Pollutants
The following questions refer to the situation below. A chemical plant’s production adds
pollutants to a stream which irrigates a farm’s crops. The pollutants damage the farm’s
crops, increasing the firm’s costs by $800 per month. The crop damage may be
eliminated in two ways: the chemical plant can install a new filtering system costing
$300 per month, or the farm can install a new irrigation system costing $600 per month.
Suppose transactions costs are zero. Also suppose the chemical plant is not liable for the
farm’s crop damages and can continue to pollute the stream. What will be the result of
private bargaining between the farm and the chemical plant?
a. The chemical plant will pay the farm $800 per month in crop damages.
b. The farm will bear the $800 per month cost of crop damages.
c. The chemical plant will install the new filtering system.
d. The farm will install the new irrigation system.
Land in California is quite fertile and capable of growing large amounts of tobacco,
while the land in New England is relatively rocky, of poorer quality, and capable of
growing only smaller tobacco crops. Nevertheless, New England is a larger producer of
tobacco than is California. Use the concepts of cost and comparative advantage to
resolve this apparent contradiction.