에너지환경 경제학 (2)

에너지환경 경제학 (2)

아주대학교 경제학과 , 에너지시스템학과 , 금융공학협동과정교수 김수덕 ([email protected])

The Production Opportunities of the Farmer and Rancher

The Circular Flow Diagram

Positive EconomicsThe essence of science is the scientific method the dispassionate development and testing of theories about how

the world works. This method of inquiry is as applicable to studying a nation's

economy as it is to studying the earth's gravity or a species' evolution.

As Albert Einstein once put it, "the whole of science is nothing more than the refinement of everyday thinking

The scientific method observation, theory, and more observation

How does the interplay between the theory and observation work?

Does the challenge that experiments are often difficult in economics make economics not scientific?

The role of Assumption Should an assumption be real? Or what does it have to do with

the art of scientific thinking? What is the role of different assumptions to answer different

questions?Positive vs. Normative Analysis

Natural resource economicsNatural resource economics deals with the supply, demand, and allocation of the Earth's natural resources. One main objective of natural resource economics is to better understand the role of natural resources in the economy in order to develop more sustainable methods of managing those resources to ensure their availability to future generations. One main objective of natural resource economics is to better understand the role of natural resources in the economy in order to develop more sustainable methods of managing those resources to ensure their availability to future generations.The economics and policy area focuses on the human aspects of environmental problems. Traditional areas of environmental and natural resource economics include welfare theory, pollution control, resource extraction, and non-market valuation, and also resource exhaustibility,] sustainability, environmental management, and environmental policy. Research topics could include the environmental impacts of agriculture, transportation and urbanization, land use in poor and industrialized countries, international trade and the environment, climate change, and methodological advances in non-market valuation, to name just a few. welfare theory,

pollution control, resource extraction, and non-market valuation, and also resource exhaustibility, sustainability, environmental management, and environmental policy.

Natural resource economics also relates to energy, and is a broad scientific subject area which includes topics related to supply and use of energy in societies.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resource_economics

Environmental economicsEnvironmental economics is a subfield of economics concerned with environmental issues. Quoting from the National Bureau of Economic Research Environmental Economics program: “ [...] Environmental Economics [...] undertakes theoretical or empirical studies of the economic

effects of national or local environmental policies around the world [...]. Particular issues include the costs and benefits of alternative environmental policies to deal with air pollution, water quality, toxic substances, solid waste, and global warming.”

Environmental economics is distinguished from Ecological economics that emphasizes the economy as a subsystem of the ecosystem with its focus upon preserving natural capital. One survey of German economists found that ecological and environmental economics are different schools of economic thought, with ecological economists emphasizing "strong" sustainability and rejecting the proposition that natural capital can be substituted by human-made capital. For an overview of international policy relating to environmental economics, see Runnals (2011).

Central to environmental economics is the concept of market failure. Market failure means that markets fail to allocate resources efficiently. As stated by Hanley, Shogren, and White (2007) in their textbook Environmental Economics.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Economics

The Market for Aluminum (Efficiency)

What is an externality?

Why do externalities make market outcomes inefficient?

How can people sometimes solve the problem of externalities on their own? Why do such private solutions not always work?

What public policies aim to solve the problem of externalities?

Introduction

One type of market failure: externalities.

Externality: the uncompensated impact of one person’s actions on the well-being of a bystander Negative externality:

the effect on bystanders is adversePositive externality:

the effect on bystanders is beneficial

Self-interested buyers and sellers neglect the external effects of their actions, so the market outcome is not efficient.

Pollution: A Negative Externality

Example of negative externality: Air pollution from a factory. The firm does not bear the

full cost of its production, and so will produce more than the socially efficient quantity.

