IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/umcicp/6656.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What are the Economic Health Costs of Non-Action in Controlling Toxic Water Pollution?

Author

Listed:
  • Easter, K. William
  • Konishi, Yoshifumi
  • Raggi, Meri
  • Viaggi, Davide

Abstract

This paper identifies information that may be important in determining the benefits of preventing toxic water contamination (or equivalently cost of nonaction) when a given toxification occurs. It attempts to identify information and behavior issues that need to be considered when we estimate benefits and weigh them against the costs of removing toxins. This paper also provides “scenarios” for three toxic pollutants that are found in water bodies. We make use of two alternatives--one for developing countries and the other for developed countries--to demonstrate, with specific examples of arsenic, mercury and Atrazine, how benefit estimates and control policies vary with different assumptions concerning behavior/information and type of chemical contamination. A comparison with EU evaluation experience is also carried out.

Suggested Citation

  • Easter, K. William & Konishi, Yoshifumi & Raggi, Meri & Viaggi, Davide, 2006. "What are the Economic Health Costs of Non-Action in Controlling Toxic Water Pollution?," Conference Papers 6656, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:umcicp:6656
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.6656
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/6656/files/cp06ea01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.6656?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sanchez-Choliz, Julio & Duarte, Rosa, 2005. "Water pollution in the Spanish economy: analysis of sensitivity to production and environmental constraints," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 325-338, May.
    2. Hasler, Berit & Lundhede, Thomas, 2005. "Are Agricultural Measures for Groundwater Protection Beneficial When Compared to Purification of Polluted Groundwater?," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24587, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Bryan J. Hubbell & Jeffrey L. Jordan, 2000. "Joint Production and Averting Expenditure Measures of Willingness to Pay: Do Water Expenditures Really Measure Avoidance Costs?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 427-437.
    4. Daniel J. Phaneuf & Catherine L. Kling & Joseph A. Herriges, 2000. "Estimation and Welfare Calculations in a Generalized Corner Solution Model with an Application to Recreation Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 83-92, February.
    5. Charles W. Abdalla, 1994. "Groundwater Values from Avoidance Cost Studies: Implications for Policy and Future Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1062-1067.
    6. Mark Montgomery & Michael Needelman, 1997. "The Welfare Effects of Toxic Contamination in Freshwater Fish," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 211-223.
    7. Seung-Jun Kwak & Clifford Russell, 1994. "Contingent valuation in Korean environmental planning: A pilot application to the protection of drinking water quality in Seoul," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(5), pages 511-526, October.
    8. Philippe Le Goffe, 1995. "The benefits of improvements in coastal water quality : a contingent approach," Post-Print hal-02364342, HAL.
    9. Anna Alberini & Alan Krupnick, 2000. "Cost-of-Illness and Willingness-to-Pay Estimates of the Benefits of Improved Air Quality: Evidence from Taiwan," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 37-53.
    10. Alberini, Anna & Zanatta, Valentina & Rosato, Paolo, 2007. "Combining actual and contingent behavior to estimate the value of sports fishing in the Lagoon of Venice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 530-541, March.
    11. Robert L. Raucher, 1986. "The Benefits and Costs of Policies Related to Groundwater Contamination," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(1), pages 33-45.
    12. Timothy J. Bartik, 2008. "Evaluating the Benefits of Non-marginal Reductions in Pollution Using Information on Defensive Expenditures," Book chapters authored by Upjohn Institute researchers, in: Joseph Herriges & Catherine L. Kling (ed.),Revealed Preference Approaches to Environmental Valuation, volume 0, pages 459-475, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
    13. Hanley, Nick, 1990. "The Economics of Nitrate Pollution," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 17(2), pages 129-151.
    14. Dickie, Mark & Gerking, Shelby, 1996. "Formation of Risk Beliefs, Joint Production and Willingness to Pay to Avoid Skin Cancer," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(3), pages 451-463, August.
    15. Harrington, Winston & Krupnick, Alan J. & Spofford, Walter Jr., 1989. "The economic losses of a waterborne disease outbreak," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 116-137, January.
