), ‘CEPAL Aplicación de Instrumentos Económicos en la Gestión Ambiental en América Latina y el Caribe: Desafíos y Factores Condicionantes’, Serie Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo No. 31, Santiago:CEPAL.
2. Bovenberg, A.L. and L.H. Goulder (1996), ‘Optimal environmental taxation in the presence of other taxes: general equilibrium analyses’, American Economic Review, 86, 985–1000.
3. CAEMA (2001), ‘Evaluación de la efectividad ambiental y eficiencia económica de la tasa por contaminación hídrica en el sector industrial colombiano’, El Centro Andino para la Economía en el Medio Ambiente,Bogotá: mimeo.
4. Fullerton, D. (1997), ‘Environmental levies and distortionary taxation: comment’, American Economic Review, 87, 245–51.
5. OECD (1994), Managing the Environment: The Role of Economic Instruments,Paris: OECD.
6. OECD (1995), Environmental Taxes in OECD Countries, Paris: OECD.
7. Parry, I.W.H., R.C. Williams III and L.H. Goulder (1999), ‘When can carbon abatement policies increase welfare? The fundamental role of distorted factor markets’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 37 (1), 52–84.
8. Seroa da Motta, R. (2001), ‘Tributación ambiental, macroeconomia y médio ambiente en América Latina: aspectos conceptuales y el caso de Brasil’, Serie Macroeconomía del Desarrollo 7, Santiago: CEPAL.
9. Seroa da Motta, R., R. Huber and J. Ruintenbeek (1999), ‘Market based instruments for environmental policymaking in Latin America and the Caribbean: lessons from eleven countries’, Environment and Development Economics, 4 (2), 177–202
10. Acquatella, J. (2001), ‘CEPAL Aplicación de Instrumentos Económicos en la Gestión Ambiental en América Latina y el Caribe: Desafíos y Factores Condicionantes’, Serie Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo No. 31, Santiago: CEPAL.
11. Ardila, S. and Z.C. Guzman (2002), ‘Estudio Sobre El Caso Colombiano en la Aplicacíon de Instrumentos Económicos: La Tasa Retributiva’, presented at the Second World Congress of Environmental Resource Economists, Monterey, CA, 24–27 June.
12. Baumol, W.J. and W.E. Oates (1988), The Theory of Environmental Policy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1st edn Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1975).
13. Becker, G. (1968), ‘Crime and punishment: an economic approach’, Journal of Political Economy, 76, 169–217.
14. Bovenberg, A.L. and L.H. Goulder (1996), ‘Optimal environmental taxation in the presence of other taxes: general equilibrium analyses’, American Economic Review, 86, 985–1000.
15. Bressers, H.T. and J. Schuddeboom (1996), A Survey of Effluent Charges and Other Economic Instruments in Dutch Environmental Policy, Paris: OECD.
16. CAEMA (2001), ‘Evaluación de la efectividad ambiental y eficiencia económica de la tasa por contaminación hídrica en el sector industrial colombiano’, El Centro Andino para la Economía en el Medio Ambiente, Bogotá: mimeo.
17. Donoso, G. (2002), ‘1981 Water Code: a case study, Proceedings of the Second World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists, Monterey, CA, 24–27 June.
18. Ekins, P. (1999), ‘European environmental taxes and charges: recent experience, issues and trends’, Ecological Economics, 31 (1), 39–62.
19. Ekins, P. and S. Speck (1999), ‘Competitiveness and exemptions of environmental in Europe’, Environmental and Resource Economics, 13 (4), 369–95.
20. Fullerton, D. (1997), ‘Environmental levies and distortionary taxation: comment’, American Economic Review, 87 (1), 245–51.
21. Gray, W.B. and M.E. Deily (1996), ‘Compliance and enforcement: air pollution regulation in the US, steel industry’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 31 (1), 96–111.
22. Hahn, R.W. (2000), ‘The impact of economics on environmental policy’, Journal of Environmental and Economic Management, 39 (3), 375–99.