How govt may improve the market outcome:Impose a tax on the firm equal to the

external cost of the pollution it generates

Other Examples of Negative Externalities

the neighbor’s barking dog

late-night stereo blasting from the dorm room next to yours

noise pollution from construction projects

talking on cell phone while driving makes the roads less safe for others

health risk to others from second-hand smoke

Positive Externalities from EducationA more educated population benefits society: lower crime rates: educated people

have more opportunities, so less likely to rob and steal

better government: educated people make better-informed voters

People do not consider these external benefits when deciding how much education to “purchase”

Result: market eq’m quantity of education too low

How govt may improve the market outcome: subsidize cost of education

Other Examples of Positive Externalities

Being vaccinated against contagious diseases protects not only you, but people who visit the salad bar or produce sectionafter you.

R&D creates knowledge others can use

Renovating your house increases neighboring property values

Thank you for not

contaminating the fruit supply!

Recap of Welfare Economics

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 10 20 30 Q (gallons

)

P $

The market for gasoline

Demand curve shows private value, the value to buyers (the prices they are willing to pay)

Supply curve shows private cost, the costs directly incurred by sellers

The market eq’m maximizes consumer + producer surplus.

$2.50

25

Analysis of a Negative Externality

0

1

2

3

4

5

0 10 20 30 Q (gallons

)

P $


Supply (private cost)

External cost = value of the negative

impact on bystanders

= $1 per gallon(value of harm from smog, greenhouse gases)

Social cost = private + external cost

external cost


0

1

2

3

4

5

0 10 20 30 Q (gallons

)

P $


D

S

Social

cost

The socially optimal quantity is 20 gallons.

The socially optimal quantity is 20 gallons.

At any Q < 20, value of additional gas exceeds social cost

At any Q < 20, value of additional gas exceeds social cost

At any Q > 20, social cost of the last gallon isgreater than its value

At any Q > 20, social cost of the last gallon isgreater than its value

25


0

1

2

3

4

5

0 10 20 30 Q (gallons

)

P $


D

S

Social cost

Market eq’m (Q = 25)is greater than social optimum (Q = 20)

25

One solution: tax sellers $1/gallon,would shift supply curve up $1.

“Internalizing the Externality”Internalizing the externality: altering incentives so that people take account of the external effects of their actionsIn the previous example, the $1/gallon tax on sellers makes sellers’ costs equal to social costs.When market participants must pay social costs, the market eq’m matches the social optimum. (Imposing the tax on buyers would achieve the same outcome; market Q would equal optimal Q.)

Positive Externalities

In the presence of a positive externality, the social value of a good includesprivate value – the direct value to buyersexternal benefit – the value of the

positive impact on bystanders

The socially optimal Q maximizes welfare:At any lower Q, the social value of

additional units exceeds their cost.At any higher Q, the cost of the last unit exceeds its social

value.

AA CC TT II VV E LE L EE AA RR NN II NN G G 11: :

Analysis of a positive externalityAnalysis of a positive externality

External benefit = $10/shot

Draw the social value curve.

Find the socially optimal Q.

What policy would internalize this externality?

22

The market for flu shots

D

S

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 10 20 30

P

Q

$

AA CC TT II VV E LE L EE AA RR NN II NN G G 11: :

AnswersAnswersSocially optimal Q = 25 shots

To internalize the externality, use subsidy = $10/shot.

23

The market for flu shots

D

S

Social value = private value + external benefit

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 10 20 30

P

Q

$externa

l benefit

25

Effects of Externalities: Summary

If negative externality market produces a larger quantity

than is socially desirable

If positive externality market produces a smaller quantity


To remedy the problem, “internalize the externality” tax goods with negative externalities subsidize goods with positive externalities

If negative externality market produces a larger quantity


If positive externality market produces a smaller quantity


To remedy the problem, “internalize the externality” tax goods with negative externalities subsidize goods with positive externalities

