Severin Borenstein:

Coase demonstrated, the parties can trade the right so that whichever entity values it most ends up owning it.  Efficient trading of the right to pollute moves society towards the optimal amount and allocation of the pollution.  The idea is central to the cap and trade approach to reducing greenhouse gases and other pollutants.

In its editorial remembering Coase, the cap-and-trade-hating Wall Street Journal stated the principle of the Coase Theorem reasonably well, but then its conclusion echoed much of the right-wing press on Coase’s passing: “The too frequent assumption of modern government is that it can play the role of teacher, even when its taxes or regulation raise costs or otherwise make things worse. The Pigovians have had a political renaissance since the 2008 financial crisis, touting the virtues of regulation. But as we see the results, the Coasians are due for a comeback.”

Whoa!  Coase was clearly skeptical of government regulation, but he recognized – indeed advocated — that government must establish and enforce property rights for efficient trade to take place.   The costs it imposes on the polluters isn’t part of the calculation, just recognition that the total costs to society can be mitigated by facilitating such trade.

It is ironic and disappointing to hear some commentators laud Coase while at the same time saying that cap-and-trade would be too costly to the U.S. economy.  The WSJ editorial page, and many others of similar inclination, have argued instead that “the market” will solve pollution problems without government intervention.  That’s not Prof. Coase; that’s Prof. Ostrich, the one with his head in the sand.

via energyathaas.wordpress.com

Hat tip: Professor Stavins

Posted in ,
  1. Jonathan H. Adler Avatar

    Whoa! As Coase stressed time and again, we can only assume that trading will result in the allocation of rights to the highest-valued user if there are no transaction costs. The point of his work — again, as he stressed time and again — is that transaction costs are ubiquitous. Further, Coase explained that because of transaction costs we can assume neither that imposing costs on the “polluter” nor that government intervention to address the “externality” (a word he deliberately avoided) is welfare maximizing. While Coase did not condemn cap and trade, he did not champion it either.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Environmental Economics

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading