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

K. Easter, Yoshifumi Konishi, Meri Raggi and Davide Viaggi

No 6656, Conference Papers from University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy

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.

Keywords: Environmental Economics and Policy; Resource /Energy Economics and Policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 37
Date: 2006-08
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/6656/files/cp06ea01.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
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:ags:umcicp:6656

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.6656

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Conference Papers from University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().