23. IPCC (2001), Climate Change 2001: Mitigation, Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24. Magat, W. and K. Viscusi (1990), ‘Effectiveness of the EPA’s regulatory enforcement: the case of industrial effluent standards’, Journal of Law and Economics, 33, 331–60.
25. OECD (1994), Managing the Environment: The Role of Economic Instruments, Paris: OECD.
26. OECD (1995), Environmental Taxes in OECD countries, Paris: OECD.
27. O’Ryan, R. (2002), ‘Emissions trading in Santiago: why has it not worked, but been successful?’, Proceedings of the Second World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists, Monterey, CA, 24–27 June.
28. Panayotou, T. (1993), Green Markets, San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.
29. Parry, I.W.H., R.C. Williams III and L.H. Goulder (1999), ‘When can carbon abatement policies increase welfare? The fundamental role of distorted factor markets’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 37 (1), 52–84.
30. Peltzman, S. (1976), ‘Toward a more general theory of regulation’, Journal of Law Economics, 19 (2), 211–40.
31. Rietbergen-McCracken, J. and H. Abaza (eds) (2000), Economic Instruments for Environmental Management: A Worldwide Compendium of Case Studies, London: Earthscan/UNEP.
32. Rudas, G. (2002), ‘Tasas para regulación ambiental: la contaminación indust rial en Bogotá’, in G. Rudas, Instrumentos Económicos y Financieros para la Política Ambiental, Bogotá: Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Departamento de Economía, 2002-11-06.
33. Seroa da Motta, R. (1998), Application of Economic Instruments for Environmental Management in Latin America: from Theoretical to Practical Constraints, OAS Meeting on Sustainable Development in Latin America and the Caribbean: Policies, Programs and Financing, Washington, DC, 30 October.
34. Seroa da Motta, R. (2000), ‘Latin America region case studies in economic instruments’, in J. Rietbergen-McCracken and H. Abaza (eds), Economic Instruments for Environmental Management: A Worldwide Compendium of Case Studies, London: Earthscan/UNEP.
35. Seroa da Motta, R. and F.E. Mendes (1996), ‘Instrumentos econômicos na gestão ambiental: aspectos teóricos e de implementação’, Perspectivas da Economia Brasileira – 1996, Rio de Janeiro: IPEA/DIPES.
36. Seroa da Motta, R., G. Rudas and J.M. Ramírez (2000), ‘Water pollution taxes in Colombia’, in J. Rietbergen-McCracken and H. Abaza (eds), Economic Instruments for Environmental Management: A Worldwide Compendium of Case Studies, London: Earthscan/UNEP.
37. Seroa da Motta, R., R. Huber and J. Ruintenbeek (1999), ‘Market-based instruments for environmental policymaking in Latin America and the Caribbean: lessons from eleven countries’, Environment and Development Economics, 4 (2), 177–202.
38. Seroa da Motta, R. (2001), Determinants of Environmental Performance in the Brazilian Industrial Sector, Regional Dialogue on Policy Initiatives, Washington, DC: The Inter-American Development Bank.
39. Stavins, R. (1996), ‘Correlated uncertainty and policy instrument choice’, Journal of Environmental economics and Management, 30 (2), 218–32.
40. Stavins, R. (2002), ‘Experience with market-based environmental policy instruments’, Working paper 00-004, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
41. Stigler, G. (1971), ‘The theory of economic regulation’, The Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 2 (1), Spring, 1–21.
42. Svendsen, G.T. (1998), Public Choice and Environmental Regulation: Tradable Permit Systems in the United States and CO2 Taxation in Europe, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
43. Amigues, J.-P., M. Moreaux, F. Salanié, A. Thomas and Q.H. Vuong (1994), ‘La régulation de la pollution industrielle par les Agences de l’Eau’ (‘The regulation of industrial pollution by Water Agencies’), Paris: Commissariat Général du Plan.
