Home Valuing environmental health for informed policy-making
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Valuing environmental health for informed policy-making

  • Vojtěch Máca EMAIL logo , Jan Melichar , Milan Ščasný and Markéta Braun Kohlová
Published/Copyright: February 23, 2017

Abstract

Background:

Monetized environmental health impact assessments help to better evaluate the environmental burden of a wide range of economic activities. Apart from the limitations and uncertainties in physical and biological science used in such assessments, assumptions taken from economic valuation may also substantially influence subsequent policy-making considerations.

Aim:

This study attempts to demonstrate the impact of normative policy assumptions on quantified external costs using a case study of recently discussed variants of future coal mining and use of extracted coal in electricity and heat generation in the Czech Republic.

Methods:

A bottom-up impact-pathway approach is used for quantification of external costs. Several policy perspectives are elaborated for aggregating impacts that differ in geographic coverage and in how valuation of quantified impacts is adjusted in a particular perspective.

Results:

We find that the fraction of monetized external impacts taken into policy-making considerations may vary according to choice of decision perspective up to a factor of 10.

Conclusion:

At present there are virtually no hard rules for defining geographical boundaries or adjusting values for a summation of monetized environmental impacts. We, however, stress that any rigorous external cost assessment should, for instance in a separate calculation, take account of impacts occurring beyond country borders.

Acknowledgment

A support for manuscript preparation from PRVOUK-P02 programme of Charles University is gratefully acknowledged.

  1. Author statement

  2. Research funding: The manuscript preparation was supproted by PRVOUK-P02 programme of Charles University. Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest. Informed consent: Informed consent is not applicable. Ethical approval: The conducted research is not related to either human or animals use.

References

1. WHO Regional Office for Europe, OECD. Economic cost of the health impact of air pollution in Europe: clean air, health and wealth. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2015.Search in Google Scholar

2. Máca V, Melichar J. The health costs of revised coal mining limits in Northern Bohemia. Energies 2016;9(81):1–20.10.3390/en9020081Search in Google Scholar

3. Bickel P, Friedrich R. ExternE: externalities of energy. Methodology 2005 Update. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004.Search in Google Scholar

4. Briggs DJ. A framework for integrated environmental health impact assessment of systemic risks. Environ Health 2008;7(1):61.10.1186/1476-069X-7-61Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central

5. WHO. Health risks of air pollution in Europe – HRAPIE project. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 2013.Search in Google Scholar

6. Miedema HME, Vos H. Noise annoyance from stationary sources: relationships with exposure metric day-evening-night level (DENL) and their confidence intervals. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;116(1):334–43.10.1121/1.1755241Search in Google Scholar PubMed

7. Ščasný M, Máca V. Monetary and non-monetary measures of health benefits from exposure reduction. In: Pacyna J, Pacyna E, editors. Environmental determinants of human health. Cham: Springer Nature, 2016:133–50.10.1007/978-3-319-43142-0_7Search in Google Scholar

8. Holland M. Cost-benefit Analysis of Final Policy Scenarios for the EU Clean Air Package. 2014. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/pdf/TSAP CBA.pdf. Accessed 16 June 2016.Search in Google Scholar

9. Desaigues B, Ami D, Bartczak A, Braun-Kohlová M, Chilton S, et al. Economic valuation of air pollution mortality: a 9-country contingent valuation survey of value of a life year (VOLY). Ecol Indic 2011;11(3):902–10.10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.12.006Search in Google Scholar

10. Ready R, Navrud S, Day B, Dubourg R, Machado F, et al. Benefit transfer in Europe: how reliable are transfers between countries? Environ Resour Econ 2004;29(1):67–82.10.1023/B:EARE.0000035441.37039.8aSearch in Google Scholar

11. Pearce D, Atkinson G, Mourato S. Cost-benefit analysis and the environment. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2006:318.Search in Google Scholar

12. Pizer W, Adler M, Aldy J, Anthoff D, Cropper M, et al. Using and improving the social cost of carbon. Science 2014;346(6214):1189–90.10.1126/science.1259774Search in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2016-8-1
Accepted: 2017-1-24
Published Online: 2017-2-23
Published in Print: 2017-3-1

©2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Environmental challenges in Central and Eastern Europe
  4. Mini Reviews
  5. The CEECHE: a practical approach for reducing exposures and disease outcomes in Central and Eastern Europe
  6. Perinatal health in the Danube region – new birth cohort justified
  7. Building multi-country collaboration on watershed management: lessons on linking environment and public health from the Western Balkans
  8. An open-sourced statistical application for identifying complex toxicological interactions of environmental pollutants
  9. Air exchange rates and alternative vapor entry pathways to inform vapor intrusion exposure risk assessments
  10. Review Articles
  11. Sustainable exposure prevention through innovative detection and remediation technologies from the NIEHS Superfund Research Program
  12. Future of environmental research in the age of epigenomics and exposomics
  13. Linking childhood allergic asthma phenotypes with endotype through integrated systems biology: current evidence and research needs
  14. Impact of nutrition on pollutant toxicity: an update with new insights into epigenetic regulation
  15. Environmental PAH exposure and male idiopathic infertility: a review on early life exposures and adult diagnosis
  16. The association of peripubertal serum concentrations of organochlorine chemicals and blood lead with growth and pubertal development in a longitudinal cohort of boys: a review of published results from the Russian Children’s Study
  17. Epigenomic reprogramming in inorganic arsenic-mediated gene expression patterns during carcinogenesis
  18. Emerging roles of xenobiotic detoxification enzymes in metabolic diseases
  19. Recent advances on iron oxide magnetic nanoparticles as sorbents of organic pollutants in water and wastewater treatment
  20. Review of heavy metal accumulation on aquatic environment in Northern East Mediterrenean Sea part I: some essential metals
  21. Original Articles
  22. Sensemaking, stakeholder discord, and long-term risk communication at a US Superfund site
  23. Valuing environmental health for informed policy-making
  24. How serious are health impacts in one of the most polluted regions of Central Europe?
  25. The results of interconnection of the evidence of professional exposure to genotoxic factors (regex) and cancer registry in the Czech Republic
  26. The impact of selected environmental, behavioral and psychosocial factors on schoolchildren’s somatic and mental health
  27. Markers of lipid oxidative damage among office workers exposed intermittently to air pollutants including nanoTiO2 particles
  28. Determinants of ETS exposure in a sample of Slovak pregnant women
  29. Respiratory toxicity of Fe3O4 nanoparticles: experimental study
  30. Exposure of children to phthalates and the impact of consumer practices in Slovakia
  31. Metal contamination in environmental media in residential areas around Romanian mining sites
Downloaded on 24.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/reveh-2016-0035/html
Scroll to top button