Defining Groundwater Remediation Objectives with Cost-benefit Analysis: Does It Work?
AbstractThe use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is increasingly advocated as a tool for supporting water planning decisions, in particular at the local (site) level. This paper questions whether CBA is relevant for evaluating groundwater management options at the scale of large regional aquifers. It highlights the difficulties related to estimating the cost of groundwater protection and remediation measures at the regional (water body) level. It also identifies methodological challenges in estimating the economic value of the benefits of groundwater protection. The paper is based on an original case study carried out on the upper Rhine valley aquifer in eastern France. The methodology deployed combines engineering approaches to assess the cost of remediation and economic methods (contingent valuation) to estimate the benefits associated with groundwater improvement.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by HAL in its series Post-Print with number hal-00934930.
Date of creation: 2014
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published, Water Resources Management, 2014, 28, 1, 261-278
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00934930
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/
Cost-benefit analysis; Groundwater remediation; Contingent valuation survey; Volatile organic compounds (VOC); Willingness to pay;
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-AGR-2014-02-08 (Agricultural Economics)
- NEP-ALL-2014-02-08 (All new papers)
- NEP-DCM-2014-02-08 (Discrete Choice Models)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Roy Brouwer, 2008. "The potential role of stated preference methods in the Water Framework Directive to assess disproportionate costs," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(5), pages 597-614.
- Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001.
"Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence,"
Environmental & Resource Economics,
European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
- Carson, Richard T & Flores, Nicholas A, 2000. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt75k752s7, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
- Ryan, Mandy & Scott, David A. & Donaldson, Cam, 2004. "Valuing health care using willingness to pay: a comparison of the payment card and dichotomous choice methods," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 237-258, March.
- Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Georgiou, Stavros & Lake, Iain, 2006. "The aggregation of environmental benefit values: Welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 450-460, December.
- Edwards, Steven F., 1988. "Option prices for groundwater protection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 475-487, December.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (CCSD).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.