Policy Goals for Improved Water Quality in the Baltic Sea: When do the Benefits Outweigh the Costs?

Hyytiäinen, Kari; Ahlvik, Lassi; Ahtiainen, Heini; Artell, Janne; Huhtala, Anni; Dahlbo, Kim

doi:10.1007/s10640-014-9790-z

Cited by 33 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The largest body of nitrogen-related economic literature is concerned with government policies for reducing nitrogen pollution. A number of studies have quantified in monetary terms the benefits of policies to reduce nitrogen pollution (Morgan and Owens 2001;Poor et al 2007) or undertaken Benefit: Cost Analysis of pollution-reduction programs (Hyytiäinen et al 2015).…”

Section: Policy-level Economicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic perspectives on nitrogen in farming systems: managing trade-offs between production, risk and the environment

Pannell¹

2017

Soil Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Economic insights are crucial for making sound decisions about farm-level management of nitrogen and also about regional or national policy such as for water pollution. In the present review, key insights are presented from a large and diverse literature on the economics of nitrogen in agriculture and the economics of the consequences of nitrogen fertilisation. Issues covered include (1) the economics of nitrogen as an input to production, (2) nitrogen and economic risk at the farm level, (3) the economics of nitrogen fixation by legumes, (4) the existence of flat payoff functions, which often allow wide flexibility in decisions about nitrogen fertiliser rates, (5) explanations for over-application of nitrogen fertilisers by some farmers, and (6) the economics of nitrogen pollution at both the farm level and the policy level. Economics helps to explain farmer behaviour and to design strategies and policies that are more beneficial and more likely to be adopted and successfully implemented.

show abstract

Section: Policy-level Economicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic perspectives on nitrogen in farming systems: managing trade-offs between production, risk and the environment

Pannell¹

2017

Soil Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, the studied setup is not a cost-effective measure for reducing N and P, if one disregards sales revenue. Marginal costs are 800 €/kg N and 5 400 €/kg P, which is higher than the marginal cost of most land-based measures 23 . However, taking revenue into account, the marginal cost for N and P reductions using seaweed cultivation is negative, making this measure highly cost-effective.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 78%

Socioeconomic prospects of a seaweed bioeconomy in Sweden

Hasselström

Thomas

Nordström

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seaweed cultivation is a large industry worldwide, but production in Europe is small compared to production in Asian countries. In the EU, the motivations for seaweed farming may be seen from two perspectives; one being economic growth through biomass production and the other being the provisioning of ecosystem services such as mitigating eutrophication. In this paper, we assess the economic potential of large-scale cultivation of kelp, Saccharina latissima, along the Swedish west coast, including the value of externalities. The findings suggest that seaweed farming has the potential of becoming a profitable industry in Sweden. Furthermore, large-scale seaweed farming can sequester a significant share of annual anthropogenic nitrogen and phosphorus inflows to the basins of the Swedish west coast (8% of N and 60% of P). Concerning the valuation of externalities, positive values generated from sequestration of nitrogen and phosphorus are potentially counteracted by negative values from interference with recreational values. Despite the large N and P uptake, the socioeconomic value of this sequestration is only a minor share of the potential financial value from biomass production. This suggests that e.g. payment schemes for nutrient uptake based on the socioeconomic values generated is not likely to be a tipping point for the industry. Additionally, seaweed cultivation is not a cost-efficient measure in itself to remove nutrients. Policy should thus be oriented towards industry development, as the market potential of the biomass will be the driver that may unlock these bioremediation opportunities.

show abstract

“…Improvements in water quality have the greatest benefits on countries with the largest coastlines, such as Sweden, Finland and Estonia. However, the costs are higher for the countries whose water drains into the sub-basins that are in the poorest ecological state, and thus have the greatest nutrient abatement targets [35]. According to one study, the total cost for meeting country reduction nutrient targets are 1978 M euros, with the highest costs per GDP being borne by the poorest countries (Sweden-54, Finland-158, Russia-536, Estonia-158, Latvia-136, Lithuania-72, Poland-776, Germany-86 and Denmark-3 (M Euros).…”

Section: Trade-offs Across Users Rural and Urban Areas And Generationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Assessment of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) Using the OECD Principles on Water Governance

Jetoo

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper uses the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) water governance principles to assess the governance of the implementation of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP), with a focus on the eutrophication segment. Whilst governance assessments can be used as auditing functions, this study was done with the goal of stimulating reflection, in order to investigate whether the governance systems have made any improvements. This is especially needed, since the BSAP is to be renewed in 2021, so that any assessment of it at this moment is timely. This review has focused on the 12 principles of water governance and the three complementary drivers into which the principles are grouped: Effectiveness, efficiency and trust, and engagement. This paper focuses on national implementation actions. It uses qualitative thematic analysis to analyze the content of the national implementation plans for Baltic Sea Coastal countries. It identifies gaps in water governance and makes recommendations for enhancing effectiveness, efficiency and trust, and engagement in the governance of the Baltic Sea, including improved stakeholder participation, the establishment of a permanent lead agency for the implementation of BSAP, increased funding for implementation actions, and a better governance of trade-offs.There is clearly a gap in the decision making and implementation of actions to achieve national nutrient reduction measures. It is this governance gap that spurs this study, which aims to assess the BSAP through the lens of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) water governance principles. It explores the extent to which the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan provides conditions for an effective application of the 12 principles of water governance, unveiled by the OECD in 2015. It focuses on the country level implementation of the BSAP, using the National implementation reports (NIP). Using this framework, it identifies factors that enable or constrain the implementation of the BSAP, and makes recommendations for improvement. This study is timely, as the findings can inform the process for the renewal of BSAP in 2021.

show abstract

Policy Goals for Improved Water Quality in the Baltic Sea: When do the Benefits Outweigh the Costs?

Cited by 33 publications

References 42 publications

Economic perspectives on nitrogen in farming systems: managing trade-offs between production, risk and the environment

Economic perspectives on nitrogen in farming systems: managing trade-offs between production, risk and the environment

Socioeconomic prospects of a seaweed bioeconomy in Sweden

An Assessment of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) Using the OECD Principles on Water Governance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About