IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v52y2017icp266-272.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing environmental impacts of mercury emissions from gold mining: Dollar per troy ounce estimates for twelve open-pit, small-scale, and artisanal mining sites

Author

Listed:
  • Gulley, Andrew L.

Abstract

Mercury is a toxic pollutant that distributes globally once emitted into the air. Mercury emission is the primary environmental impact of small-scale and artisanal gold mining, which are responsible for nearly half of anthropogenic mercury emissions each year. Considering that small-scale, artisanal, and formal gold mining are linked by the global gold price, this analysis evaluates the question - In dollar terms, what is the difference in mercury emission impact, per ounce of gold production, from these three forms of mining? To answer this question, a calibrated benefit transfer approach is employed to apply environmental valuation literature estimates (of mercury's impact on global earnings) to twelve gold mining sites around the world. The results indicate a mean impact range of <$1–$5 for two formally operated open-pit mines in Nevada, $200–$600 for small-scale and artisanal sites that concentrate gold ore prior to mercury amalgamation, and $500–$3200 for small-scale and artisanal sites that amalgamate all of the ore. Given the vast disparity between impact per ounce estimates, even small leakages in gold production from formal to informal operations could increase the net environmental impact of global gold production. Future research ought to estimate this leakage rate by modeling small-scale and artisanal miners’ price elasticity of supply.

Suggested Citation

  • Gulley, Andrew L., 2017. "Valuing environmental impacts of mercury emissions from gold mining: Dollar per troy ounce estimates for twelve open-pit, small-scale, and artisanal mining sites," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 266-272.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:52:y:2017:i:c:p:266-272
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2017.03.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420716301337
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2017.03.009?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Balistreri, Edward J. & Worley, Christopher M., 2009. "Mercury: The good, the bad, and the export ban," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 195-204, December.
    2. Sergey V. Paltsev, 2001. "The Kyoto Protocol: Regional and Sectoral Contributions to the Carbon Leakage," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 4), pages 53-80.
    3. Wilson, Matthew A. & Hoehn, John P., 2006. "Valuing environmental goods and services using benefit transfer: The state-of-the art and science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 335-342, December.
    4. Babiker, Mustafa H., 2005. "Climate change policy, market structure, and carbon leakage," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 421-445, 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. Gasparinnetti, Pedro & Bakker, Leonardo Barcellos & Queiroz, Julia Mello & Vilela, Thais, 2024. "Economic valuation of artisanal small-scale gold mining impacts: A framework for value transfer application," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    2. Moses Nyakuwanika & Huibrecht Margaretha van der Poll & John Andrew van der Poll, 2021. "A Conceptual Framework for Greener Goldmining through Environmental Management Accounting Practices (EMAPs): The Case of Zimbabwe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-26, September.
    3. Queiroz, Julia & Gasparinetti, Pedro & Bakker, Leonardo B. & Lobo, Felipe & Nagel, Gustavo, 2022. "Socioeconomic cost of dredge boat gold mining in the Tapajós basin, eastern Amazon," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    4. Johan Danu Prasetya & Dian Hudawan Santoso & Eni Muryani & Tyka Ramadhamayanti & Bandhar Aji Sukma Yudha, 2021. "Carrying Capacity Of Mercury Pollution To Rivers In The Gold Mining Area Of Pancurendang Village, Banyumas," Journal Clean WAS (JCleanWAS), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 5(1), pages 1-4, March.
    5. Leonardo Barcellos de Bakker & Pedro Gasparinetti & Júlia Mello de Queiroz & Ana Claudia Santiago de Vasconcellos, 2021. "Economic Impacts on Human Health Resulting from the Use of Mercury in the Illegal Gold Mining in the Brazilian Amazon: A Methodological Assessment," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-26, November.
    6. Konstantinos Komnitsas, 2020. "Social License to Operate in Mining: Present Views and Future Trends," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-15, June.

