Point nonpoint source water quality trading: A case study in the Minnesota River Basin

被引:45
作者
Fang, F
Easter, KW
Brezonik, PL
机构
[1] Kieser & Associates, Kalamazoo, MI 49007 USA
[2] Univ Minnesota, Dept Appl Econ, St Paul, MN 55108 USA
[3] Univ Minnesota, Dept Civil Engn, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
来源
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN WATER RESOURCES ASSOCIATION | 2005年 / 41卷 / 03期
关键词
nonpoint source pollution; cost effectiveness; phosphorus pollution; erosion; load offsetting; transaction costs; water quality trading;
D O I
10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03761.x
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Contrary to the general trend of only a few actual trades occurring within point-nonpoint source water quality trading programs in the United States, two trading projects in the Minnesota River Basin, created under the provisions of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, have generated five major trades and numerous smaller ones. In this paper, these two projects are described to illustrate their origins, implementation, and results. It was found that several factors contributed to the relatively high number of trades in these projects, including the offsetting nature of the projects (hence a fixed number of credits that the point sources were required to obtain), readily available information on potential nonpoint source trading partners, and an effectively internal trading scheme used by one of the two projects. It was also found that long term structural pollution control measures, such as streambank stabilization, offered substantial cost savings over point source controls. Estimates of transaction costs showed that the total costs of the trading projects were increased by at least 35 percent after transaction costs were taken into account. Evidence also showed that in addition to pollution reduction, these two trading projects brought other benefits to the watershed, such as helping balance environmental protection and regional economic growth.
引用
收藏
页码:645 / 658
页数:14
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1999, SUMM US EFFL TRAD OF
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2000, FERTILE GROUND NUTR
[3]  
[Anonymous], FIN WAT QUAL TRAD PO
[4]  
[Anonymous], ENV PRACTICE
[5]  
BACON EF, 1992, USE EC INSTRUMENTS W
[6]  
Baumol WilliamJ., 1988, THEORY ENV POLICY
[7]  
Dales JH., 1968, Pollution, property & prices
[8]   ECONOMIC PRESCRIPTIONS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL-PROBLEMS - HOW THE PATIENT FOLLOWED THE DOCTORS ORDERS [J].
HAHN, RW .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 1989, 3 (02) :95-114
[9]  
Hanley N., 1997, ENV EC THEORY PRACTI
[10]  
Krutilla K, 1999, HANDBOOK OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS, P249