Skip Navigation



Oxford Economic Papers Advance Access published online on July 4, 2008
Oxford Economic Papers, doi:10.1093/oep/gpn021
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
61/1/183    most recent
gpn021v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wagner, U. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press 2008 All rights reserved

The voluntary provision of a pure public good? Another look at CFC emissions and the Montreal Protocol

Ulrich J. Wagner

The Earth Institute at Columbia University, 2910 Broadway, MC 3277, New York, NY10025, USA, e-mail: ulrich.wagner{at}columbia.edu

JEL classifications: H41, D62, Q20


  Abstract

Based on their finding of a positive and nearly linear relationship between GNP and reductions of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) emissions in the run-up to the Montreal Protocol, Murdoch and Sandler (1997) have argued that the treaty's initial emission targets were consistent with voluntary provision of abatement rather than cooperative behavior. This paper documents that their analysis relies on largely imputed emission data that overstate emission reductions compared to emission data that countries reported to UNEP. The imputation procedure appears to induce a spurious positive correlation between income and CFC reductions. In a replication of the econometric analysis using UNEP data, the hypothesis of a positive and linear relationship between the two variables is rejected. These findings call for a more cautious interpretation of emission targets set by the Montreal Protocol and alert researchers to important limitations of a data set that has been widely used in empirical studies of this treaty.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.