Adaptation and mitigation strategies for controlling stochastic water pollution: An application to the Baltic Sea

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to analyse and compare the costs of two strategies against transboundary water pollution, mitigation and adaptation measures, which are linked with respect to risk. Chance constraint programming is applied, and the analytical results indicate that total costs for given probabilistic targets are higher (lower) than the costs without risk linkage for negative (positive) covariance between the two classes of measures. A comparison of two international policies—cooperation and national uniform standards—indicates that cleaning under non-cooperative uniform national standards can be increased when considering stochastic pollution and linkage in risk between mitigation and adaptation measures. The empirical application to the Baltic Sea shows that the risk linkage can increase or decrease minimum costs for a given probabilistic target under cooperative solutions by 17 or 13%, and decrease the cost under national uniform policy for a given overall probabilistic target by approximately 10%.

[1]  R. Hjorth.  Building international institutions for environmental protection : The case of Baltic Sea environmental cooperation , 1992 .

[2]  R. Tol,et al.  Weathering Climate Change - Some Simple Rules to Guide Adaptation Decisions , 1999 .

[3]  Sven Erik Jørgensen,et al.  Ecological engineering : an introduction to ecotechnology , 1989 .

[4]  Katarina Elofsson.  Cost-effective reductions of stochastic agricultural loads to the Baltic Sea , 2003 .

[5]  S. Seitzinger,et al.  EUTROPHICATION OF SWEDISH SEAS , 2006 .

[6]  J. Laffont,et al.  A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation , 1993 .

[7]  Cost effective policies for alternative distributions of stochastic water pollution. , 2002, Journal of environmental management.

[8]  Response to ‘Discussion of the paper “Cost effective policies for alternative distributions of stochastic water pollution” by Gren, Destouni and Tempone’ by Kampas and Adamidis , 2005 .

[9]  W. Mitsch,et al.  The role of wetlands in the control of nutrients with a case study of western Lake Erie. , 1989 .

[10]  S. Barrett.  The theory of international environmental agreements , 2005 .

[11]  William T. McSweeny,et al.  Probabilistic Cost Effectiveness in Agricultural Nonpoint Pollution Control , 1990, Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics.

[12]  P. Portney.  The theory of environmental policy , 1976 .

[13]  The allocative efficiency implications of water pollution abatement cost comparisons , 1990 .

[14]  I. Gren,et al.  SPECIAL ISSUE THE VALUES OF WETLANDS: LANDSCAPE AND INSTITUTIONAL PERSPECTIVES Economic criteria for using wetlands as nitrogen sinks under uncertainty , 2000 .

[15]  Berit Arheimer,et al.  Climate change impact on water quality: model results from southern Sweden. , 2005, Ambio.

[16]  Quirino Paris,et al.  A Programming Model with Stochastic Technology and Prices: The Case of Australian Agriculture , 1985 .

[17]  Tore Söderqvist,et al.  Why Give up Money for the Baltic Sea? – Motives for People's Willingness (or Reluctance) to Pay , 1998 .

[18]  R. Tol.  ADAPTATION AND MITIGATION: TRADE-OFFS IN SUBSTANCE AND METHODS , 2005 .

[19]  David Kendrick,et al.  GAMS, a user's guide , 1988, SGNM.

[20]  O. Byström,et al.  The nitrogen abatement cost in wetlands , 1998 .

[21]  Katarina Elofsson.  Cost-Effective Control of Interdependent Water Pollutants , 2006, Environmental management.

[22]  Charles Perrings,et al.  Mitigation and adaptation strategies for the control of biological invasions , 2005 .

[23]  Rodney Turner,et al.  Science and Integrated Coastal Management , 2001 .

[24]  Frederic P. Miller,et al.  IPCC fourth assessment report , 2009 .

[25]  Hans W. Paerl,et al.  Denitrification in a constructed wetland receiving agricultural runoff , 2009, Wetlands.

[26]  T. Żylicz,et al.  Costing an international public good: the case of the Baltic Sea , 1999 .

[27]  Ing-Marie Gren,et al.  The Value of Investing in Wetlands for Nitrogen Abatement , 1995 .

[28]  A. Charnes,et al.  Deterministic Equivalents for Optimizing and Satisficing under Chance Constraints , 1963 .

[29]  J. Gan,et al.  Clean Coastal Waters , 2002 .

[30]  A. Stigebrandt,et al.  Giving Advice on Cost Effective Measures for a Cleaner Baltic Sea: A Challenge for Science , 2001, Ambio.

[31]  R. Hart.  Dynamic pollution control—time lags and optimal restoration of marine ecosystems , 2003 .

[32]  John R. Birge,et al.  Introduction to Stochastic Programming , 1997 .

[33]  R. Elmgren.  Understanding human impact on the Baltic ecosystem: changing views in recent decades. , 2001 .

[34]  J. Walter Milon,et al.  OPTIMIZING NONPOINT SOURCE CONTROLS IN WATER QUALITY REGULATION , 1987 .

[35]  R. Mendelsohn.  Efficient Adaptation to Climate Change , 2000 .

[36]  R. Ferm.  Integrated management of the Baltic Sea , 1991 .

[37]  J. Shogren,et al.  Linking Adaptation and Mitigation in Climate Change Policy , 2000 .

[38]  I. Bateman,et al.  Managing nutrient fluxes and pollution in the Baltic: An interdisciplinary simulation study , 1999 .

[39]  Konstantinos Adamidis,et al.  Discussion of the paper "Cost effective policies for alternative distributions of stochastic water pollution" by Gren, Destouni and Tempone. , 2005, Journal of environmental management.

[40]  Timothy C. Haab,et al.  Willingness to pay for quality improvements: should revealed and stated preference data be combined? , 1997 .

[41]  I. Gren.  International Versus National Actions Against Nitrogen Pollution of the Baltic Sea , 2001 .