IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/nceewp/280900.html

CERCLA’s Overlooked Cleanup Program: Emergency Response and Removal

Author

Listed:
  • Jenkins, Robin
  • Klemick, Heather
  • Kopits, Elizabeth
  • Marten, Alex

Abstract

Over the past five decades, the federal government has enacted laws and developed regulations to manage actual and threatened hazardous releases. This paper describes a relatively understudied component of the nation’s response capability – the Superfund Emergency Response and Removal (ERR) Program. Drawing on a new dataset of 113 recent removal actions on 88 sites in the Mid-Atlantic region, we find a great deal of diversity across sites, from the discovery and cause of contamination to the types of risks and the cleanup strategy. The program addresses traditionally studied media such as soil, water, and air contamination, as well as risks from not-yet-released contained contaminants and potential fire or explosion. One of the program’s major strengths is its ability to address this wide range of threats, even though this very heterogeneity complicates research efforts to assess its net benefits. We describe the involvement of potentially responsible parties and EPA expenditures on removal actions. Finally, we consider future challenges for research into the net benefits of the program.

Suggested Citation

  • Jenkins, Robin & Klemick, Heather & Kopits, Elizabeth & Marten, Alex, 2011. "CERCLA’s Overlooked Cleanup Program: Emergency Response and Removal," National Center for Environmental Economics-NCEE Working Papers 280900, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:nceewp:280900
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.280900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/280900/files/NCEE2011-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.280900?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kent Messer & William Schulze & Katherine Hackett & Trudy Cameron & Gary McClelland, 2006. "Can Stigma Explain Large Property Value Losses? The Psychology and Economics of Superfund," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 33(3), pages 299-324, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2011. "Handbook on the Benefits, Costs, and Impacts of Land Cleanup and Reuse," Environmental Economics Guidance Documents 348897, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

    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. Dolan, Paul & Metcalf, Robert, 2008. "Comparing willingness-to-pay and subjective well-being in the context of non-market goods," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 28504, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Duan, Wenjie & Bu, He & Chen, Zheng, 2020. "COVID-19-related stigma profiles and risk factors among people who are at high risk of contagion," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    3. Guignet, Dennis & Jenkins, Robin & Ranson, Matthew & Walsh, Patrick J., 2018. "Contamination and incomplete information: Bounding implicit prices using high-profile leaks," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 259-282.
    4. Guignet, Dennis, 2012. "The impacts of pollution and exposure pathways on home values: A stated preference analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 53-63.
    5. Paul Dolan & Robert Metcalfe, 2008. "Comparing Willingness-to-Pay and Subjective Well-Being in the Context of Non-Market Goods," CEP Discussion Papers dp0890, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    6. Recai Aydin & Barton A. Smith, 2008. "Evidence of the Dual Nature of Property Value Recovery Following Environmental Remediation," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 36(4), pages 777-812, December.
    7. Vivian Hoffmann & Jacob R. Fooks & Kent D. Messer, 2014. "Measuring and Mitigating HIV Stigma: A Framed Field Experiment," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(4), pages 701-726.
    8. Gamper-Rabindran, Shanti & Timmins, Christopher, 2013. "Does cleanup of hazardous waste sites raise housing values? Evidence of spatially localized benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 345-360.
    9. John Braden & Xia Feng & DooHwan Won, 2011. "Waste Sites and Property Values: A Meta-Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(2), pages 175-201, October.
    10. Cheng, Nieyan & Li, Minghao & Liu, Pengfei & Luo, Qianfeng & Tang, Chuan & Zhang, Wendong, 2024. "Pipeline incidents and property values," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    11. Dennis Guignet & Matthew T. Heberling & Michael Papenfus & Olivia Griot, 2022. "Property Values, Water Quality, and Benefit Transfer: A Nationwide Meta-analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 98(2), pages 191-218.
    12. Maik Kecinski & Kent D. Messer & Brandon R. McFadden & Trey Malone, 2020. "Environmental and Regulatory Concerns During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Results from the Pandemic Food and Stigma Survey," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 76(4), pages 1139-1148, August.
    13. Andre Torre & Vu Hai Pham & Arnaud Simon, 2015. "The ex-ante impact of conflict over infrastructure settings on residential property values: The case of Paris’s suburban zones," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(13), pages 2404-2424, October.
    14. Tanaka, Shinsuke & Zabel, Jeffrey, 2018. "Valuing nuclear energy risk: Evidence from the impact of the Fukushima crisis on U.S. house prices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 411-426.
    15. Jenkins, Robin & Kopits, Elizabeth & Simpson, David, 2006. "Measuring the Social Benefits of EPA Land Cleanup and Reuse Programs," National Center for Environmental Economics-NCEE Working Papers 280849, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    16. Zarghamee, Homa S. & Messer, Kent D. & Fooks, Jacob R. & Schulze, William D. & Wu, Shang & Yan, Jubo, 2017. "Nudging charitable giving: Three field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 137-149.
    17. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2013. "Valuing Local Environmental Amenity with Discrete Choice Experiments: Spatial Scope Sensitivity and Heterogeneous Marginal Utility of Income," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 105-130, September.
    18. Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Liu, Xiangping, 2016. "Disentangling property value impacts of environmental contamination from locally undesirable land uses: Implications for measuring post-cleanup stigmaAuthor-Name: Taylor, Laura O," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 85-98.
    19. Taisuke Sadayuki, 2020. "The externality of a mortality incident within an apartment building: cases of homicide, suicide and fire deaths," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 22(1), pages 21-38, January.
    20. Maik Kecinski & Deborah Kerley Keisner & Kent D. Messer & William D. Schulze, 2018. "Measuring Stigma: The Behavioral Implications of Disgust," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 131-146, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H10 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - General
    • Q24 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Land
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling

    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:ags:nceewp:280900. 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/nepgvus.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.