Emerging Issues in Decentralized Resource Governance: Environmental Federalism, Spillovers, and Linked Socio-Ecological Systems

Literature Cited

1. Agrawal A. 2003a. Common resources and institutional sustainability. The Drama of the Commons E Ostrom, T Dietz, N Dolšak, PC Stern, S Stonich, EU Weber 41–85 Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
   [Google Scholar]
2. Agrawal A. 2003b. Sustainable governance of common-pool resources: context, methods, and politics. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 32:243–62
   [Google Scholar]
3. Ahmad E, Brosio G 2008. Handbook of Fiscal Federalism Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
4. Arrow KJ, Ehrlich PR, Levin SA 2014. Some perspectives on linked ecosystems and socioeconomic systems. Environment and Development Economics S Barrett, K-G Mäler, ES Maskin 95–116 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
   [Google Scholar]
5. Barbier E. 2011a. Capitalizing on Nature: Ecosystems as Natural Assets Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
6. Barbier E. 2011b. Transaction costs and the transition to environmentally sustainable development. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 1:58–69
   [Google Scholar]
7. Barrett S. 2010. Why Cooperate? The Incentive to Supply Global Public Goods Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
8. Berkes F. 2017. Environmental governance for the Anthropocene? Social-ecological systems, resilience and collaborative learning. Sustainability 9:1232
   [Google Scholar]
9. Berry CR. 2009. Imperfect Union: Representation and Taxation in Multilevel Governments Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
10. Bird RM, Slack E. 2014. Local taxes and local expenditures in developing countries: strengthening the Wicksellian connection. Public Adm. Dev. 34:359–69
    [Google Scholar]
11. Boffa F, Piolatto A, Ponzetto GAM 2016. Political centralization and government accountability. Q. J. Econ. 131:1381–422
    [Google Scholar]
12. Boulding K. 1966. The coming economics of Spaceship Earth. Environmental Quality in a Growing Economy H Jarrett 3–14 Baltimore, MD: Resour. Future/Johns Hopkins University Press
    [Google Scholar]
13. Breton A. 2008. Modeling vertical competition. See Ahmad & Brosio 2008 86–105
    [Google Scholar]
14. Brock WA, Starrett D. 2003. Managing systems with non-convex positive feedback. Environ. Resour. Econ. 26:4575–602
    [Google Scholar]
15. Burtraw D, Shobe W. 2008. Local options on global stocks: how the states are affecting the U.S. debate on climate policy. States and Climate Change: Leaders or Lab Rats? J Domanski 43–67 Princeton, NJ: Policy Res. Inst. Region
    [Google Scholar]
16. Burtraw D, Shobe W. 2009. State and local climate policy under a national emissions floor Discuss. Pap. 09-54 Resour. Future Washington, DC: https://media.rff.org/documents/RFF-DP-09-54.pdf
17. Burtraw D, Woerman M. 2013. Economic ideas for a complex climate policy regime. Energy Econ 40:S24–31
    [Google Scholar]
18. Cai H, Treisman D. 2009. Political decentralization and policy experimentation. Q. J. Political Sci. 4:135–58
    [Google Scholar]
19. Carpenter S, Arrow K, Barrett S, Biggs R, Brock W et al. 2012. General resilience to cope with extreme events. Sustainability 4:123248–59
    [Google Scholar]
20. Carpenter SR, Brock WA. 2004. Spatial complexity, resilience, and policy diversity: fishing on lake-rich landscapes. Ecol. Soc. 9:18
    [Google Scholar]
21. Centeno MA, Nag M, Patterson TS, Shaver A, Windawi AJ 2015. The emergence of global systemic risk. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 41:65–85
    [Google Scholar]
22. Cheikbossian G. 2008. Rent-seeking, spillovers and the benefits of decentralization. J. Urban Econ. 63:1217–28
    [Google Scholar]
23. Colding J, Barthel S. 2019. Exploring the social-ecological systems discourse 20 years later. Ecol. Soc. 24:12
    [Google Scholar]
24. Crépin A-S, Norberg J, Mäler K-G 2011. Coupled economic-ecological systems with slow and fast dynamics—modelling and analysis method. Ecol. Econ. 70:81448–58
    [Google Scholar]
25. Dalmazzone S. 2008. Decentralization and the environment. See Ahmad & Brosio 2008 459–77
    [Google Scholar]
26. Desmet K, Rossi-Hansberg E. 2015. On the spatial economic impact of global warming. J. Urban Econ. 88:16–37
    [Google Scholar]