    16. Brouwer, Roy, 2006. "Do stated preference methods stand the test of time? A test of the stability of contingent values and models for health risks when facing an extreme event," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 399-406, December.
    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. Easter, K. William & Konishi, Yoshifumi, 2006. "Estimating Economic Health Costs of Not Controlling Toxic Water Pollution," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25768, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Bruno Lanz, 2015. "Avertive expenditures, endogenous quality perception, and the demand for public goods: An instrumental variable approach," CIES Research Paper series 36-2015, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    3. John C. Whitehead & George Van Houtven, "undated". "Methods for Valuing the Benefits of the Safe Drinking Water Act: Review and Assessment," Working Papers 9705, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    4. Konishi, Yoshifumi & Coggins, Jay S., 2006. "Value of Information and Averting Behavior: The Case of Toxic Water Contamination," 2006 Annual meeting, July 23-26, Long Beach, CA 21395, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    5. repec:gii:ciesrp:cies_rp_36rev is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Lanz, Bruno & Provins, Allan, 2017. "Using averting expenditures to estimate the demand for public goods: Combining objective and perceived quality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 20-35.
    7. Leslie Richardson & John B. Loomis & Patricia A. Champ, 2013. "Valuing Morbidity from Wildfire Smoke Exposure: A Comparison of Revealed and Stated Preference Techniques," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(1), pages 76-100.
    8. John C. Whitehead & Thomas J. Hoban & George Van Houtven, 1999. "Averting Behavior and Drinking Water Quality," Working Papers 9905, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    9. Tenwalde, Tracy & Jones, Eugene & Hitzhusen, Frederick J., 2005. "An Economic Analysis of Consumer Expenditures for Safe Drinking Water: Addressing Nitrogen Risk with an Averting Cost Approach," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19431, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    10. Patrick Lloyd-Smith & Craig Schram & Wiktor Adamowicz & Diane Dupont, 2018. "Endogeneity of Risk Perceptions in Averting Behavior Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(2), pages 217-246, February.
    11. N. Traoré & N. Amara & R. Landry, 1999. "Households’ Response to Groundwater Quality Degradation Results from a Household Survey in Quebec," Post-Print hal-01200915, HAL.
    12. Anna Alberini, 2017. "Measuring the economic value of the effects of chemicals on ecological systems and human health," OECD Environment Working Papers 116, OECD Publishing.
    13. Cropper, Maureen L., 2000. "Has Economic Research Answered the Needs of Environmental Policy?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 328-350, May.
    14. Jason F. Shogren & Tommy Stamland, 2005. "Self-Protection and Value of Statistical Life Estimation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(1).
    15. Konishi, Yoshifumi & Coggins, Jay S., 2008. "Environmental risk and welfare valuation under imperfect information," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 150-169, May.
    16. Marta Suárez-Varela & Ariel Dinar, 2020. "The Role of Curtailment Versus Efficiency on Spillovers Among Pro-Environmental Behaviors: Evidence from Two Towns in Granada, Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-24, January.
    17. Konishi, Yoshifumi & Adachi, Kenji, 2011. "A framework for estimating willingness-to-pay to avoid endogenous environmental risks," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 130-154, January.
    18. Traoré, Namatié & Amara, Nabil & Landry, Réjean, 1999. "Households’ Response to Groundwater Quality Degradation Results from a Household Survey in Quebec," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 52.
    19. Zawojska, Ewa & Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Giergiczny, Marek, 2018. "Valuing tap water quality improvements using stated preference methods. Does the number of discrete choice options matter?," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274019, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    20. Namatié Traoré & Nabil Amara & Réjean Landry, 1999. "Households’ Response to Groundwater Quality Degradation Results from a Household Survey in Quebec," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 52, pages 5-22.
    21. Bernal García, Juan Jesús & Martínez Maria-Dolores, Soledad María & Sánchez García, Juan Francisco, 2006. "Study of the potentiality of the electronic commerce in the Region of Murcia by means of a model of logistic regression/Estudio de la Potencialidad del Comercio Electrónico en la Región de Murcia medi," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 24, pages 499-529, Abril.

    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:umcicp:6656. 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/ciumnus.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.