Market FailureExternality: the basic idea is that an externality exists when a person makes a choice that affects other people that are not accounted for in the market price. For instance, a firm emitting pollution will typically not take into account the costs that its pollution imposes on others. As a result, pollution in excess of the 'socially efficient' level may occur. A classic definition influenced by Kenneth Arrow and James Meade is provided by Heller and Starrett (1976), who define an externality as “a situation in which the private economy lacks sufficient incentives to create a potential market in some good and the nonexistence of this market results in losses of Pareto efficiency.” In economic terminology, externalities are examples of market failures, in which the unfettered market does not lead to an efficient outcome.Common property and non-exclusion: When it is too costly to exclude people from access to an environmental resource for which there is rivalry, market allocation is likely to be inefficient. The challenges related with common property and non-exclusion have long been recognized. Hardin's (1968) concept of the tragedy of the commons popularized the challenges involved in non-exclusion and common property. "commons" refers to the environmental asset itself, "common property resource" or "common pool resource" refers to a property right regime that allows for some collective body to devise schemes to exclude others, thereby allowing the capture of future benefit streams; and "open-access" implies no ownership in the sense that property everyone owns nobody owns. The basic problem is that if people ignore the scarcity value of the commons, they can end up expending too much effort, over harvesting a resource (e.g., a fishery). Hardin theorizes that in the absence of restrictions, users of an open-access resource will use it more than if they had to pay for it and had exclusive rights, leading to environmental degradation. See, however, Ostrom's (1990) work on how people using real common property resources have worked to establish self-governing rules to reduce the risk of the tragedy of the commons.Public goods and non-rivalry: Public goods are another type of market failure, in which the market price does not capture the social benefits of its provision. For example, protection from the risks of climate change is a public good since its provision is both non-rival and non-excludable. Non-rival means climate protection provided to one country does not reduce the level of protection to another country; non-excludable means it is too costly to exclude any one from receiving climate protection. A country's incentive to invest in carbon abatement is reduced because it can "free ride" off the efforts of other countries. Over a century ago, Swedish economist Knut Wicksell (1896) first discussed how public goods can be under-provided by the market because people might conceal their preferences for the good, but still enjoy the benefits without paying for them.

Four Types of Goods/Bads

Garbage: Excludable bad, so long as there are laws and enforcement that help control its management and disposal

Garbage

Garbage without enforcement & Law

Indoor air pollution

Air, Noise pollution

Market Efficiency and Market Failure

생산가치의 극대화

$

MWPT MC

a

bc

Pe

qe

$

MWPT MC

a

bc

Pe

qe

MEC(Marginal External Cost)

$

MWPT MC

a

bc

Pe

qe

$

MWPT MC

a

bc

Pe

qe

MEC +MC

사회적 후생의 극대화

Public Good and Market Failure

오염도

(ppm)

MWTP1

( 가구 1)

MWTP2

( 가구 2)

MWTP3

( 가구 3)

Total

MWTP

오염제거의

MC

4 110 60 30 200 50

3 85 35 20 140 65

270

(55)

10

(0)

15

(10)

95

(65)95

1 55 0 10 65 150

0 45 0 5 50 240

125

100

75

50

25

4 3 2 1 0

125

100

75

50

25

4 3 2 1 0

125

100

75

50

25

4 3 2 1 0

250

200

150

100

50

4 3 2 1 0

가구 1

MC

가구 3

가구 2

MWTP1

MWTP2

MWTP3

MWTPT

125

100

75

50

25

4 3 2 1 0

125

100

75

50

25

4 3 2 1 0

125

100

75

50

25

4 3 2 1 0

250

200

150

100

50

4 3 2 1 0

가구 1

MC

가구 3

가구 2

MWTP1

MWTP2

MWTP3

MWTPT

Incentive to Under-report=> Market Failure

환경재의 공공재적 성격

• 호수 주변에 세가구가 살고 있다 .• 현재 이 호수의 오염농도는 5ppm 이며 정화시설을 설치하면 수질을 개선할 수 있다 . •가구들은 아래와 같이 그 비용을 지불할 의사가 있다

Public Policies Toward Externalities

Two approaches

Command-and-control policies regulate behavior directly. Examples:limits on quantity of pollution emittedrequirements that firms adopt a particular technology to

reduce emissions

Market-based policies provide incentives so that private decision-makers will choose to solve the problem on their own.