27. Diamond J. 1997. Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies New York: W.W. Norton
28. Dijkstra BR, Fredriksson PG. 2010. Regulatory environmental federalism. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2:319–39
    [Google Scholar]
29. Dorsch MJ, Flachsland C. 2017. A polycentric approach to global climate governance. Glob. Environ. Politics 17:245–64
    [Google Scholar]
30. Duit A. 2016. Resilience thinking: lessons for public administration. Public Adm 94:2364–80
    [Google Scholar]
31. Eaton S, Kostka G. 2018. What makes for good and bad neighbors? An emerging research agenda in the study of Chinese environmental politics. Environ. Politics 27:5782–803
    [Google Scholar]
32. Eichenberger R, Frey B. 2008. Functional, overlapping and competing jurisdictions (FOCJ): a complement and alternative to today's federalism. See Ahmad & Brosio 2008 154–81
    [Google Scholar]
33. Falk A, Fehr E, Urs F 2003. Appropriating the commons: a theoretical explanation. The Drama of the Commons E Ostrom, T Dietz, N Dolšak, PC Stern, S Stonich, EU Weber 154–91 Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
    [Google Scholar]
34. Fell H, Kaffine DT. 2014. Can decentralized planning really achieve first-best in the presence of environmental spillovers. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 68:146–53
    [Google Scholar]
35. Fischel W. 2001. Municipal corporations, homeowners and the benefit view of the property tax. Property Taxation and Local Government Finance: Essays in Honor of C. Lowell Harriss WE Oates 33–77 Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Inst. Land Policy
    [Google Scholar]
36. Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J 2005. Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 30:441–73
    [Google Scholar]
37. Garcia-Mila T, McGuire TJ, Oates W 2017. Strength in diversity? Fiscal federalism among the fifty U.S. states. Work. Pap. 1001 Barcelona Grad. Sch. Econ.
38. Goulder LH, Stavins RN. 2011. Challenges from state-federal interactions in US climate change policy. Am. Econ. Rev. 101:3253–57
    [Google Scholar]
39. Hamilton M, Lubell M. 2018. Collaborative governance of climate change adaptation across spatial and institutional scales. Policy Stud. J. 46:2222–47
    [Google Scholar]
40. Hinkelmann K, Kempthorne O. 1994. Design and Analysis of Experiments Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
41. Inman RP. 1985. Markets, governments and the new political economy. Handbook of Public EconomicsVol. 2: AJ Auerbach, M Feldstein 647–777 Amsterdam: North-Holland
    [Google Scholar]
42. Koethenbuerger M. 2008. Revisiting the “Decentralization Theorem”—on the role of externalities. J. Urban Econ. 64:1116–22
    [Google Scholar]
43. Levin S, Xepapadeas T, Crépin A-S, Norberg J, de Zeeuw A et al. 2013. Social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems: modeling and policy implications. Environ. Dev. Econ. 18:2111–32
    [Google Scholar]
44. Libecap GD. 1989. Contracting for Property Rights Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
45. Libecap GD. 2014. Addressing global environmental externalities: transaction costs considerations. J. Econ. Lit. 52:2424–79
    [Google Scholar]
46. Lipscomb M, Mobarak AM. 2016. Decentralization and pollution spillovers: evidence from the re-drawing of county borders in Brazil. Rev. Econ. Stud. 84:1464–502
    [Google Scholar]
47. Lockwood B. 2008. The political economy of decentralization. See Ahmad & Brosio 2008 33–60
    [Google Scholar]
48. Lorz O, Willmann G. 2005. On the endogenous allocation of decision powers in federal structures. J. Urban Econ. 57:2242–57
    [Google Scholar]
49. Mäler K-G, Xepapadeas A, de Zeeuw A 2003. The economics of shallow lakes. Environ. Resour. Econ. 26:4603–24
    [Google Scholar]
50. McCann L. 2013. Transaction costs and environmental policy design. Ecol. Econ. 88:253–62
    [Google Scholar]
51. Millimet D. 2014. Environmental federalism: a survey of the empirical literature. Case West. Reserve Law Rev. 64:41669–1757
    [Google Scholar]
52. Nechyba T. 2001. The benefit view and the new view: Where do we stand, twenty-five years into the debate?. Property Taxation and Local Government Finance W Oates 114–21 Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Inst. Land Policy
    [Google Scholar]
53. North DC. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
