3. Producción
Browse
4 results
Search Results
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, El tratamiento de las variables en economía : una revisión y un marco conceptual(Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Departamento de Economía, 2008)This article reviews the treatment of the concept of variables in empirical research in economics. It incorporates ideas from other quantitative areas, and are arranged in a conceptual framework. We present a taxonomy of the variables and discusses methodological issues that arise from it. We believe that the reflection on the nature of the variables since the definition of the study objectives, and ahead of linking them with the empirical work, is a task that even should be part of the formulation of theories, hypothesis or ideas involved in the empirical economic research. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, La oferta de los productos agrícolas alimenticios a la zona urbana(Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Departamento de Economía, 1973)Busca presentar un modelo que explique los mecanismos y funcionamiento de la oferta de los productos agrícolas alimenticios al mercado urbano cuando estos vienen del sector agrícola de auto-consumo. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, ¿Cuál es el costo de la contaminación ambiental minera sobre los recursos hídricos en el Perú?(Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Departamento de Economía, 2011)This study estimates the economic cost of mining pollution on water resources for the years 2008 and 2009 based on the conceptual framework of Environmental Efficiency (Pittman, 1981.1983, Färe et al., 1989, 1993, 2003; Rao, 2000). This framework understands such costs as the mining companies trade-off between increasing production that is saleable at market prices (desirable-output) and reducing environmental pollution that emerges from the production process (output-undesirable). These economic costs were calculated from parametric and nonparametric production possibility frontiers to 28 and 37 mining units in 2008 and 2009, respectively, which were under the purview of the National Campaign for Environmental Monitoring of Effluent and Water Resources conducted by Energy and Mining Investment Supervisory Agency (OSINERGMIN) in those years. The results show that the economic cost of mining pollution on water resources raised to $ 814.7 million and U.S. $ 448.8 million for 2008 and 2009, respectively. This economic cost was highly concentrated in a few mining units, within a few pollution parameters, and was also higher in mining units with average/low mineral production. The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and the Tobit regressions were not able to identify a pattern that explains the economic costs by using institutional, spatial and operational variables, which may be noted that it could be explained by factors related to the environmental management of mining production process. Taking into consideration that at present the fine and penalty system in the mining sector is based on an administrative-criteria, which does not fine for the potential environmental damage generated, the results of this study highlight the need to redesign this system based on an economic-criteria in order to establish a preventive mechanism of the pollution process in order to generate the necessary incentives for mining companies to address negative externalities that emerge from their production process. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, ¿Cuál es el costo de la contaminación ambiental minera sobre los recursos hídricos en el Perú?(Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Departamento de Economía, 2011)This study estimates the economic cost of mining pollution on water resources for the years 2008 and 2009 based on the conceptual framework of Environmental Efficiency (Pittman, 1981.1983, Färe et al., 1989, 1993, 2003; Rao, 2000). This framework understands such costs as the mining companies trade-off between increasing production that is saleable at market prices (desirable-output) and reducing environmental pollution that emerges from the production process (output-undesirable). These economic costs were calculated from parametric and nonparametric production possibility frontiers to 28 and 37 mining units in 2008 and 2009, respectively, which were under the purview of the National Campaign for Environmental Monitoring of Effluent and Water Resources conducted by Energy and Mining Investment Supervisory Agency (OSINERGMIN) in those years. The results show that the economic cost of mining pollution on water resources raised to $ 814.7 million and U.S. $ 448.8 million for 2008 and 2009, respectively. This economic cost was highly concentrated in a few mining units, within a few pollution parameters, and was also higher in mining units with average/low mineral production. The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and the Tobit regressions were not able to identify a pattern that explains the economic costs by using institutional, spatial and operational variables, which may be noted that it could be explained by factors related to the environmental management of mining production process. Taking into consideration that at present the fine and penalty system in the mining sector is based on an administrative-criteria, which does not fine for the potential environmental damage generated, the results of this study highlight the need to redesign this system based on an economic-criteria in order to establish a preventive mechanism of the pollution process in order to generate the necessary incentives for mining companies to address negative externalities that emerge from their production process.