IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae06/25768.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating Economic Health Costs of Not Controlling Toxic Water Pollution

Author

Listed:
  • Easter, K. William
  • Konishi, Yoshifumi

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to determine what types of information may be important in determining the welfare benefits of preventing toxic water contamination when a given type of toxification occurs (or is likely to occur) in a given setting. It attempts to identify information and behavior issues that need to be considered when policy makers and others wish to obtain reasonable estimates of welfare benefits and weigh them against the economic costs of removing toxins. This paper also provides reasonable "scenarios" for three toxic pollutants that are found in water bodies (surface water or groundwater). We make use of two country alternatives--one in developing countries and the other in developed countries--to demonstrate, with specific examples of arsenic, mercury and atrazine, how welfare estimates may vary when a particular behavioral/informational scenario or a particular type of chemical contamination occurs.

Suggested Citation

  • Easter, K. William & Konishi, Yoshifumi, 2006. "Estimating Economic Health Costs of Not Controlling Toxic Water Pollution," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25768, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae06:25768
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.25768
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/25768/files/cp060227.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.25768?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel J. Phaneuf & Catherine L. Kling & Joseph A. Herriges, 2000. "Estimation and Welfare Calculations in a Generalized Corner Solution Model with an Application to Recreation Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 83-92, February.
    2. Mark Montgomery & Michael Needelman, 1997. "The Welfare Effects of Toxic Contamination in Freshwater Fish," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 211-223.
    3. Seung-Jun Kwak & Clifford Russell, 1994. "Contingent valuation in Korean environmental planning: A pilot application to the protection of drinking water quality in Seoul," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(5), pages 511-526, October.
    4. Anna Alberini & Alan Krupnick, 2000. "Cost-of-Illness and Willingness-to-Pay Estimates of the Benefits of Improved Air Quality: Evidence from Taiwan," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 37-53.
    5. Robert L. Raucher, 1986. "The Benefits and Costs of Policies Related to Groundwater Contamination," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(1), pages 33-45.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Easter, K. William & Konishi, Yoshifumi & Raggi, Meri & Viaggi, Davide, 2006. "What are the Economic Health Costs of Non-Action in Controlling Toxic Water Pollution?," Conference Papers 6656, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    2. A. Myrick Freeman III, 2000. "The Valuation of Environmental Health Damages in Developing Countries: Some Observations," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper sp200011t1, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Nov 2000.
    3. Raucher, Robert Schafer, 1986. "Regulating Pollution Sources under a Differential Ground-Water Protection Strategy," 1986 Annual Meeting, July 27-30, Reno, Nevada 278448, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Larson, Douglas & Shaikh, Sabina, 1999. "Empirical Specification Requirements for Two-Constraint Models of Recreation Demand," Western Region Archives 321713, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    5. Cloé Garnache & Scott M. Swinton & Joseph A. Herriges & Frank Lupi & R. Jan Stevenson, 2016. "Solving the Phosphorus Pollution Puzzle: Synthesis and Directions for Future Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1334-1359.
    6. Ferrier, Peyton & Zhen, Chen, 2014. "Explaining the Shift from Preserved to Fresh Vegetable Consumption," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170555, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Dong, Diansheng & Kaiser, Harry M., 2003. "Estimation of a Censored AIDS Model: A Simulated Amemiya-Tobin Approach," Research Bulletins 122113, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    8. Leslie Richardson & John B. Loomis & Patricia A. Champ, 2013. "Valuing Morbidity from Wildfire Smoke Exposure: A Comparison of Revealed and Stated Preference Techniques," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(1), pages 76-100.
    9. Poe, Gregory L. & Bishop, Richard C., 1992. "Measuring the Benefits of Groundwater Protection from Agricultural Contamination: Results from a Two-Stage Contingent Valuation Study," Staff Papers 200549, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    10. Babatunde O. Abidoye & Joseph A. Herriges & Justin L. Tobias, 2012. "Controlling for Observed and Unobserved Site Characteristics in RUM Models of Recreation Demand," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1070-1093.
    11. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & Tiziano Tempesta, 2007. "Latent class count models of total visitation demand: days out hiking in the eastern Alps," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(4), pages 447-460, December.
    12. Kuriyama, Koichi & Shoji, Yasushi & Tsuge, Takahiro, 2020. "The value of leisure time of weekends and long holidays: The multiple discrete–continuous extreme value (MDCEV) choice model with triple constraints," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    13. Stephen C. Newbold, 2011. "Valuing Health Risk Changes Using a Life-Cycle Consumption Framework," NCEE Working Paper Series 201103, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Apr 2011.
    14. Dr. Timothy J. Richards, 2015. "A Shameless Pitch for Quantitative Marketing," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(4), pages 564-567, October.
    15. Na Wang & Yongrok Choi, 2019. "Challenges for Sustainable Water Use in the Urban Industry of Korea Based on the Global Non-Radial Directional Distance Function Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-15, July.
    16. Sánchez, José J. & Baerenklau, Ken & González-Cabán, Armando, 2016. "Valuing hypothetical wildfire impacts with a Kuhn–Tucker model of recreation demand," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 63-70.
    17. Bhat, Chandra R., 2008. "The multiple discrete-continuous extreme value (MDCEV) model: Role of utility function parameters, identification considerations, and model extensions," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 274-303, March.
    18. Chengyan Yue & John C. Beghin, 2017. "Tariff Equivalent And Forgone Trade Effects Of Prohibitive Technical Barriers To Trade," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: John Christopher Beghin (ed.), Nontariff Measures and International Trade, chapter 8, pages 139-150, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Tatsuo Suwa, 2008. "Estimation of the spatial substitution effect of national park trip demand: an application of the Kuhn-Tucker model," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 9(4), pages 239-257, December.
    20. Tudor, Lynne G. & Besedin, Elena Y. & Fisher, Michael & Smith, Stuart, 1999. "Economic Analysis Of Environmental Regulations: Application Of The Random Utility Model To Recreational Benefit Assessment For The Mp&M Effluent Guideline," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21630, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    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:ags:iaae06:25768. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.