44. CGGREF (Conseil Général du Génie Rural, des Eaux et des Forêts) (1994), ‘Evaluation of the Sixth Program of the Water Agencies’, Paris: Ministry of the Environment.
45. Commissariat Général du Plan (2001), ‘La politique de preservation de la resource en eau destinée à la consommation humaine’ (‘The water conservation policy for human consumption’), Paris: La Documentation Française.
46. DGCCRF (Direction Général de la Concurrence, de la Consommation et de la Regression des Fraudes) (2001), Enquête sur le prix de l’eau 1995/2000 (Water Price Survey, 1995–2000), Paris: Ministry of the Economy.
47. European Community Council (1991), Directive on the treatment of urban wastewater, 91/271/CEE, Brussels.
48. Gastaldo, S. (1994), ‘Les instruments économiques à l’appui des politiques de l’environnement’ (‘Economic instruments for environmental policy’), Paris: Direction des Etudes et Synthèses Economiques, INSEE.
49. Guide de l’Eau (2001), Paris: Johanès Editions.
50. Lavergne, P. and A. Thomas (2004), ‘Semiparametric estimation and testing in models of adverse selection, with an application to environmental regulation’, forthcoming in Empirical Economics.
51. Martin, Y. (1996), ‘La gestion durable des eaux souterraines en France’, Paris: Conseil Général des Mines.
52. Ministry of the Environment (2001), ‘Report on the Environment’, Paris: La Documentation Française.
53. Nauges, C. and A. Reynaud (2001), ‘Estimation de la demande domestique d’eau potable en France’, Revue Economique, 52 (1), 167–85.
54. Nauges, C. and A. Thomas (2000), ‘Privately operated water utilities, municipal price negotiation, and estimation of residential water demand: the case of France’, Land Economics, 76 (1), 68–85.
55. Neira, M. (1995), ‘Etude du système des redevances des Agences de l’Eau en France’ (‘Analysis of the French Water Agency Tax System’), report for the Rhin-Meuse River Basin Committee, Metz.
56. Salanié, F. and A. Thomas (1995), ‘Impact des redevances sur les équipements d’épuration et analyse des politiques d’aide à l’investissement’ (‘Impact of emission charges on abatement and an analysis of abatement subsidy policies’), report for the Water Agency Committee, Toulouse
57. Brañes, Raúl (2000), Manual de derecho ambiental mexicano, Mexico: FCE.
58. CNA – Comisión Nacional del Agua (2002a), Compendio Básico del Agua en México, Mexico.
59. CNA – Comisión Nacional del Agua (2002b), Situación del subsector de agua potable, alcantarillado y saneamiento a diciembre de 2001, Mexico.
60. Fox, Vicente (2002), Speech at the presentation of the evaluation results of Promagua, Los Pinos, Mexico, 17 September.
61. Ginerde los Ríos, F. (1997), Los instrumentos económicos y la regulación ambiental en México en Economía Ambiental: Lecciones de América Latina, Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Ecología, Primera edición, December.
62. Guerrero, H. (2002), ‘Irrigation water pricing: the case of Mexico’, paper presented at the International Conference ‘Irrigation Water Pricing: Micro and Macro Considerations’, 15–17 June, Agadir, Morocco.
63. Guerrero, H. and C.W. Howe (2000), ‘Water pricing in Mexico: principles and reality’, European Association of Environmental and Resources Economists (EAERE), Tenth Annual Conference, University of Crete, Department of Economics, 29 June–2 July.
64. INEGI (2002), Estadísticas económicas de mediano plazo, Mexico. http://www.inegi.gob.mx/.
65. Kemper, K. and O. Alvarado (2001), ‘Water’, in Marcelo M. Giugale, Olivier Lafourcade and Vinh H. Nguyen (eds), Mexico: A Comprehensive Development Agenda for the New Era, Washington, DC: The World Bank.
66. Morales Reyes, Javier I. (1999), ‘Situación y Propuestas para el tratamiento de aguas residuales y participación privada en México’, Federalismo y Desarrollo, No. 65 January–March, Mexico.
