 An integrated multiple criteria decision making framework for application in the evaluation of mineral taxation regimesWebby Banda and Eugie Kabwe Resources Policy, 2019, vol. 62, issue C, 635-650 Abstract: Mineral taxation regimes are usually evaluated based on five criteria, namely, neutrality, progressivity, administrative efficiency, investor risk and government risk. A significant gap in the use of these criteria is not considering trade-offs a policy maker faces in designing a tax regime. The concept of trade-offs between different criteria is an important reason why it is difficult to make an aggregate judgement about taxation regimes being analysed. For instance, it is difficult to choose a mineral taxation system that optimally balances these criteria. In this paper, an integrated multiple criteria decision making framework comprising the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) was formulated to address the problem of trade-offs among tax criteria. To illustrate the practical application of the developed framework it was applied in the selection process of Zambia’s robust copper taxation regime. Results show that the 2016 taxation regime is the most robust for Zambia. Keywords: Neutrality; Progressivity; Administrative efficiency; Investor risk; Government risk; AHP; TOPSIS; Zambia (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:62:y:2019:i:c:p:635-650 DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.11.012 Access Statistics for this article Resources Policy is currently edited by R. G. Eggert More articles in Resources Policy from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.