54. Oates W. 2004. A reconsideration of environmental federalism. Recent Advances in Environmental Economics J List, A de Zeeuw 1–32 Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
55. Oates W. 2005. Toward a second-generation theory of fiscal federalism. Int. Tax Public Finance 12:4349–73
    [Google Scholar]
56. Oates W. 2008. On the evolution of fiscal federalism: theory and institutions. Natl. Tax J. 61:2313–34
    [Google Scholar]
57. Ostrom E. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
58. Ostrom E. 2010. Polycentric systems for coping with collective action and global environmental change. Glob. Environ. Change 20:4550–57
    [Google Scholar]
59. Ostrom E. 2012. Nested externalities and polycentric institutions: Must we wait for global solutions to climate change before taking actions at other scales. Econ. Theory 49:2353–69
    [Google Scholar]
60. Preiser R, Biggs R, De Vos A, Folke C 2018. Social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems: organizing principles for advancing research methods and approaches. Ecol. Soc. 23:446
    [Google Scholar]
61. Rose-Ackerman S. 1980. Risk taking and reelection: Does federalism promote innovation. J. Leg. Stud. 9:3593–616
    [Google Scholar]
62. Rubenfeld DL. 1985. The economics of the public sector. Handbook of Public EconomicsVol. 2: AJ Auerbach, M Feldstein 571–645 Amsterdam: North-Holland
    [Google Scholar]
63. Runyan CW, D'Odorico P, Shobe W 2015. The economic impacts of positive feedbacks resulting from deforestation. Ecol. Econ. 120:93–99
    [Google Scholar]
64. Shobe W, Burtraw D. 2012. Rethinking environmental federalism in a warming world. Clim. Change Econ. 3:41250018 https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010007812500182
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
65. Sigman H. 2002. International spillovers and water quality in rivers: Do countries free ride. Am. Econ. Rev. 92:41152–59
    [Google Scholar]
66. Sigman H. 2005. Transboundary spillovers and decentralization of environmental policies. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 50:182–101
    [Google Scholar]
67. Sorens JP. 2016. Secession risk and fiscal federalism. Publius J. Fed. 46:125–50
    [Google Scholar]
68. Strumpf KS. 2002. Does government decentralization increase policy innovation. J. Public Econ. Theory 4:2207–41
    [Google Scholar]
69. Treisman D. 2004. Rational appeasement. Int. Organ. 58:2345–73
    [Google Scholar]
70. Treisman D. 2007. The Architecture of Government: Rethinking Political Decentralization Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press
71. Ventura J. 2019. Sharing a government. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 17:61723–52
    [Google Scholar]
72. Volden C. 1996. Entrusting the states with welfare reform. The New Federalism: Can the States Be Trusted? J Ferejohn, B Weingast 65–96 Stanford, CA: Hoover Inst. Press
    [Google Scholar]
73. Volden C, Ting MM, Carpenter DP 2008. A formal model of learning and policy diffusion. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 102:3319–32
    [Google Scholar]
74. Walker B, Barrett S, Polasky S, Galaz V, Folke C et al. 2009. Looming global-scale failures and missing institutions. Science 325:59461345–46
    [Google Scholar]
75. Walker B, Carpenter S, Rockstrom J, Crépin A-S, Peterson G 2012. Drivers, “slow” variables, “fast” variables, shocks, and resilience. Ecol. Soc. 17:330
    [Google Scholar]
76. Weiland PS. 2000. Federal and state preemption of environmental law: a critical analysis. Harv. Environ. Law Rev. 24:237
    [Google Scholar]
77. Williams RC. 2012. Growing state-federal conflicts in environmental policy: the role of market-based regulation. J. Public Econ. 96:111092–99
    [Google Scholar]
78. Wilson J. 2003. Scientific uncertainty, complex systems, and the design of common-pool institutions. The Drama of the Commons E Ostrom, T Dietz, N Dolšak, PC Stern, S Stonich, EU Weber 327–59 Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press
    [Google Scholar]
79. Young OR. 2002. The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change: Fit, Interplay, and Scale Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
80. Zodrow G. 2001. Reflections on the new view and the benefit view of the property tax. Property Taxation and Local Government Finance W Oates 79–110 Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Inst. Land Policy
    [Google Scholar]