Abstract
Trading has its limits. It only works well when the pollutants can be well monitored, when there are minor equitable concerns about geographic tradeoffs, and when an existing fungible unit can be devised to adequately measure the value of disparate actions to deliver environmental benefits. The presence or absence of these conditions determines the usefulness of trading and its utility varies in its application to different environmental benefits. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of trading can be optimized with good design. It is suggested that in some cases, programs whose short term, quantifiable costs may be higher, may be the better solution in the long run.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 169-176 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Penn State Environmental Law Review |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| State | Published - Dec 2006 |
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Geography, Planning and Development
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
- Law