期刊文献+

矿山开发过程中环境成本分析 被引量:3

ANALYSES ON ENVIRONMENTAL COST IN THE COURSE OF MINING
下载PDF
导出
摘要 当前,我国矿山环境问题突出。造成这种局面的主要原因是没有把环境成本纳入矿山企业的运行成本。本文分析了矿山开采过程中漠视环境成本对经济的危害,指出矿山开采中社会成本和私人成本的分离的负外部性问题是因为界定环境产权的交易费用太高,从而导致环境没有私有产权。没有私有产权的东西不能通过价格机制在市场成交。我们给出了模拟市场价格机制的环境评估手段,讨论了使环境成本转化为企业的内部成本的可行手段,指出不可逆的环境破坏成本核算的复杂性。最后指出我们应该制定符合我国国情的环境成本核算标准。 The mine environment issue stands out in our country currently. The main reason is that environmental cost has not been brought into the mine corporation' s cost. In this paper, the endanger to our economic because of disregarding environmental cost is analyzed, and that the negative externality, the separating between social cost and private cost, is that the exchange cost in order to bound private property right is too high. So, environment is public goods and no one has private right of it. But, the thing of which no one has the private right can not been exchanged by price mechanism. The methods of evaluating environment by simulating price mechanism are pointed out, and the means of changing environmental cost into the enterprise' s inner cost are discussed. At last, the complex of the irreversible environment destroy is pointed out and we must constitute our own standard on environmental cost account in order to match with the situation of our country.
作者 王小马 吴艳
出处 《中国矿业》 北大核心 2006年第7期34-37,共4页 China Mining Magazine
关键词 环境成本 社会成本 私人成本 环境评估 产权 Environmental cost Social cost Private cost Evaluating environment Property right
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献36

  • 1[11]Bateman I J, Langford I H, Turner R K,et al. Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies[J]. Ecological Economics, 1999, 12:161-179.
  • 2[12]Bonnieux F, Rainelli P. Contingent valuation methodology and the EU institutional framework [A]. In: Bateman I J, Willis K G, eds. Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries[C]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. 585-612.
  • 3[13]Carson R T. Valuation of tropical rainforests: Philosophical and practical issues in the use of contingent valuation [J]. Ecological Economics, 1998, 24: 15-29.
  • 4[14]Loomis J B, Kent P, Strange L, et al. Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: Results from a contingent valuation survey [J]. Ecological Economics, 2000, 33: 103-117.
  • 5[15]Jorgenson B S, Wilson M A, Heberlein T A. Fairness in the contingent valuation of environmental public goods: Attitude toward paying for environmental improvements at two levels of scope [J]. Ecological Economics, 2001, 36(1): 133-148.
  • 6[17]Lovett A, Bateman I J. Economic analysis of environmental preferences: Progress and prospects [J]. Computer, Environment and Urban systems, 2001, 25: 131-139.
  • 7[18]Smith V K. Non-market valuation of environmental resources: An interpretive appraisal [J]. Land Economics, 1993, 69: 1-26.
  • 8[19]Brown T C, Gregory R. Why the WTP-WTA disparity matters [J]. Ecological Economics, 1999, 28: 323-335.
  • 9[20]Hanemann W M. The economic theory of WTP and WTA [A]. In: Bateman I J, Willis K G, eds. Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries[C]. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.42-96.
  • 10[21]Bishop R C, Heberlein T A. Measuring values of extra-Market goods: Are indirect measures biased? [J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1979, 61(5): 926-930.

共引文献297

同被引文献28

引证文献3

二级引证文献7

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部