IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/masfgc/v28y2023i1d10.1007_s11027-006-2948-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ancillary Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation in Russia

Author

Listed:
  • S. Avaliany

    (Environmental Defense)

  • D. Dudek

    (Environmental Defense)

  • A. Golub

    (Environmental Defense)

  • E. Strukova

    (Environmental Defense)

Abstract

This paper demonstrates the strong link between the implementation of a GHG emission mitigation policy and the reduction of human health risk related to air pollution in Russia. The human health risk analysis method was introduced in Russia in the late 1990s. After a few pilot studies, this method has been in studies in several Russian cities with high populations and high air pollution. These studies demonstrate that among the hundreds of pollutants controlled by Russian law, a handful are responsible for up to 90% of human health risk from air pollution (PM$_{10}$ and SO$_{2}$ contribute the most). Fossil fuel combustion is the main source of the aforementioned conventional pollutants. This paper provides an overview of local ancillary benefits studies in selected Russian cities. The countrywide energy study presented in this paper proves that reduction of GHG emissions in the power generation sector would result in the reduction of these conventional pollutants in all regions. A major challenge for Russia in this process is a potential increase of the share of coal in the fuel mix. Such a change would result in the additional loss of 118,000 years of life countrywide. In the Central and Volgo-Viatsky regions additional mortality could increase by more than 30%. As a result of a GHG mitigation policy that avoided an increase in the coal share of the fuel mix could produce ancillary benefits in 2010 around $60 per ton of CO2 emission reduction in power sector alone.

Suggested Citation

  • S. Avaliany & D. Dudek & A. Golub & E. Strukova, 2023. "Ancillary Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation in Russia," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 1-18, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:masfgc:v:28:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s11027-006-2948-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11027-006-2948-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11027-006-2948-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11027-006-2948-4?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. D.G. Victor & N. Nakicenovic & N. Victor, 1998. "The Kyoto Protocol Carbon Bubble: Implications for Russia, Ukraine, and Emission Trading," Working Papers ir98094, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    2. A. Markandya & A. Golub & E. Strukova, 2003. "The influence of climate change considerations on energy policy: the case of Russia," International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(3), pages 324-338.
    3. Anne Rozan, 2004. "Benefit Transfer : A Comparison of WTP for Air Quality between France and Germany," Post-Print hal-00278980, HAL.
    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. Spash, Clive L. & Vatn, Arild, 2006. "Transferring environmental value estimates: Issues and alternatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 379-388, December.
    2. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Stanley, Tom D., 2006. "Measurement, generalization, and publication: Sources of error in benefit transfers and their management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 372-378, December.
    3. Black, Andrew & Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nick & Tinch, Dugald & Aftab, Ashar & Bergmann, E. Ariel, 2006. "Transferring the Benefits of Water Quality Enhancements in Small Catchments," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25790, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Brander, Luke M. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Kuik, Onno & Markandya, Anil & Nunes, Paulo A.L.D. & Schaafsma, Marije & Wagtendonk, Alfred, 2010. "Scaling up Ecosystem Services Values: Methodology, Applicability and a Case Study," Sustainable Development Papers 60689, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    5. Stephen Hynes & Daniel Norton & Nick Hanley, 2013. "Adjusting for Cultural Differences in International Benefit Transfer," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(4), pages 499-519, December.
    6. Pittel, Karen & Rübbelke, Dirk T.G., 2008. "Climate policy and ancillary benefits: A survey and integration into the modelling of international negotiations on climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 210-220, December.
    7. Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley, 2008. "How Can We Reduce the Errors from Benefits Transfer? An Investigation Using the Choice Experiment Method," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 128-147.
    8. Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nick, 2007. "What Determines Prediction Errors In "Benefits Transfer" Models?," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7967, Agricultural Economics Society.
    9. D. Dudek & A. Golub & E. Strukova, 2004. "Economics of the Kyoto Protocol for Russia," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(2), pages 129-142, June.
    10. Genty, Aurélien, 2005. "Du concept à la fiabilité de la méthode du transfert en économie de l’environnement : un état de l’art," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 77.
    11. Colombo, Sergio & Calatrava-Requena, Javier & Conzalex-Roa, M.C., 2005. "Testing Choice Experiment for Benefit Transfer," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24747, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Martini, Chiara & Tiezzi, Silvia, 2014. "Is the environment a luxury? An empirical investigation using revealed preferences and household production," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 147-167.
    13. Erda Wang & Ling Zhao & Ying Zhou & Bertis B. Little, 2013. "Valuing Outdoor Recreation Activities Using a Meta-Analysis Model in China: An Empirical Study," Tourism Economics, , vol. 19(2), pages 415-432, April.
    14. Xin Liu & Kai W. Wirtz, 2006. "Total oil spill costs and compensations," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(1), pages 49-60, February.
    15. Joko Mariyono, 2014. "Dead weight loss associated with economic efficiency use of pesticides in Indonesian rice production," Economic Journal of Emerging Markets, Universitas Islam Indonesia, vol. 6(2), pages 69-84, April.
    16. Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Romain Craste & Bengt Kriström & Pere Riera, 2014. "Non-market valuation in France: An overview of the research activity," Working Papers hal-01087365, HAL.
    17. Björklund, Gunilla & Swärdh, Jan-Erik, 2017. "Estimating policy values for in-vehicle comfort and crowding reduction in local public transport☆," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 453-472.
    18. Christopher N. MacCracken & James A. Edmonds & Son H. Kim & Ronald D. Sands, 1999. "The Economics of the Kyoto Protocol," The Energy Journal, , vol. 20(1_suppl), pages 25-71, June.
    19. Kiula, Olga & Markandya, Anil & Ščasný, Milan & Menkyna Tsuchimoto, Fusako, 2014. "The Economic and Environmental Effects of Taxing Air Pollutants and CO2: Lessons from a Study of the Czech Republic," MPRA Paper 66599, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Oct 2015.
    20. Björklund, Gunilla & Swärdh, Jan-Erik, 2015. "Valuing in-vehicle comfort and crowding reduction in public transport," Working papers in Transport Economics 2015:12, CTS - Centre for Transport Studies Stockholm (KTH and VTI).

    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:spr:masfgc:v:28:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s11027-006-2948-4. 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.