Prevention versus Treatment under Precautionary Regulation: A Case Study of Groundwater Contamination under Uncertainty
Erik Lichtenberg and
Tony M. Penn
American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2003, vol. 85, issue 1, 44-58
Abstract:
Policy discussions on agricultural pollution problems characterize prevention as more cost effective and precautionary than ex post treatment. We derive conditions under which treatment alone is more cost effective in situations involving multiple sources of emissions, multiple sites affected, and a commonly used precautionary approach to uncertainty. We also show that a greater degree of precaution can result in less reliance on prevention. An empirical case study indicates that treatment alone is the most cost-effective means of dealing with nitrate in most Maryland community water system wells. The use of leaching prevention measures is restricted to the most intensive poultry producing areas. The incremental cost of precaution is substantial. Copyright 2003, Oxford University Press.
Date: 2003
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)
Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/1467-8276.t01-2-00102 (application/pdf)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
Related works:
Working Paper: PREVENTION VERSUS TREATMENT UNDER PRECAUTIONARY REGULATION: A CASE STUDY OF GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION UNDER UNCERTAINTY (2001) 
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:85:y:2003:i:1:p:44-58
Access Statistics for this article
American Journal of Agricultural Economics is currently edited by Madhu Khanna, Brian E. Roe, James Vercammen and JunJie Wu
More articles in American Journal of Agricultural Economics from Agricultural and Applied Economics Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Oxford University Press ().