Solutions (Market Failure and Gov’t Intervention)

Environmental RegulationsPay-As-You-Throw

Taxes and tariffs on pollution/Removal of "dirty subsidies

Quotas on pollutionTREC (tradeable emissions reduction permits)

Property Rights and Coase Theorem

Solutions (Environmental Regulations)Pay-As-You-ThrowEPA supports this new approach to solid waste management because it encompasses three interrelated components that are key to successful community programs: Environmental Sustainability - Communities with programs in place have reported

significant increases in recycling and reductions in waste, due primarily to the waste reduction incentive created by PAYT. Less waste and more recycling mean that fewer natural resources need to be extracted. In addition, greenhouse gas emissions associated with the manufacture, distribution, use, and subsequent disposal of products are reduced as a result of the increased recycling and waste reduction PAYT encourages. In this way, PAYT helps slow the buildup of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere which leads to global climate change. For more information on the link between solid waste and global climate change, go to EPA's Climate Change Web site.

Economic Sustainability - PAYT is an effective tool for communities struggling to cope with soaring municipal solid waste management expenses. Well-designed programs generate the revenues communities need to cover their solid waste costs, including the costs of such complementary programs as recycling and composting. Residents benefit, too, because they have the opportunity to take control of their trash bills.

Equity - One of the most important advantages of a variable-rate program may be its inherent fairness. When the cost of managing trash is hidden in taxes or charged at a flat rate, residents who recycle and prevent waste subsidize their neighbors' wastefulness. Under PAYT, residents pay only for what they throw away.

Solutions (Environmental Regulations)

음식물 쓰레기 종량제의 필요성

Source: 음식물쓰레기 종량제시스템 도입 및 구축방향 , 대진대학교 환경공학과 김병태 , 2011. 11. 25

RFID (radio frequency identification) 기반 시스템 구성도

Source: 음식물쓰레기 종량제시스템 도입 및 구축방향 , 대진대학교 환경공학과 김병태 , 2011. 11. 25

Solutions (Taxes and tariffs on pollution)Corrective tax: a tax designed to induce private decision-makers to take account of the social costs that arise from a negative externality Also called Pigouvian taxes after Arthur Pigou (1877-1959). The ideal corrective tax = external cost For activities with positive externalities,

ideal corrective subsidy = external benefit

Taxes and tariffs on pollution/Removal of "dirty subsidies." Increasing the costs of polluting will discourage polluting, and will

provide a "dynamic incentive," that is, the disincentive continues to operate even as pollution levels fall.

A pollution tax that reduces pollution to the socially "optimal" level would be set at such a level that pollution occurs only if the benefits to society (for example, in form of greater production) exceeds the costs.

Some advocate a major shift from taxation from income and sales taxes to tax on pollution - the so-called "green tax shift."

Example: Acme, US Electric run coal-burning power plants. Each emits 40 tons of sulfur dioxide per month. SO2 causes acid rain & other health issues.

Policy goal: reducing SO2 emissions 25%

Policy optionsregulation:

require each plant to cut emissions by 25%corrective tax:

Make each plant pay a tax on each ton of SO2 emissions. Set tax at level that achieves goal.

Corrective Taxes & Subsidies

Corrective Taxes & SubsidiesSuppose cost of reducing emissions is lower for Acme than for US Electric. Socially efficient outcome: Acme reduces emissions more than US Electric. The corrective tax is a price on the right to pollute. Like other prices, the tax allocates this “good” to the firms who value it

most highly (US Electric). Under regulation, firms have no incentive to reduce emissions beyond the

25% target. A tax on emissions gives firms incentive to continue reducing emissions as

long as the cost of doing so is less than the tax. If a cleaner technology becomes available, the tax gives firms an incentive

to adopt it.Other taxes distort incentives and move economy away from the social optimum.But corrective taxes enhance efficiency by aligning private with social incentives.

