Suchergebnisse

Can multinational firms exert more power than national firms by influencing politics through lobbying? To answer this question, we analyze the extent of national environmental regulation when policy is determined in a lobbying game between a government and a firm. We compare the resulting equilibrium regulation levels, outputs and welfare in a game with a multinational firm with those in an otherwise identical game with a national firm. For low transportation costs, output and pollution of a national firm are always as least as high as for a multinational; this changes for high transportation costs and intermediate damage parameters. When there is no lobbying, welfare levels are always higher with multinationals than with national firms. However, the existence of lobbying may reverse this ordering. [Copyright Elsevier B.V.]

Cover -- Half Title -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Table of Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Series Preface -- Introduction -- Part I Overview and Comparison of Different Taxes -- 1 Thomas Sterner and Gunnar Köhlin (2003), 'Environmental Taxes in Europe', Public Finance and Management, 3, pp. 117-42 -- 2 Randall A. Bluffstone (2003), 'Environmental Taxes in Developing and Transition Economies', Public Finance and Management, 3, pp. 143-75 -- Part II Institutional Aspects and Political Economy of Implementation -- 3 Henrik Hammar, Åsa Löfgren and Thomas Sterner (2004), 'Political Economy Obstacles to Fuel Taxation', Energy Journal, 25, pp. 1-17 -- 4 Dawn Erlandson (1994), 'The Btu Tax Experience: What Happened and Why it Happened', Pace Environmental Law Review, 12, pp. 173-84 -- 5 Per G. Fredriksson and Daniel L. Millimet (2004), 'Comparative Politics and Environmental Taxation', Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 48, pp. 705-22 -- 6 Erik Gawel (2001), 'Enforcement of Environmental Charges: Some Economic Aspects and Evidence from the German Waste Water Charge', European Environment, 11, pp. 225-38 -- 7 Susmita Dasgupta, Benoit Laplante, Nlandu Mamingi and Hua Wang (2001), 'Inspections, Pollution Prices, and Environmental Performance: Evidence from China', Ecological Economics, 36, pp. 487-98 -- 8 Michael Common (1985), 'The Distributional Implications of Higher Energy Prices in the UK', Applied Economics, 17, pp. 421-36 -- 9 Alan Krupnick, Winston Harrington and Anna Alberini (2001), 'Public Support for Pollution Fee Policies for Motor Vehicles with Revenue Recycling: Survey Results', Regional Science and Urban Economics, 31, pp. 505-22 -- 10 Sarah E. West (2004), 'Distributional Effects of Alternative Vehicle Pollution Control Policies', Journal of Public Economics, 88, pp. 735-57

Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901.

Presentation at the UNISECO H2020 Final Conference, 18-19 March 2021 https://uniseco-project.eu/final-conference UNISECO is a European research project aiming to develop innovative approaches to enhance the understanding of socio-economic and policy drivers and barriers for further development and implementation of agro-ecological practices in EU farming systems. Learn more about the project: https://uniseco-project.eu/ This project has received funding from the European Union's H2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 773901.

The UNISECO project aims to provide recommendations on how the sustainability of agro-ecological farming systems (AEFS) in Europe can be promoted. These recommendations build also upon scenario development and assessment of territorial effects of a large-scale implementation of agro-ecological farming innovations in the EU. This Deliverable describes in detail the scenarios and related storylines developed with stakeholders and first results from the biophysical modelling of the five scenarios using the BioBaM model, and the economic modelling. Five storylines were developed in a participatory process involving all project partners and project stakeholders. The main determinants of the storylines are their level of implementation of agro-ecological farming practises and the localisation of food system (i.e. level of trade within the EU and globally). The first storyline Business-as-usual, extends the dynamics and critical aspects of current agri-food systems into the future and highlights current policy barriers to the expansion of agro-ecology. The second storyline, Agro-ecology-for-export, depicts a future in which medium-large agricultural farms and large companies in the food processing and distribution sectors promote a weak agro-ecological approach as a marketing strategy. The third and fourth storylines describe a future in which food systems are localised but for different reasons. In both these storylines, local foods, regardless of production methods, are given priority over agro-ecological farming practises. In consequence, production practises remain similar to current ones or further intensify. Localisation-for-protectionism do this for reasons of rising nationalism and protectionism, and calls the centrality of the EU into question and promotes further re-nationalization of agricultural policies. The Localisation-for-sustainability on the other hand promotes local food system not for protectionist reasons, but in an ambition to increase food system sustainability and resilience by cutting food ...

The UNISECO project aims to provide recommendations on how the sustainability of agro-ecological farming systems (AEFS) in Europe can be promoted. In this deliverable D4.3, the results from a large-scale implementation of various agro-ecological approaches, from single practices such as undersowing in cereals to more systemic approaches, such as agroforestry, and to a full agro-ecological transformation of the agri-food system are presented. Based on the case-study results from WP3, various bundles of agro-ecological innovations have been identified in a multi-step stakeholder process. Suggested practices and approaches ranged from plot and farm-level to whole food-system level and a selection of those was then chosen for implementation in the two biophysical mass-flow models BioBaM_GHG_EU and SOLm. In BioBaM_GHG_EU, an option space of 432 options was built by combining several variants of a) more or less mixed-farming approaches integrating crop and livestock production; b) livestock diets (fully grass-based ruminant production); c) manure management (conventional, biogas digesters, etc.); d) hedges and undersowing on croplands; e) grassland use in a land sharing or land sparing variant with vegetation regrowth; d) reduced grassland use intensity in high nature value farmland. In SOLm, a detailed implementation of agroforestry systems was implemented, based on parameters from state-of-the-art literature, such as the different crops and trees varieties used and their respective shares per hectare agroforestry, the yield potential of agroforestry, and the performance regarding a number of environmental indicators (e.g. water use, NH3 emissions, C-sequestration). In all these scenarios and options, a number of environmental and socio-economic indicators was assessed, such as land use, GHG emissions, nutrient surplus, etc. or food supply and calorie and protein provision self-sufficiency. Key results show that many agroecological futures are possible in the EU without compromising food security and with ...

This paper is based on results from the research project UNISECO, which is funded by European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 773901.We would like to thank all the farmers, farm organisations and stakeholders of the multi-actor platforms of the UNISECO project who contributed to the data collection. We also like to thank Andreas Basler whose corrections improved the comprehensibility of the paper. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF