Abstract In macroeconomic analyses usually a simple proportional trade-off between economic growth and environmental pressure is assumed, i.e. constant return to scale (CRS). In this study authors show how changing CRS assumption affects environmental policy effectiveness based on Polish example. The problem revealed in the conducted analysis is actual in many countries, where the local perspective may efface global threats. The empirical objective of this paper is to assess cost-effectiveness of environmental policies at the county level under various return to scale (RTS) scenarios. First, environmental pressure was measured in four dimensions: air, soil, water pollution and bio-uniformity; second, the double-bootstrapped truncated regression model under different RTS were estimated, verifying the cost-effectiveness of county and transnational policies. The results send a message that the adoption of CRS assumption recommended in a such case by literature and usually followed by local authorities may lead to misleading assessment of the eco-efficiency level. It was found that local policy loses its impact on the eco-efficiency under VRS and 40% of local authorities in Poland can no longer benefit from economies of scale. The article offers original methodology, first, for measuring eco-efficiency in macroeconomic approach, second, a frontier-based cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), adopting the double-bootstrapped modelling procedure.

中文翻译：

---

环境政策对波兰乡村地区生态效率的影响：规模报酬递减如何改变观点？

摘要 在宏观经济分析中，通常假设经济增长和环境压力之间的简单比例权衡，即规模报酬不变（CRS）。在这项研究中，作者展示了改变 CRS 假设如何影响基于波兰示例的环境政策有效性。所进行的分析中揭示的问题在许多国家都是实际存在的，在这些国家中，本地视角可能会消除全球威胁。本文的实证目标是评估在各种规模回报 (RTS) 情景下县级环境政策的成本效益。首先，从空气、土壤、水污染和生物均匀性四个维度衡量环境压力；其次，估计了不同RTS下的双自举截断回归模型，验证县和跨国政策的成本效益。结果发出一个信息，即在此类案例中采用由文献推荐并通常为地方当局遵循的 CRS 假设可能会导致对生态效率水平的误导性评估。结果发现，地方政策在 VRS 下失去了对生态效率的影响，波兰 40% 的地方当局无法再从规模经济中受益。本文提供了原始方法，首先，用于衡量宏观经济方法中的生态效率，其次，基于前沿的成本效益分析 (CEA)，采用双引导建模程序。结果发出一个信息，即在此类案例中采用由文献推荐并通常为地方当局遵循的 CRS 假设可能会导致对生态效率水平的误导性评估。结果发现，地方政策在 VRS 下失去了对生态效率的影响，波兰 40% 的地方当局无法再从规模经济中受益。本文提供了原始方法，首先，用于衡量宏观经济方法中的生态效率，其次，基于前沿的成本效益分析 (CEA)，采用双引导建模程序。结果发出一个信息，即在此类案例中采用由文献推荐并通常为地方当局遵循的 CRS 假设可能会导致对生态效率水平的误导性评估。结果发现，地方政策在 VRS 下失去了对生态效率的影响，波兰 40% 的地方当局无法再从规模经济中受益。本文提供了原始方法，首先，用于衡量宏观经济方法中的生态效率，其次，基于前沿的成本效益分析 (CEA)，采用双引导建模程序。