The Equivalence of Pigovian Taxes and Pollution Permits

• 버스회사로 하여금 공급곡선을 자신의 사적한계비용을 나타내는PMC 가 아니라 새로운 사적 한계비용을 나타내는 PMCt로 느끼고 행동할 수 있도록 세금 t 를 부과하는 방법 . • 사회적 비용을 고려한 것과 동일한 결과에 도달하여 사회적으로 바람직한 수준만큼 버스가 운행되고 오염배출량이 결정되도록하는 결과 .• 현실적용에 있어서는 측정의 문제가 가장 큰 제약

Pollution Permit

Example of a Corrective Tax: The Gas Tax

The gas tax targets three negative externalities: congestion

the more you drive, the more you contribute to congestion

accidentslarger vehicles cause more damage in an accident

pollutionburning fossil fuels produces greenhouse gases

Solutions (Environmental Regulations)

congestion charges or road usage charges

Source: Jonathan Leape, The London Congestion Charge, Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 20, Number 4—Fall 2006—Pages 157–176

Solutions (Quotas on pollution)tradeable emissions permits, which if freely traded may ensure that reductions in pollution are achieved at least cost. In theory, if such tradeable quotas are allowed,

then a firm would reduce its own pollution load only if doing so would cost less than paying someone else to make the same reduction.

In practice, tradeable permits approaches have had some success, such as the U.S.'s sulphur dioxide trading program or the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, and interest in its application is spreading to other environmental problems.

Point Carbon Secondary CER OTC

자료 : http://www.pointcarbon.com

Tradable Pollution Permits in the Real World

SO2 permits traded in the U.S. since 1995.

Nitrogen oxide permits traded in the northeastern U.S. since 1999.

Carbon emissions permits traded in Europe since January 1, 2005. Examples:

CCX(Chicago Climate Exchange), CFE(Chicago Climate Future Exchange) ECX(European Climate Exchange)

Emission Credit 의 종류 AAUs (Assigned Amount Units) EUAs (EU Allowance Units) CERs (Certified Emission Reductions) ERUs (Emission Reduction Units) RMUs (Removal Units)

탄소배출권거래제최근 언론에서 자주 보도되는‘탄소배출권거래제’는 지구온난화의 주범인 이산화탄소 (CO₂) 의 배출을 억제하기위해 도입된 강력한 경제적수단 중의 하나다 . 탄소배출권은 2005 년부터 EU 국가를 중심으로 본격적으로 거래되기 시작해 높게는 CO₂ 톤당 30 유로까지 높은 가격대에서 거래됐다가 최근 글로벌 경기침체와 유가하락으로 10 유로대에서 거래되고있다 .탄소배출권거래제는 기업에 도전이자 기회기도 하다 . 하나의 탄소배출권은 CO₂1 톤을 배출할 수 있는 권리를 의미하는데 , 만일 어느 기업이 배출권을 확보하지못하면 화석연료의 사용과 그에 따른 생산활동에 제약을 받게된다 . 보유한 배출권의 양이 자신이 배출한 CO₂ 의 양보다 적을 경우에는 소정의 페널티를 지급해야한다 . 현재 EU 에서는 이같은 초과배출량에 CO₂ 톤당 100유로의 높은 페널티를 부과하고있다 . 페널티를 치르지 않으려면 탄소 배출권시장에서 높은 가격을 내고서라도 배출권을 매입해야한다 . 한편 , 기업이 나름대로 노력해 온실가스의 배출을 줄여 배출권이 필요 이상으로 많이있다고 판단되면 이를 시장에서 매도할수있다 . 탄소배출권은 재화를 생산하는 기업만 거래할수있는 것이 아니기 때문에 , 전문적인 금융거래기관도 관심을 가질수있다 . 배출권의 매입과 매도의 메커니즘은 증권거래소에서 주식이나 선물을 사고 파는것과 유사해 저가매입에 고가매도를 통한 차익의 실현을 목적으로 참여할수있다 . 특히 , 자본시장통합법이 시행됨에 따라 탄소배출권 등 다양한 파생상품의 개발이 보다 탄력을 받을 것으로전망되며 , 배출권의 특성상 선물거래도 활성화될 것으로 보인다 .하지만 탄소배출권 본연의 취지가 금융파생상품보다는 온실가스감축을 위한 규제적수단이라는점을 인식할 필요가 있다 . 이러한 점에서 EU 는 전문적인 탄소배출권거래시장을 따로 개설하거나 전력거래소가 거래의 중추적기능을 맡도록하고있다 . 배출권 거래시장은 배출권 실수요자 중심으로 편성되는것이 바람직하다는 인식이 있기 때문이다 .최근 미국월스트리트와 우리나라의 키코파생상품에서 경험했듯이 파생상품의 관리에는 금융당국의 엄격한 모니터링과 불공정거래 , 비대칭정보에 관한 관리 , 감독기능이 강화돼야한다는 교훈을 배웠다 . 탄소배출권이 파생상품의 투기적 열풍으로 기업에 과도한 재정적부담이 되지않으며 , 또 그 부담이 소비자에게 전가되는일을 예방하기 위해서는 국내에서도 탄소배출권은 향후 실수요자위주로 거래되도록 제도가 설계돼야 할 것이다 .

