IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/natres/v36y2012i4p285-299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost‐benefit analysis of soil remediation in Israeli industrial zones

Author

Listed:
  • Doron Lavee
  • Tomer Ash
  • Gilat Baniad

Abstract

Industrial zones are the main source of soil pollution in Israel. Due to the upcoming approval of the bill on soil contamination and remediation in Israel, it is important to assess the economic feasibility of soil remediation. This study examines the economic feasibility of an extensive remediation project of all contaminated industrial zones in Israel. The estimated economic benefits include both direct benefits, resulting from the increase in the land value of the contaminated site, and indirect benefits, arising from the increase in nearby property values. A cost‐benefit analysis showed a cost benefit ratio of 1:14. Nonetheless, the direct benefits were found to be lower than the costs. Thus, the question of funding requires collaboration between government and the private sector.

Suggested Citation

  • Doron Lavee & Tomer Ash & Gilat Baniad, 2012. "Cost‐benefit analysis of soil remediation in Israeli industrial zones," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 36(4), pages 285-299, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:36:y:2012:i:4:p:285-299
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-8947.2012.01462.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-8947.2012.01462.x
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kiel, Katherine A. & Williams, Michael, 2007. "The impact of Superfund sites on local property values: Are all sites the same?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 170-192, January.
    2. Farber, Stephen, 1998. "Undesirable facilities and property values: a summary of empirical studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Alberto Longo & Anna Alberini, 2006. "What are the effects of contamination risks on commercial and industrial properties? evidence from Baltimore, Maryland," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 713-737.
    4. Anna Alberini, 2007. "Determinants And Effects On Property Values Of Participation In Voluntary Cleanup Programs: The Case Of Colorado," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 25(3), pages 415-432, July.
    5. Brasington, David M. & Hite, Diane, 2005. "Demand for environmental quality: a spatial hedonic analysis," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 57-82, January.
    6. Ihlanfeldt, Keith R. & Taylor, Laura O., 2004. "Externality effects of small-scale hazardous waste sites: evidence from urban commercial property markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 117-139, January.
    7. Todd K. BenDor & Sara S. Metcalf & Mark Paich, 2011. "The Dynamics of Brownfield Redevelopment," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 3(6), pages 1-23, June.
    8. Francois Bonnieux & Alain Carpentier & Robert D. Weaver, 1998. "Reducing soil contamination : economic incentives and potential benefits," Post-Print hal-02299648, HAL.
    9. McGrath, Daniel T., 2000. "Urban Industrial Land Redevelopment and Contamination Risk," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 414-442, May.
    10. Jeffrey Zabel & Dennis Guignet, 2010. "A Hedonic Analysis of the Impact of LUST Sites on House Prices in Frederick, Baltimore, and Baltimore City Counties," NCEE Working Paper Series 201001, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Jan 2010.
    11. David M. Brasington & Diane Hite, 2005. "Demand for Environmental Quality: A Spatial Hedonic Approach," Departmental Working Papers 2005-08, Department of Economics, Louisiana State University.
    12. McCluskey, Jill J. & Rausser, Gordon C., 2003. "Hazardous waste sites and housing appreciation rates," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 166-176, March.
    13. Gary H. McClelland & William D. Schulze & Brian Hurd, 1990. "The Effect of Risk Beliefs on Property Values: A Case Study of a Hazardous Waste Site," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(4), pages 485-497, December.
    14. Kiel, Katherine & Zabel, Jeffrey, 2001. "Estimating the Economic Benefits of Cleaning Up Superfund Sites: The Case of Woburn, Massachusetts," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(2-3), pages 163-184, March-May.
    15. Ted Gayer & James T. Hamilton & W. Kip Viscusi, 2002. "The Market Value of Reducing Cancer Risk: Hedonic Housing Prices with Changing Information," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 266-289, October.
    16. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    17. Larry Dale & James C. Murdoch & Mark A. Thayer & Paul A. Waddell, 1999. "Do Property Values Rebound from Environmental Stigmas? Evidence from Dallas," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(2), pages 311-326.
    18. Michaels, R. Gregory & Smith, V. Kerry, 1990. "Market segmentation and valuing amenities with hedonic models: The case of hazardous waste sites," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 223-242, September.
    19. Thomas O. Jackson, 2002. "Environmental Contamination and Industrial Real Estate Prices," Journal of Real Estate Research, American Real Estate Society, vol. 23(1/2), pages 179-200.
    20. Mendelsohn, Robert & Hellerstein, Daniel & Huguenin, Michael & Unsworth, Robert & Brazee, Richard, 1992. "Measuring hazardous waste damages with panel models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 259-271, May.
    21. Katherine Kiel & Melissa Boyle, 2001. "A Survey of House Price Hedonic Studies of the Impact of Environmental Externalities," Working Papers 0111, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:36:y:2012:i:4:p:285-299. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley Content Delivery). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0165-0203 .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.