| Website | https://www.geocep.cuni.cz |
Governments worldwide are exploring policies aimed at promoting healthier and more sustainable dietary choices. This study examines the public acceptability of two promising yet controversial policy interventions: the introduction of a meat tax and the removal of meat subsidies. Drawing on existing literature about the impact of policies on food consumption, particularly meat, we analyse data from a multi-country survey conducted across five European countries. We employ ordered logistic models and latent cluster analysis to examine factors influencing respondents’ support for these policies. Our findings highlight the role of value-based, diet-related, and socio-demographic factors. Notably, respondents from Spain, Portugal, and the UK showed significantly greater support for these meat policies compared to Latvians and Czechs. Age emerged as a key factor, indicating an increasing likelihood of support for both policies among younger individuals. Moreover, environmental and egoistic values were associated with increased odds of support, while security concerns and hedonic values had the opposite effect. Neither income nor employment emerged as significant predictors. Our study underscores the complexity of public opinions towards meat policies and provides valuable insights for policymakers seeking to design effective strategies to promote healthier and more sustainable dietary behaviours in Europe.
Standard climate economics considers damages of climate change to utility, total factor productivity, and capital. Highlighting that air pollution and climate change affect human health and labor productivity significantly, we complement this literature by including human health in a theoretical climate economic framework. Our macroeconomic approach incorporates a separate health sector and provides closed-form analytical solutions for the main model variables. Economic growth is endogenously driven by innovations, which depend on labor availability and productivity. These aspects of the labor force are directly linked to human health, which is harmed by burning fossil fuels. We calculate growth in the decentralized equilibrium and derive optimal climate policy. Calibrating the model by taking standard parameter values we show the economic growth rate to be higher for the planner solution compared to the market outcome. For an optimal climate policy, we find that 44% of total resource stock should be extracted when considering damages to capital, but only 1% of the stock should be extracted in an “all inclusive” approach where health damages are included. The health perspective requires optimal environmental policies that are much more stringent than those normally advocated in climate economics, since harm to human health has negative effects on economic growth, which makes the overall impact of climate change very large.
This paper investigates whether green bonds offer investors in China an attractive yield compared to other equivalent conventional bonds. By applying a matching method and, subsequently, fixed-effect estimation, our empirical results reveal a significant negative...