* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Welcome to ECON 325 - University of Puget Sound
Survey
Document related concepts
Transcript
Week 1: Intro. (anyone remember markets?) & valuation issues the economy Firms (production) Inputs THE ECONOMY Households (consumption) Outputs the environment as an asset (environomy) NATURE Wastes Firms Impacts on biodiversity (production) Inputs Resource inputs THE ECONOMY Households (consumption) Global life-support Outputs Amenity values criteria for decision making is a proposed plan desirable? benefit cost analysis can help if B > C, support if B < C, oppose but how to measure the B and C? anthropocentric focus system of measurement is humancentered all B and C valued in terms of their effects on humanity controversial, but a good starting point. what is the alternative? but before we start measuring benefits and costs… a review of markets… demand relationship between the quantity demanded and the price of a good when all other influences (tastes and preferences, prices of substitutes and complements, income, numbers of consumers and consumer expectations) on buying plans remain the same demand law of demand – ceteris parabis (With all other factors remaining the same) – if p ↑, QD ↓ if p ↓, QD ↑ demand curve downward sloping $ demand Quantity demand = MB demand curve for pizza tells us dollar’s worth of other goods give up to get 1 more pizza consumer surplus: MB – price paid consumer surplus benefits derived from demand demand measures amount particular good people willing to purchase at different prices demand and willingness to pay total WTP (total benefits) is sum of WTP for each unit sum is the total area under demand curve what are total benefits in this case? supply The relationship between the quantity supplied and the price of a good when all other influences on selling plans (production costs such as labor, energy, capital, and materials) remain the same supply law of supply – ceteris parabis – if p ↑, QS ↑ if p ↓, QS ↓ supply curve upward sloping $ supply Quantity supply = MC supply curve for pizza tells us dollar’s worth of other goods give up to produce 1 more pizza. producer surplus: Price – MC producer surplus marginal cost and total cost all env. goods / services have costs (opportunity costs) marginal cost: cost of producing last unit total costs sum of marginal costs; area under mc curve what is total cost in this case? how much to preserve? environmental economic to the rescue 3 step analysis – identify optimal allocation – does it exist? – how to implement it (policy) examples – natural resources: fishery – environmental econ: solid waste / landfill optimal allocation: MB = MC At q*, MB = MC, net benefits maximized. Cannot increase benefits by changing q MB = MC → Efficiency – cannot make one person better off without hurting another Why? $ MB = MC S = MC D = MB Quantity MB > MC q* MC > MB MB = MC If MB > MC, can increase quantity → increases benefits more than increases costs → total net benefits increase If MC > MB, can decrease quantity → decreases cost by more than decreases benefits → total net benefits increase Only at q* impossible to increase net benefits by changing quantity maximize net benefit! net benefit: excess of benefits over costs area under demand curve / above supply curve static efficiency net benefit from using the resource is maximized back to fig 2.5 is action that preserves 4 miles of river worth doing? (not if preserving 5 is better) what is efficient level of preservation? what is we preserve 5 instead of 4? net benefit increases by area MNR therefore 4 miles of preservation is not efficient are 5? if preserve 6, C > B (triangle RTU is reduction of net benefit) cannot be better off preserving more or less than 5 dynamic efficiency above was static analysis (one time period) maximizes present value of net benefits that could be received from all of the possible ways of allocating those resources over the n periods discounting most environmental/nat resource issues depend on time present value: allows comparison of net benefit received in one time period to another discount rate is the rate at which society as a whole is willing to trade off present for future benefits why are discount rates needed? a dollar received today is considered more valuable than one received in the future 4 primary reasons for applying a discount rate: 1. positive rates of inflation diminish the purchasing power of dollars over time 2. dollars can be invested today, earning a positive rate of return. discount rates reflect the opportunity cost of capital (expected financial return forgone by investing in a project rather than in comparable financial securities) 3. uncertainty surrounding the ability to obtain promised future income. That is, there is the risk that a future benefit (e.g., enhanced fish catches) will never be realized 4. humans are generally impatient and prefer instant gratification to waiting for long-term benefits pv one time benefit (in yr. 200) PV [ B n] B n n (1 r ) n PV [ B0 ,..., Bn] Bi i i 0 (1 r ) B PV $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 r $820,348.299875 $371,527.882127 $138,032.967198 $19,053.100033 $50.108813 $0.002511 $0.000000 total benefit over all 200 years n 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 B 10 50 100 200 500 1000 2000 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 $1,000,000.00 PV r $744,093.914897 $228,107.079790 $52,032.839850 $2,707.416423 $0.381406 $0.000000 $0.000000 n 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 10 50 100 200 500 1000 2000 how to choose a discount rate? at one extreme, an infinitely high discount rate would render all future actions meaningless other extreme, using no discount rate means that benefits today are no more valuable than benefits experienced 100 years from now neither of these extreme views is correct real question is, “what discount rate best reflects the time preference, productivity, and risk of this project?" common proxies federal opportunity cost of capital – the absence of the project, the federal government could put the funds to productive use reducing the national debt – Federal bonds, ~3-6% average the rate of productivity growth – ~3% NOAA has adopted a 3% discount rate OMB uses 7% (ror in private sector) example: should govt establish a national marine sanctuary? assume that a marine ecosystem is threatened by polluted runoff from development; waste from sewage, detergents, and fertilizers; destructive fishing methods; and offshore oil drilling threatens the viability of reefs and seagrass beds, and threatens the long-term sustainability of the fish and other seafood harvests in response, the federal government is considering establishing a NMS to provide comprehensive protection of the marine environment list the benefits Direct economic benefits: – – – – more ecotourism enhanced seafood harvests better bird watching a fishing catch that is sustainable in the longterm Indirect economic benefits – preservation of cultural and historic sites (e.g., lighthouses and ship wrecks) list the costs productivity losses incurred by industry as a result of the prohibition on off-shore drilling, waste dumping, and net fishing private industry could be required to purchase costly equipment to comply with new regulations related to the treatment of industrial waste products (abatement cost) max net benefit, not b-c ratio Costs Net Benefits Benefit-Cost Ratio A 1,200.0 1,100.0 100.0 1.091 B 1,350.0 1,200.0 150.0 1.125 C 1,475.0 1,300.0 175.0 1.135 D 1,580.0 1,400.0 180.0 1.129 E 1,682.0 1,500.0 182.0 1.121 F 1,778.0 1,600.0 178.0 1.111 Plan Benefits simple benefit-cost excel example r t 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0.07 benefits 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 PV benefits 0 0 0 0 2.288685636 2.138958538 1.999026671 1.868249226 1.746027314 1.631801228 costs PV costs 5 5 5 4.672897 5 4.367194 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11.67274861 14.04009 bc ratio 0.03 0.07 1.02 0.83 0.831387