IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/war/wpaper/2020-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Increasing the cost-effectiveness of water quality improvements through pollution abatement target-setting at different spatial scales

Author

Listed:
  • Mikołaj Czajkowski

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Hans E. Andersen

    (Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University)

  • Gite Blicher-Mathiasen

    (Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University
    Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Wiktor Budziński

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Katarina Elofsson

    (Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University)

  • Jan Hagemejer

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Berit Hasler

    (Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University)

  • Christoph Humborg

    (Department of Environmental Science, Stockholm University)

  • James C. R. Smart

    (Australian Rivers Institute, Griffith University)

  • Erik Smedberg

    (Department of Environmental Science, Stockholm University)

  • Per Stålnacke

    (Department of Water Resources, Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research)

  • Hans Thodsen

    (Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University)

  • Adam Wąs

    (Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Faculty of Economic Sciences)

  • Maciej Wilamowski

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Tomasz Żylicz

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Nick Hanley

    (Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Institute of Biodiversity)

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate the potential gains in cost-effectiveness from changing the spatial scale at which nutrient reduction targets are set for the Baltic Sea, focusing on nutrient loadings associated with agriculture. Costs of achieving loadings reductions are compared across five levels of spatial scale, namely the entire Baltic Sea; the marine basin level; the country level; the watershed level; and the grid square level. A novel highly disaggregated model, which represents decreases in agricultural profits, changes in root zone N concentrations and transport to the Baltic Sea is proposed, and is then used to estimate the gains in cost-effectiveness from changing the spatial scale of nutrient reduction targets. The model includes 14 Baltic Sea marine basins, 14 countries, 117 watersheds and 19,023 10-by-10 km grid squares. A range of policy options are identified which approach the cost-effective reductions in N loadings identified by the constrained optimization model. We argue that our results have important implications for both domestic and international policy design for achieving water quality improvements where non-point pollution is a key stressor of water quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikołaj Czajkowski & Hans E. Andersen & Gite Blicher-Mathiasen & Wiktor Budziński & Katarina Elofsson & Jan Hagemejer & Berit Hasler & Christoph Humborg & James C. R. Smart & Erik Smedberg & Per Ståln, 2020. "Increasing the cost-effectiveness of water quality improvements through pollution abatement target-setting at different spatial scales," Working Papers 2020-02, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
  • Handle: RePEc:war:wpaper:2020-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/index.php/download_file/5367/
    File Function: First version, 2020
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Brady, Mark, 2003. "The relative cost-efficiency of arable nitrogen management in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 53-70, November.
    2. Jordan F. Suter & Christian A. Vossler & Gregory L. Poe & Kathleen Segerson, 2008. "Experiments on Damage-Based Ambient Taxes for Nonpoint Source Polluters," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 86-102.
    3. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    4. Ing-Marie Gren & Paul Jannke & Katarina Elofsson, 1997. "Cost-Effective Nutrient Reductions to the Baltic Sea," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(4), pages 341-362, December.
    5. Markowska, Agnieszka & Zylicz, Tomasz, 1999. "Costing an international public good: the case of the Baltic Sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 301-316, August.
    6. Heini Ahtiainen & Janne Artell & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Berit Hasler & Linus Hasselström & Anni Huhtala & Jürgen Meyerhoff & James C.R. Smart & Tore Söderqvist & Mohammed H. Alemu & Daija Angeli & Kim D, 2014. "Benefits of meeting nutrient reduction targets for the Baltic Sea - a contingent valuation study in the nine coastal states," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 278-305, November.
    7. Segerson, Kathleen, 1988. "Uncertainty and incentives for nonpoint pollution control," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 87-98, March.
    8. Suter, Jordan F. & Vossler, Christian A. & Poe, Gregory L. & Segerson, Kathleen, 2008. "AJAE Appendix: Experiments on Damage-Based Ambient Taxes for Nonpoint Source Polluters," American Journal of Agricultural Economics APPENDICES, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(1), pages 1-14, February.
    9. Aftab, Ashar & Hanley, Nick & Baiocchi, Giovanni, 2010. "Integrated regulation of nonpoint pollution: Combining managerial controls and economic instruments under multiple environmental targets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 24-33, November.
    10. Kaitala, V. & Mäler, K.-G. & Tulkens, H., 1995. "The acid rain game as a resource allocation process with an application to the international cooperation among Finland, Russia and Estonia," LIDAM Reprints CORE 1150, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    11. Aftab, Ashar & Hanley, Nick & Baiocchi, Giovanni, 2017. "Transferability of Policies to Control Agricultural Nonpoint Pollution in Relatively Similar Catchments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 11-21.
