PREVENTION VERSUS TREATMENT UNDER PRECAUTIONARY REGULATION: A CASE STUDY OF GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION UNDER UNCERTAINTY

Erik Lichtenberg and Tony M. Penn

No 28584, Working Papers from University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics

Abstract: Policy discussions of 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.

Keywords: Environmental; Economics; and; Policy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 38
Date: 2001
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/28584/files/wp00-12a.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Journal Article: Prevention versus Treatment under Precautionary Regulation: A Case Study of Groundwater Contamination under Uncertainty (2003)
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:umdrwp:28584

DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.28584

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by AgEcon Search ().