Abstract
In the context of a unionized labor market and green consumerism, this paper analyzes, within a vertically differentiated duopoly, which environmental policy – taxes or subsidies – is more efficient in reducing polluting emissions and enhancing social welfare. The structure of wage setting proves to be crucial in determining final outcomes. Specifically, under firm-specific unions with decentralized wage setting, a subsidy policy is more efficient than a tax policy. Conversely, when an industry-wide union sets wages centrally, the tax policy outperforms the subsidy policy.
Funding source: NextGenerationEU
Award Identifier / Grant number: CUP N. I53D23002520006
References
Asproudis, E., and M. Gil-Moltó. 2015. “Green Trade Unions: Structure, Wages and Environmental Technology.” Environmental and Resource Economics 60: 165–89.10.1007/s10640-014-9768-xSearch in Google Scholar
Asproudis, E., E. Filippiadis, and M. Tian. 2022. “Timing of Environmental Technological Choice and Trade Unions’ Climate Solidarity.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 182: 121801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121801.Search in Google Scholar
Ben Elhadj, N., and O. Tarola. 2015. “Relative Quality-Related (Dis)Utility in Vertically Differentiated Oligopoly with an Environmental Externality.” Environment and Development Economics 20: 354–79.10.1017/S1355770X14000576Search in Google Scholar
Betcherman, G. 2012. “Labor Market Institutions: A Review of the Literature.” Policy Research Working Paper; No.6276 @World Bank, Washington.10.1596/12139Search in Google Scholar
Booth, A. L. 1995. The Economics of the Trade Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Calabuig, V., and M. Gonzalez-Maestre. 2002. “Union Structure and Incentives for Innovation.” European Journal of Political Economy 18: 177–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0176-2680(01)00074-x.Search in Google Scholar
Ceccantoni, G., O. Tarola, and S. Zanaj. 2018. “Green Consumption and Relative Preferences in a Vertically Differentiated International Oligopoly.” Ecological Economics 149: 129–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.03.019.Search in Google Scholar
Cremer, H., and J. Thisse. 1999. “On the Taxation of Polluting Products in a Differentiated Industry.” European Economic Review 43: 575–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0014-2921(98)00021-x.Search in Google Scholar
Dobbelaere, S. 2004. “Estimation of Price-Cost Margins and Union Bargaining Power for Belgian Manufacturing.” International Journal of Industrial Organization: 1381–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2004.10.003.Search in Google Scholar
Fanti, L., and N. Meccheri. 2017. “Unionization Regimes, Capacity Choice by Firms and Welfare Outcomes.” The Manchester School 85: 661–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/manc.12165.Search in Google Scholar
Flanagan, R. J. 1999. “Macroeconomic Performance and Collective Bargaining: An International Perspective.” Journal of Economic Literature 37: 1150–75. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.37.3.1150.Search in Google Scholar
Garella, P. 2021. “The Effects of Taxes and Subsidies on Environmental Qualities in a Differentiated Duopoly.” Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences 14: 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12076-021-00272-7.Search in Google Scholar
Haucap, J., and C. Wey. 2004. “Unionisation Structures and Innovation Incentives.” The Economic Journal 114: 149–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0013-0133.2004.00203.x.Search in Google Scholar
Lian, X., Q. Gong, and L. F. Wang. 2018. “Consumer Awareness and Ex-Ante Versus Ex-Post Environmental Policies Revisited.” International Review of Economics & Finance 55: 68–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2018.01.014.Search in Google Scholar
Lombardini-Riipinen, C. 2005. “Optimal Tax Policy Under Environmental Quality Competition.” Environmental and Resource Economics 32: 317–36.10.1007/s10640-005-4680-zSearch in Google Scholar