Tradable Pollution Permits

Recall: Acme, US Electric each emit 40 tons SO2, total of 80 tons.

Goal: reduce emissions 25% (to 60 tons/month)

Suppose cost of reducing emissions is $100/ton for Acme, $200/ton for US Electric.

If regulation requires each firm to reduce 10 tons,

cost to Acme: (10 tons) x ($100/ton) = $1,000

cost to USE: (10 tons) x ($200/ton) = $2,000

total cost of achieving goal = $3,000

Alternative: issue 60 permits, each allows its bearer one ton of

SO2 emissions (so total emissions = 60 tons)

give 30 permits to each firm establish market for trading permits

Each firm can choose among these options:1. emit 30 tons of SO2, using all its permits

2. Trade the permit emit < 30 tons, sell unused permits buy additional permits so it can emit > 30 tons


Suppose market price of permit = $150 One possible equilibrium:

Acme spends $2,000 to cut emissions by 20

tonshas 10 unused permits, sells them for

$1,500net cost to Acme: $500

US Electricemissions remain at 40 tonsbuys 10 permits from Acme for $1,500net cost to USE: $1,500

Total cost of achieving goal: $2,000


A system of tradable pollution permits achieves goal at lower cost than regulation. Firms with low cost of reducing pollution

sell whatever permits they can. Firms with high cost of reducing pollution

buy permits. Result: Pollution reduction is concentrated among those firms with lowest costs. When policymakers do not know the position of this demand curve, the permits system achieves pollution reduction targets more precisely.

Some politicians, many environmentalists argue that no one should be able to “buy” the right to pollute, cannot put a price on the environment.However, people face tradeoffs.The value of clean air & water must be compared to their cost. The market-based approach reduces the cost of environmental protection, so it should increase the public’s demand for a clean environment.


Private Solutions to Externalities

Types of private solutions:

moral codes and social sanctions, e.g., the “Golden Rule”

charities, e.g., the Sierra Club

contracts between market participants and the affected bystanders

The Coase theorem: If private parties can bargain without cost over the allocation of resources, they can solve the externalities problem on their own.

Coase Theorem ( 시장의 자발적 해결 )

Source: 강의자료 8- 환경문제의 해결방안 , 인천대 손양훈 , 2009

The Coase Theorem: An Example

Dick owns a dog named Spot.

Negative externality: Spot’s barking disturbs Jane, Dick’s neighbor.

The socially efficient outcome maximizes Dick’s + Jane’s well-being. If Dick values having Spot more

than Jane values peace & quiet, the dog should stay.

Coase theorem: The private market will reach the efficient outcome on its own…

See Spot bark.


CASE 1: Dick has the right to keep Spot. Benefit to Dick of having Spot = $500Cost to Jane of Spot’s barking = $800

Socially efficient outcome: Spot goes bye-bye.