    12. Honkatukia, Juha & Ollikainen, Markku, 2001. "Towards Efficient Pollution Control in the Baltic Sea. An anatomy of current failure with suggestions," Discussion Papers 755, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    13. Kaitala, Veijo & Maler, Karl-Goran & Tulkens, Henry, 1995. " The Acid Rain Game as a Resource Allocation Process with an Application to the International Cooperation among Finland, Russia and Estonia," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(2), pages 325-343, June.
    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. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    2. Hamet Sarr & Mohamed Bchir & Francois Cochard & Anne Rozan, 2016. "Nonpoint source pollution: An experimental investigation of the Average Pigouvian Tax," Working Papers hal-01375078, HAL.
    3. Wu, Shang & Palm-Forster, Leah H. & Messer, Kent D., 2021. "Impact of peer comparisons and firm heterogeneity on nonpoint source water pollution: An experimental study," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    4. Kari Hyytiäinen & Lassi Ahlvik & Heini Ahtiainen & Janne Artell & Anni Huhtala & Kim Dahlbo, 2015. "Policy Goals for Improved Water Quality in the Baltic Sea: When do the Benefits Outweigh the Costs?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(2), pages 217-241, June.
    5. Suter, Jordan F. & Vossler, Christian A. & Poe, Gregory L., 2009. "Ambient-based pollution mechanisms: A comparison of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups of emitters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1883-1892, April.
    6. Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2011. "The Economics of Non-Point-Source Pollution," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 3(1), pages 355-373, October.
    7. Hamet SARR & Mohamed Ali BCHIR & François COCHARD & Anne ROZAN, 2016. "Nonpoint source pollution: An experimental investigation of the Average Pigouvian Tax," Working Papers 2016-05, CRESE.
    8. Elofsson, Katarina & Folmer, Henk & Gren, Ing-Marie, 2003. "Management of eutrophicated coastal ecosystems: a synopsis of the literature with emphasis on theory and methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 1-11, November.
    9. Ohnishi, Kazuhiro, 2021. "Pollution, partial privatization and the effect of ambient charges," MPRA Paper 109592, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 04 Sep 2021.
    10. Marc Willinger & Nasreddine Ammar & Ahmed Ennasri, 2014. "Performance of the Ambient Tax: Does the Nature of the Damage Matter?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 59(3), pages 479-502, November.
    11. Rodriguez, Luz A. & Pfaff, Alexander & Velez, Maria Alejandra, 2019. "Graduated stringency within collective incentives for group environmental compliance: Building coordination in field-lab experiments with artisanal gold miners in Colombia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    12. Hansen, Lars Gårn, 2020. "A Montero payment mechanism for regulating non-point pollution emissions," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    13. Banerjee, Simanti & Cason, Timothy N. & de Vries, Frans P. & Hanley, Nick, 2017. "Transaction costs, communication and spatial coordination in Payment for Ecosystem Services Schemes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 68-89.
    14. Ahmad Naimzada & Marina Pireddu, 2021. "Differentiated goods in a dynamic Cournot duopoly with emission charges on outputs," Working Papers 471, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics.
    15. Ohnishi, Kazuhiro, 2021. "The environmental effect of ambient charges in mixed triopoly with diverse firm objectives," MPRA Paper 108521, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Matthew Kotchen & Kathleen Segerson, 2020. "The Use of Group-Level Approaches to Environmental and Natural Resource Policy," NBER Working Papers 27142, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. George HALKOS & Georgia GALANI, 2014. "Cost Effectiveness Analysis in Reducing Nutrient Loading in Baltic and Black Seas A Review," Journal of Advanced Research in Management, ASERS Publishing, vol. 5(1), pages 28-51.
    18. Ing-Marie Gren, 2001. "International Versus National Actions Against Nitrogen Pollution of the Baltic Sea," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(1), pages 41-59, September.
    19. Li, Tongzhe & Fooks, Jacob R. & Messer, Kent D. & Ferraro, Paul J., 2021. "A field experiment to estimate the effects of anchoring and framing on residents’ willingness to purchase water runoff management technologies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    20. Gaston Giordana & Marc Willinger, 2013. "Regulatory instruments for monitoring ambient pollution," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 7, pages 193-232, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cost-effectiveness; nutrient pollution; agricultural run-off; Baltic Sea; eutrophication;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q52 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Pollution Control Adoption and Costs; Distributional Effects; Employment Effects
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling
    • Q18 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Agricultural Policy; Food Policy
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • F53 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Agreements and Observance; International Organizations
    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:war:wpaper:2020-02. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.html .

    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: Marcin Bąba (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.html .

    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.