    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. Benjamin Jones & Michael Keen & Jon Strand, 2013. "Fiscal implications of climate change," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(1), pages 29-70, February.
    2. Gabriela Michalek & Reimund Schwarze, 2015. "Carbon leakage: pollution, trade or politics?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(6), pages 1471-1492, December.
    3. repec:old:wpaper:340 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Dieter Helm & Cameron Hepburn & Giovanni Ruta, 2012. "Trade, climate change, and the political game theory of border carbon adjustments," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(2), pages 368-394, SUMMER.
    5. Sato, Misato & Dechezleprêtre, Antoine, 2015. "Asymmetric industrial energy prices and international trade," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(S1), pages 130-141.
    6. Antimiani, Alessandro & Costantini, Valeria & Martini, Chiara & Salvatici, Luca & Tommasino, Maria Cristina, 2011. "Cooperative and non-cooperative solutions to carbon leakage," Conference papers 332096, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    7. Lewis C. King & Jeroen C. J. M. Bergh, 2021. "Potential carbon leakage under the Paris Agreement," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(3), pages 1-19, April.
    8. Barker, Terry & Junankar, Sudhir & Pollitt, Hector & Summerton, Philip, 2007. "Carbon leakage from unilateral Environmental Tax Reforms in Europe, 1995-2005," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 6281-6292, December.
    9. Y.-H. Henry Chen & Hossein Hosseini Jebeli & Craig Johnston & Sergey Paltsev & Marie-Christine Tremblay, 2023. "An Investigation into the Effects of Border Carbon Adjustments on the Canadian Economy," Staff Working Papers 23-27, Bank of Canada.
    10. Birgit Bednar-Friedl & Veronika Kulmer & Thomas Schinko, 2012. "The effectiveness of anti-leakage policies in the European Union: results for Austria," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(2), pages 233-260, May.
    11. Christoph Böhringer & Jared C. Carbone & Thomas F. Rutherford, 2018. "Embodied Carbon Tariffs," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(1), pages 183-210, January.
    12. Holladay, J. Scott & Mohsin, Mohammed & Pradhan, Shreekar, 2018. "Emissions leakage, environmental policy and trade frictions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 95-113.
    13. Thomas Eichner & Rüdiger Pethig, 2011. "Carbon Leakage, The Green Paradox, And Perfect Future Markets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(3), pages 767-805, August.
    14. Onno Kuik, 2014. "REDD+ and international leakage via food and timber markets: a CGE analysis," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 641-655, August.
    15. Birgit Bednar-Friedl & Veronika Kulmer & Thomas Schinko, 2011. "ETCLIP – The Challenge of the European Carbon Market: Emission Trading, Carbon Leakage and Instruments to Stabilise the CO2 Price. Effects of Different EU Climate Policy Scenarios on International Tra," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 43107, April.
    16. Reyer Gerlagh & Onno Kuik, 2007. "Carbon Leakage with International Technology Spillovers," Working Papers 2007.33, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    17. Zhang, Yang & Hu, Shan & Yan, Da & Jiang, Yi, 2023. "Proposing a carbon emission responsibility allocation method with benchmark approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    18. Elliott, Joshua & Fullerton, Don, 2014. "Can a unilateral carbon tax reduce emissions elsewhere?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 6-21.
    19. Paolo Giorgio Garella & Maria Teresa Trentinaglia, 2019. "Carbon Tax, Emission Standards, and Carbon Leak Under Price Competition," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(4), pages 941-964, April.
    20. Pan, Wenqi & Kim, Man-Keun & Ning, Zhuo & Yang, Hongqiang, 2020. "Carbon leakage in energy/forest sectors and climate policy implications using meta-analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    21. Masedi Sesele, 2024. "The Impact of South Africa’s Carbon Tax Policy on Carbon Leakages on its Top Five African Trading Partners," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 8(2), pages 1960-1971, February.

    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:eee:jrpoli:v:52:y:2017:i:c:p:266-272. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

    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.