In evaluating current environmental protection policy, economists often note that current regulations are more costly than necessary to meet environmental quality standards. While the a priori case is strong that current regulatory approaches are resulting in higher-than-necessary costs to attain environmental standards, there is relatively little empirical evidence to support this claim in Korea. The purpose of this analysis is to supply some of the missing evidence by presenting the results of one study that assesses some of the potential savings associated with implementing economic, rather than command-and-control, regulatory approaches to abate one type of air pollution in one region, in Korea. Specifically, the analysis examine the costs of meeting a long-term standared for TSP under the alternative control ctrateeies for stationary sources of TSP in Ulsan Industrial Complex region. The alternative strategies that are considered are current command-and-control and various marketable permit designs. The analysis shows that the most efficient policy of emissions control is the economic aaproaches alike results of any other empirical studies.
본 논문은 대기오염에서의 이전가능한 배출허용권 시스템이 현재의 직접규제보다 얼만큼이나 비용절감을 가져오냐를 살펴본다. 본 연구의 주된 목적은 기존에 한국내에서 시행되어온 환경보전법과 가격경쟁의 개념을 도입한 이전가능한 배출허용권 시스템의 공해절감 비용을 비교함으로서 환경문제를 해결하는데 경제적 정책의 도입필요성을 보여주고자 하였다. 그리고, 이론적인 바탕으로 울산의 대규모 대기공해 배출업소를 대상으로 사례 분석을 하여 위의 결론을 입증하였다.
