Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Suppose that there are \(n\) firms each producing the same good but with differing production functions. Output for each of these firms depends only on labor input, so the functions take the form \(q_{i}=f_{i}\left(l_{i}\right) .\) In its production activities each firm also produces some pollution, the amount of which is determined by a firm-specific function of labor input of the form \(g_{i}\left(l_{i}\right)\) a. Suppose that the government wishes to place a cap of amount \(K\) on total pollution. What is the efficient allocation of labor among firms? b. Will a uniform Pigovian tax on the output of each firm achieve the efficient allocation described in part (a)? c. Suppose that, instead of taxing output, the Pigovian tax is applied to each unit of pollution. How should this tax be set? Will the tax yield the efficient allocation described in part (a)? d. What are the implications of the problem for adopting pollution control strategies? (For more on this topic see the Extensions to this chapter.)

Short Answer

Expert verified
a) Uniform Pigovian tax on output b) Pigovian tax on each unit of pollution produced c) Output quota d) Removing all pollution regulations Answer: b) Pigovian tax on each unit of pollution produced

Step by step solution

01

a. Efficient Allocation of Labor among Firms

To find the efficient allocation of labor among firms, we first need to understand that the government wants to achieve the maximum output while staying within the pollution cap of \(K\). Let the total labor be represented by \(L\). Our problem becomes: maximize total output, subject to the constraint that total pollution should not be more than \(K\). To do this, we set up a Lagrangian function: \[L = \sum_{i=1}^{n} f_{i}(l_{i}) - \lambda \left(\sum_{i=1}^{n} g_{i}(l_{i}) - K\right)\] where \(\lambda\) is the Lagrange multiplier. Now we take the partial derivative with respect to labor in each firm \(l_i\) and equate it to zero: \[\frac{\partial L}{\partial l_i} = f'_{i}(l_{i}) - \lambda g'_{i}(l_{i}) = 0\] \(\forall i,\) we have \[f'_{i}(l_{i}) = \lambda g'_{i}(l_{i})\] The efficient allocation of labor among firms is established when the marginal output per additional pollution generated is the same across all firms, i.e., \(f'_{i}(l_{i}) / g'_{i}(l_{i})\) is equal for all \(i\). This equality ensures that the total output is maximized while staying within the pollution cap \(K\).
02

b. Uniform Pigovian Tax on Output

A uniform Pigovian tax on the output of each firm is a tax that is equal for each firm and depends only on the amount of output produced. Suppose the tax rate is \(t\). If the tax is imposed on the output of each firm, the objective of each firm will be to produce to the point where the marginal benefit of production (net of tax) equals the marginal cost or pollution caused. Mathematically, this can be expressed as: \[f'_{i}(l_{i}) - tg'_{i}(l_{i}) = 0\] Although it internalizes the pollution cost by imposing a tax on output, it does not guarantee achieving the efficient allocation as described in part (a). This is because the uniform tax rate does not take into account the individual differences in pollution generated by each firm. It would likely lead to an unequal marginal pollution rate across firms, which is not the efficient outcome.
03

c. Pigovian Tax on Each Unit of Pollution

If the pollution tax is applied to each unit of pollution produced, our problem becomes finding the tax rate that leads to the efficient allocation of labor among firms. The firms' objective is to produce to the point where the marginal benefit of production equals the pollution tax. This can be mathematically written as: \[f'_{i}(l_{i}) - \tau g'_{i}(l_{i}) = 0\] In this case, for the tax to achieve the efficient allocation as described in part (a), it must satisfy the following condition: \[\tau = \lambda\] When this condition is met, the efficient distribution of labor among firms would be achieved, and the quantity of pollution generated would be consistent with the constraint set by the government.
04

