4. The Contested Conceptualisation of Pollution in Economics: Market Failure or Cost Shifting Success?

2021 ◽  
Vol n° 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-122
Author(s):  
Clive L. Spash
Keyword(s):  
2004 ◽  
pp. 94-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Shastitko

Various ways of state participation in the mechanisms of transaction management are considered in the article. Differences between compensation and elimination of the market failures are identified. Opportunities and risks of non-regulatory alternatives usage as a mean of market failure compensation are described. Based on classification of goods correlated to relative cost of their useful characteristics evaluation (search, experience, merit) questions of institutional alternatives in three areas (political, financial and commodity) are examined.


2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 521-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Hardy

Between 2000 and 2010, new institutional arrangements were created for UK broadcasting regulation, built upon a radical rethinking of communications policy. This article examines key changes arising from Labour's media policy, the Communications Act 2003 and the work of Ofcom. It argues that changes within broadcasting were less radical than the accompanying rhetoric, and that contradictory tendencies set limits to dominant trends of marketisation and liberalisation. The article explores these tendencies by reviewing the key broadcasting policy issues of the decade including policies on the BBC, commercial public service and commercial broadcasting, spectrum and digital switchover, and new digital services. It assesses changes in the structural regulation of media ownership, the shift towards behavioural competition regulation, and the regulation of media content and commercial communications. In doing so, it explores policy rationales and arguments, and examines tensions and contradictions in the promotion of marketisation, the discourses of market failure, political interventions, and the professionalisation of policy-making.


Author(s):  
Lubos SMUTKA ◽  
Irena BENEŠOVÁ ◽  
Patrik ROVNÝ ◽  
Renata MATYSIK-PEJAS

Sugar is one of the most important elements in human nutrition. The Common Market Organisation for sugar has been a subject of considerable debate since its establishment in 1968. The European agricultural market has been criticized for its heavy regulations and subsidization. The sugar market is one of the most regulated ones; however, this will change radically in 2017 when the current system of production quotas will end. The current EU sugar market changed is structure during the last several decades. The significant number of companies left the market and EU internal sugar market became more concentrated. The aim of this paper is presentation characteristics of sugar market with respect to the supposed market failure – reduction in competition. The analysis also identifies the main drivers and determinants of the EU especially quota sugar market. In relation to paper’s aim the following results are important. The present conditions of the European sugar market have led to market failure when nearly 75 % (10 million tonnes) of the quota is controlled by five multinational companies only. These multinational alliances (especially German and French one) are also taking control over the production capacities of their subsidiaries. In most countries, this causes serious problems as the given quota is controlled by one or two producers only. This is a significant indicator of market imperfection. The quota system cannot overcome the problem of production quotas on the one hand and the demand on the other; furthermore, it also leads to economic inefficiency. The current EU sugar market is under the control of only Sudzucker, Nordzucker, Pfeifer and Langen, Tereos and ABF.


1999 ◽  
Vol 150 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid Kissling-Näf

Forests provide people with a variety of services and products (protection against avalanches, walking trails, etc.). Most forest services and products are not provided by markets and the extent of their availability is often guaranteed by public funding. In this context, the question arises whether the high benefits derived from forests could not be converted into cash more easily. Looking at various explanations for the market failure (externalities, public goods, property rights) possible marketing strategies for forest products and services and how they could optimize social welfare are investigated. Although general compensation criteria are not available, economic concepts (type of externality, scarcity, etc.) provide a first clue as to the necessity of compensation. However, mention must be made that compensation is always the result of a social agreement, and financial compensation as well as property rights are subject to social change. From a political and an economic perspective the payment of compensation for forest benefits is limited.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document