IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v14y1999i3p333-351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost Benefit Analysis of European Air Quality Targets for Sulphur Dioxide, Nitrogen Dioxide and Fine and Suspended Particulate Matter in Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Xander Olsthoorn
  • Markus Amann
  • Alena Bartonova
  • Jocelyne Clench-Aas
  • Janusz Cofala
  • Kees Dorland
  • Cristina Guerreiro
  • Jan Henriksen
  • Huib Jansen
  • Steinar Larssen

Abstract

The European Commission has proposed air quality standards for NO 2 , SO 2 and PM 10 to be in force by 2010. The present paper presents a study that gauged their costs and benefits. An analysis of the expected emissions for 2010 (reference emission scenario), using simplified air quality models, showed that non-compliance with these standards will occur in cities only, not in rural areas. Most compliance problems are expected for PM 10 , least for SO 2 . Central estimates of the costs to meet standards range from 21 MECU (SO 2 ), to 79 MECU (NO 2 ) to 87--225 MECU (PM 10 ). The estimated benefits are 83--3783 MECU (SO 2 ), 408--5900 MECU (NO 2 ), and 5007--51247 MECU (PM 10 ). Uncertainties are high, due to errors and incertitude in various steps of the methodology, mainly the estimation of the human health effects, in particular effects on mortality, and in the valuation of a statistical life. In the case of PM 10 , additional uncertainty results from the small size of the air quality database. Notwithstanding the uncertainties, the indications are that the benefits exceed the costs. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Suggested Citation

  • Xander Olsthoorn & Markus Amann & Alena Bartonova & Jocelyne Clench-Aas & Janusz Cofala & Kees Dorland & Cristina Guerreiro & Jan Henriksen & Huib Jansen & Steinar Larssen, 1999. "Cost Benefit Analysis of European Air Quality Targets for Sulphur Dioxide, Nitrogen Dioxide and Fine and Suspended Particulate Matter in Cities," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(3), pages 333-351, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:14:y:1999:i:3:p:333-351
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1008362631700
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1008362631700
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1008362631700?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. STÅLE Navrud & GERALD Pruckner, 1997. "Environmental Valuation – To Use or Not to Use? A Comparative Study of the United States and Europe," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, July.
    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. Karen Pittel & Dirk T.G. Rübbelke, 2005. "Internationale Klimaschutzverhandlungen und sekundäre Nutzen der Klimapolitik," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 6(3), pages 369-383, August.
    2. Krewitt, Wolfram, 2002. "External costs of energy--do the answers match the questions?: Looking back at 10 years of ExternE," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(10), pages 839-848, August.
    3. Maddison, David, 2005. "Air pollution and hospital admissions: an ARMAX modelling approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 116-131, January.
    4. Alberto Longo & David Hoyos & Anil Markandya, 2012. "Willingness to Pay for Ancillary Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 119-140, January.
    5. Nam, Kyung-Min & Selin, Noelle E. & Reilly, John M. & Paltsev, Sergey, 2010. "Measuring welfare loss caused by air pollution in Europe: A CGE analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5059-5071, September.
    6. Maddison, David, 2006. "Dose response functions and the harvesting effect," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 313-332, November.
    7. Markandya Anil & Rübbelke Dirk T.G., 2004. "Ancillary Benefits of Climate Policy / Sekundäre Nutzen der Klimapolitik," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 224(4), pages 488-503, August.

    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. Hermine Vedogbeton & Robert J. Johnston, 2020. "Commodity Consistent Meta-Analysis of Wetland Values: An Illustration for Coastal Marsh Habitat," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(4), pages 835-865, April.
    2. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2011. "Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: A Review and Comparison of Survey Modes," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(4), pages 309-351, September.
    3. Julien Milanesi, 2011. "Une histoire de la méthode d'évaluation contingente," Post-Print hal-01531153, HAL.
    4. repec:bla:perwir:v:1:y:2000:i:1:p:92-114 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Lindhjem, Henrik & Navrud, Ståle, 2008. "Internet CV surveys – a cheap, fast way to get large samples of biased values?," MPRA Paper 11471, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Winkler, Ralph, 2006. "Valuation of ecosystem goods and services: Part 1: An integrated dynamic approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 82-93, August.
    7. Nthambi, Mary & Wätzold, Frank & Markova-Nenova, Nonka, 2018. "Quantifying benefit losses from poor governance of climate change adaptation projects: A discrete choice experiment with farmers in Kenya," MPRA Paper 94678, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Arfini, Filippo, 1999. "The value of typical products : the case of Prosciutto di Parma and Parmigiano Reggiano cheese," 67th Seminar, October 28-30, 1999, LeMans, France 241032, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Vondolia, Godwin K. & Navrud, Ståle, 2019. "Are non-monetary payment modes more uncertain for stated preference elicitation in developing countries?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 73-87.
    10. Marjainé, Szerényi Zsuzsanna, 2001. "A természeti erőforrások pénzbeli értékelése [Monetary valuation of natural resources]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 114-129.
    11. Londoño, Luz M. & Johnston, Robert J., 2012. "Enhancing the reliability of benefit transfer over heterogeneous sites: A meta-analysis of international coral reef values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 80-89.
    12. Börger, Tobias & Beaumont, Nicola J. & Pendleton, Linwood & Boyle, Kevin J. & Cooper, Philip & Fletcher, Stephen & Haab, Tim & Hanemann, Michael & Hooper, Tara L. & Hussain, S. Salman & Portela, Rosim, 2014. "Incorporating ecosystem services in marine planning: The role of valuation," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 161-170.
    13. Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2004. "What's it worth? An examination of historical trends and future directions in environmental valuation," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), pages 419-443, September.
    14. M. Morrison & R. Blamey & J. Bennett, 2000. "Minimising Payment Vehicle Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(4), pages 407-422, August.
    15. Tyrvainen, Liisa & Miettinen, Antti, 2000. "Property Prices and Urban Forest Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 205-223, March.
    16. Utpal Kumar De & Amrita Devi, 2011. "Valuing Recreational and Conservational Benefits of a Natural Tourist Site: Case of Cherrapunjee," Journal of Quantitative Economics, The Indian Econometric Society, vol. 9(2), pages 154-172, July.
    17. Richard Yao & Pamela Kaval, 2008. "Valuing Biodiversity Enhancement in New Zealand," Working Papers in Economics 08/07, University of Waikato.
    18. Robert J. Johnston & Randall S. Rosenberger, 2010. "Methods, Trends And Controversies In Contemporary Benefit Transfer," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 479-510, July.
    19. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Maria L. Loureiro & Ståle Navrud & John Rolfe, 2021. "Guidance to Enhance the Validity and Credibility of Environmental Benefit Transfers," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 575-624, July.
    20. Michael Ahlheim & Ulrike Lehr, 2002. "Nutzentransfer: Das Sparmodell der Umweltbewertung," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 3(1), pages 85-104, 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:kap:enreec:v:14:y:1999:i:3:p:333-351. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.