d. Implications for Adopting Pollution Control Strategies

The analysis of the problem suggests that when there are differences in pollution production rates among firms, a uniform Pigovian tax on the output may not achieve an efficient allocation of labor. On the other hand, taxing pollution directly achieves efficiency if the optimal tax rate is set properly, which means considering each firm's pollution production function and staying within the government-imposed pollution cap. This indicates that adopting pollution control strategies such as output-based taxes may not always lead to efficient outcomes, and policymakers should focus on measures that are more tailored to the specific pollution production rates of different firms. Essentially, the most efficient way to address pollution is by targeting the pollution source directly, which allows for better management of the pollution problem and paying close attention to the unique characteristics of the firms contributing to pollution.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Suppose the production possibility frontier for an economy that produces one public good ( \(x\) ) and one private good \((y)\) is given by \\[ 100 x^{2}+y^{2}=5,000 \\] This economy is populated by 100 identical individuals, each with a utility function of the form \\[ \text { utility }=\sqrt{x y_{i}} \\] where \(y_{i}\) is the individual's share of private good production \((=y / 100) .\) Notice that the public good is nonexclusive and that everyone benefits equally from its level of production. a. If the market for \(x\) and \(y\) were perfectly competitive, what levels of those goods would be produced? What would the typical individual's utility be in this situation? b. What are the optimal production levels for \(x\) and \(y\) ? What would the typical individual's utility level be? How should consumption of good \(y\) be taxed to achieve this result? Hint: The numbers in this problem do not come out evenly, and some approximations should suffice.

A firm in a perfectly competitive industry has patented a new process for making widgets. The new process lowers the firm's average cost, meaning that this firm alone (although still a price taker) can earn real economic profits in the long run. a. If the market price is \(\$ 20\) per widget and the firm's marginal cost is given by \(M C=0.4 q\), where \(q\) is the daily widget production for the firm, how many widgets will the firm produce? b. Suppose a government study has found that the firm's new process is polluting the air and estimates the social marginal cost of widget production by this firm to be \(S M C=0.5 q .\) If the market price is still \(\$ 20,\) what is the socially optimal level of production for the firm? What should be the rate of a government-imposed excise tax to bring about this optimal level of production? c. Graph your results.

Suppose the oil industry in Utopia is perfectly competitive and that all firms draw oil from a single (and practically inexhaustible ) pool. Assume that each competitor believes that it can sell all the oil it can produce at a stable world price of \(\$ 10\) per barrel and that the cost of operating a well for 1 year is \(\$ 1,000\) Total output per year (Q) of the oil field is a function of the number of wells ( \(n\) ) operating in the field. In particular, \\[ Q=500 n-n^{2} \\] and the amount of oil produced by each well ( \(q\) ) is given by \\[ q=\frac{Q}{n}=500-n \\] a. Describe the equilibrium output and the equilibrium number of wells in this perfectly competitive case. Is there a divergence between private and social marginal cost in the industry? b. Suppose now that the government nationalizes the oil field. How many oil wells should it operate? What will total output be? What will the output per well be? c. As an alternative to nationalization, the Utopian government is considering an annual license fee per well to discourage overdrilling. How large should this license fee be if it is to prompt the industry to drill the optimal number of wells?

Suppose individuals face a probability of \(u\) that they will be unemployed next year. If they are unemployed they will receive unemployment benefits of \(b,\) whereas if they are employed they receive \(w(1-t),\) where \(t\) is the tax used to finance unemployment benefits. Unemployment benefits are constrained by the government budget constraint \\[ u b=t w(1-u) \\] a. Suppose the individual's utility function is given by \\[ U=\left(y_{i}\right)^{\delta} / \delta \\] where \(1-\delta\) is the degree of constant relative risk aversion. What would be the utility-maximizing choices for \(b\) and \(t ?\) b. How would the utility-maximizing choices for \(b\) and \(t\) respond to changes in the probability of unemployment, \(u ?\) c. How would \(b\) and \(t\) change in response to changes in the risk aversion parameter \(\delta ?\)

The analysis of public goods in this chapter exclusively used a model with only two individuals. The results are readily generalized to \(n\) persons-a generalization pursued in this problem. a. With \(n\) persons in an economy, what is the condition for efficient production of a public good? Explain how the characteristics of the public good are reflected in these conditions. b. What is the Nash equilibrium in the provision of this public good to \(n\) persons? Explain why this equilibrium is inefficient. Also explain why the underprovision of this public good is more severe than in the two-person cases studied in the chapter. c. How is the Lindahl solution generalized to \(n\) persons? Is the existence of a Lindahl equilibrium guaranteed in this more complex model?

See all solutions

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free