Private outcome: Jane pays Dick $600 to get rid of Spot, both Jane and Dick are better off.

Private outcome = efficient outcome.


CASE 2: Dick has the right to keep Spot. Benefit to Dick of having Spot = $1000Cost to Jane of Spot’s barking = $800

Socially efficient outcome: See Spot stay.

Private outcome: Jane not willing to pay more than $800, Dick not willing to accept less than $1000, so Spot stays.



CASE 3: Benefit to Dick of having Spot = $500Cost to Jane of Spot’s barking = $800But Jane has the legal right to peace & quiet.

Socially efficient outcome: Dick keeps Spot.

Private outcome: Dick pays Jane $600 to put up with Spot’s barking.


The private market achieves the efficient The private market achieves the efficient outcome regardless of the initial outcome regardless of the initial

distribution of rights.distribution of rights.

The private market achieves the efficient The private market achieves the efficient outcome regardless of the initial outcome regardless of the initial

distribution of rights.distribution of rights.

Coase Theorem ( 사례 1)


polluter

Property right given to polluter

Property right given to suffer



polluter





polluter



( 법정 보상금 40원 전제 )

Why Private Solutions Do Not Always Work

Transaction costs: the costs that parties incur in the process of agreeing to and following through on a bargain

Sometimes when a beneficial agreement is possible, each party may hold out for a better deal.

Coordination problems & costs when the number of parties is very large.

Coase Theorem ( 비판 )


단기와 장기의 선택따라서 미래세대는 현세대와 같은 시장재 생산을 위해서는 현세대보다 보다 많은 환경의 질 악화에 직면할 수 밖에 없고 반면 현재와 같은 환경질 수준을 유지하기 위해서는 현세대보다 작은 시장재를 공급할 수 밖에 없다 .

주의해야 할 점은 미래세대의 생산가능곡선은 현세대의 의사결정 외에도 기술개발 등 다른 요인에 의한 영향도 함께 받은 다는 점이다 . 즉 , 기술진보가 현세대 의사결정에 따른 효과를 능가한다면 , 미래 세대의 생산가능곡선이 반드시 하향이동 하지는 않을 수도 있다 .

하지만 의사결정에 있어서 미래세대의 Welfare 가 현 세대의 의사결정에 영향을 받지 않도록 하는 것이 바람직하다는 것이 지속가능성 (Sustainability) 의 기본개념이다 .

현세대의 생산결정시 미래세대의 생산가능곡선이 하향 이동하지 않도록 환경의 질에 대한 피해가 충분히 고려되어야한다 .

두개의 생산가능곡선이있다 . 왼쪽은 현세대의 시장재와 환경의 질 사이의 상충관계를 나타내는 생산가능곡선이고 오른쪽은 미래세대 , 예컨대 60-80 년 후세대의 시장재와 환경의 질 사이의 상충관계를 나타내는 생산가능곡선이다 .

현세대는 미래세대의 의사결정과 관계없이 왼쪽그림의 어느 점도 선택할 수 있다 .

예컨대 현세대가 가능한 한 많은 시장재를 생산하는 의사결정 (e2, c2) 을 한다면 자연자원이 고갈되고 환경오염이 발생하여 미래세대의 생산가능곡선이 아래쪽으로 이동한다 .

환경 쿠즈네츠 곡선태화강 수영대회와 환경 쿠즈네츠 곡선

美프로젝트 XL‥기업이 온실가스 줄이면 정부가 세금면제 등 혜택낭만적인 환경주의는 가라 ! `‥ 비판적 환경주의자 ` 등무역 자유화가 환경을 파괴한다고 ?

자유무역 , 고비마다 역풍 … 그래도 得 > 失

잠깐 ! - 국제협력 , 기술이전 , 시장메커니즘에 대해 알아보자 CDM(Clean Development Mechanism)- 청정개발체제 JI(Joint Implementation) - 공동이행제도 ET(Emission Trading)

에너지환경 경제학 (2)

Documents