67. Presidencia de la República (2002), 2o Informe de Gobierno, September, Estados Unidos Mexicanos.
68. Roemer, A. (1996), Derecho y economía: Políticas públicas del agua, Mexico: FCE.
69. Secretaría de Gobernación (2001), ‘Diario Oficial de la Federación’ states: ‘Decreto por el que se condonan y eximen contribuciones y accesorios en materia de derechos por uso o aprovechamiento de bienes del dominio público de la Nación como cuerpos receptores de las descargas de aguas residuales a cargo de los municipios, entidades federativas, Distrito Federal, organismos operadores o comisiones estatales o responsables directos de la prestación del servicio de agua potable, alcantarillado y tratamiento de aguas residuales’, 21 December, Mexico.
70. Semarnap (1999), Estadísticas del medio ambiente, Mexico.
71. Semarnap-CNA (2000), El agua en México: retos y avances, October.
72. Semarnat-CNA (2001), Programa Nacional Hidráulico 2001–2006, Mexico.
73. Tecsasím-Lyonnaise des Eaux (2000), El libro del agua. La Participación Privada en el sector, directed by Alain Biche, March, Mexico.
74. Asad, M., L.D. Simpson, L.G.T Azevedo, K.E. Kemper, R. Seroa da Motta and M. Bryant (1999), Brazil: Management of Water Resources – Bulk Water Pricing in Brazil, World Bank Technical Paper 432, Washington, DC: The World Bank.
75. Formiga-Johnson, R. and M. Scatasta (2002), ‘One Brazil? The impact of regional differences on Brazil’s new water management system: an analysis of its implementation in the Paraíba do Sul and Curu river basins’, Mimeo.
76. Fundação COPPETEC (2002), Plano de Recursos Hídricos para a Fase Inicial da Cobrança na Bacia do Paraíba do Sul, Rio de Janeiro.
77. IBGE (2002), Pesquisa Nacional de Saneamento Básico 2000, Rio de Janeiro.
78. PQA (Projeto Qualidade das Águas e Contrôle da Poluição Hídrica) (1999), Controle da Poluição Hídrica Industrial na Bacia do Rio Paraíba do Sul, PS-RE-30-RO, PQA/RJ.
79. Secretaria de Recursos Hídricos (2002), Evaluation of Brazil’s Water, Brasília.
80. Seroa da Motta, R. (1998), ‘Utilização de critérios econômicos para a valorização da água no Brasil’, Texto para Discussão 556, Rio de Janeiro: DIPES/IPEA.
81. Asad, M., L.D. Simpson, L.G.T Azevedo, K.E. Kemper, R. Seroa da Motta and M. Bryant (1999), Brazil: Management of Water Resources – Bulk Water Pricing in Brazil, World Bank Technical Paper 432, Washington, DC: The World Bank.
82. Formiga-Johnson, R. and M. Scatasta (2002), ‘One Brazil? The impact of regional differences on Brazil’s new water management system: an analysis of its implementation in the Paraíba do Sul and Curu river basins’, Mimeo.
83. Fundação COPPETEC (2002), Plano de Recursos Hídricos para a Fase Inicial da Cobrança na Bacia do Paraíba do Sul, Rio de Janeiro.
84. IBGE (2002), Pesquisa Nacional de Saneamento Básico 2000, Rio de Janeiro.
85. PQA (Projeto Qualidade das Águas e Contrôle da Poluição Hídrica) (1999), Controle da Poluição Hídrica Industrial na Bacia do Rio Paraíba do Sul, PS-RE-30-RO, PQA/RJ.
86. Secretaria de Recursos Hídricos (2002), Evaluation of Brazil’s Water, Brasília.
87. Seroa da Motta, R. (1998), ‘Utilização de critérios econômicos para a valorização da água no Brasil’, Texto para Discussão 556, Rio de Janeiro: DIPES/IPEA.