Manasakis, C., and E. Petrakis. 2009. “Union Structure and Firms’ Incentives for Cooperative R&D Investments.” Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne d’Économique 42: 665–93.10.1111/j.1540-5982.2009.01523.xSearch in Google Scholar
Mantovani, A., and C. Vergari. 2017. “Environmental vs. Hedonic Quality: Which Policy Can Help in Lowering Pollution Emissions?” Environment and Development Economics 22: 274–304. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355770x16000371.Search in Google Scholar
Meccheri, N., and C. Vergari. 2024. “Union Structure and Product Quality Differentiation.” Tech. rep., GLO Discussion Paper Series n.1377.Search in Google Scholar
Moraga-Gonzalez, J. L., and N. Padron-Fumero. 2002. “Environmental Policy in a Green Market.” Environmental and Resource Economics 22: 419–47.10.1023/A:1016060928997Search in Google Scholar
Motta, M. 1993. “Endogenous Quality Choice: Price vs. Quantity Competition.” The Journal of Industrial Economics: 113–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/2950431.Search in Google Scholar
Oswald, A. J. 1985. “The Economic Theory of Trade Unions: An Introductory Survey.” The Scandinavian Journal of Economics: 160–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/3439820.Search in Google Scholar
Pencavel, J. 1985. “Wages and Employment Under Trade Unionism: Microeconomic Models and Macroeconomic Applications.” The Scandinavian Journal of Economics: 197–225. https://doi.org/10.2307/3439822.Search in Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Ibeas, R. 2007. “Environmental Product Differentiation and Environmental Awareness.” Environmental and Resource Economics 36: 237–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-006-9026-y.Search in Google Scholar
Soares, A. C. 2020. “Price-Cost Margin and Bargaining Power in the European Union.” Empirical Economics: 2093–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-019-01703-7.Search in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- Payment for Environmental Services and Environmental Tax Under Imperfect Competition
- Disclosure of R&D Knowledge with Cross-Ownership in a Mixed Duopoly
- Optimal Tariffs with Endogenous Entry Mode: Uniform Versus Discriminatory Tariffs
- What Happens When We Become Age 18? SNAP Work Requirement and SNAP Participation
- Hiring Subsidies for Low-Educated Unemployed Youths are Ineffective in a Tight Labor Market
- The Impact of Medical Cannabis Laws on Commercial Health Insurer Individual Market Premiums, Claims, and Profitability
- Addictive Treatment
- Complement or Substitute? Punishment and Self-Interested Enforcement
- Gender Gaps in Different Assessment Systems: The Role of Teacher Gender
- Hiring Biased Managers: Kant vs. Nash
- College Expansion and Heterogeneous College Premiums: Evidence from the Marginal Treatment Effect in China
- The Effects of Hiring Credits on Firms’ Dynamics: A Synthetic Difference-in-Differences Evaluation
- Letter
- Environmental Taxes Versus Subsidies with Unionized Labor Markets. A Note on the Role of Wage Setting Structure
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- Payment for Environmental Services and Environmental Tax Under Imperfect Competition
- Disclosure of R&D Knowledge with Cross-Ownership in a Mixed Duopoly
- Optimal Tariffs with Endogenous Entry Mode: Uniform Versus Discriminatory Tariffs
- What Happens When We Become Age 18? SNAP Work Requirement and SNAP Participation
- Hiring Subsidies for Low-Educated Unemployed Youths are Ineffective in a Tight Labor Market
- The Impact of Medical Cannabis Laws on Commercial Health Insurer Individual Market Premiums, Claims, and Profitability
- Addictive Treatment
- Complement or Substitute? Punishment and Self-Interested Enforcement
- Gender Gaps in Different Assessment Systems: The Role of Teacher Gender
- Hiring Biased Managers: Kant vs. Nash
- College Expansion and Heterogeneous College Premiums: Evidence from the Marginal Treatment Effect in China
- The Effects of Hiring Credits on Firms’ Dynamics: A Synthetic Difference-in-Differences Evaluation
- Letter
- Environmental Taxes Versus Subsidies with Unionized Labor Markets. A Note on the Role of Wage Setting Structure