How unnecessarily high abatement costs and unresolved distributional issues undermine nutrient reductions to the Baltic Sea

This paper systematically reviews the literature on how to reduce nutrient emissions to the Baltic Sea cost-effectively and considerations for allocating these costs fairly among countries. The literature shows conclusively that the reduction targets of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) could be ach...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAmbio Vol. 51; no. 1; pp. 51 - 68
Main Authors Andersson, Anna, Brady, Mark V., Pohjola, Johanna
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.01.2022
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects
Abatement
Atmospheric Sciences
Baltic States
Basins
Cost allocation
Cost analysis
Earth and Environmental Science
Ecology
Economics
Economics and Business
Ekonomi och näringsliv
Emissions
Environment
Environmental Engineering/Biotechnology
Environmental impact
Environmental Management
Environmental Sciences
Eutrophication
Miljövetenskap
Nationalekonomi
Nitrogen
Nitrogen - analysis
Nutrients
Oceans and Seas
Phosphorus
Phosphorus - analysis
Physical Geography
Review
Samhällsvetenskap
Social Sciences
Systematic review
Wastewater treatment
Water quality
Water treatment
Wetlands
Baltic States
Baltic Sea
Nutrients
Cost effectiveness
Baltic Sea
Fairness
Eutrophication
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:This paper systematically reviews the literature on how to reduce nutrient emissions to the Baltic Sea cost-effectively and considerations for allocating these costs fairly among countries. The literature shows conclusively that the reduction targets of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) could be achieved at considerably lower cost, if countries would cooperate to implement the least costly abatement plan. Focusing on phosphorus abatement could be prudent as the often recommended measures—wastewater treatment and wetlands—abate nitrogen too. An implication of our review is that the potential for restoring the Baltic Sea to good health is undermined by an abatement strategy that is more costly than necessary and likely to be perceived as unfair by several countries. Neither the BSAP nor the cost-effective solution meet the surveyed criteria for fairness, implying a need for side-payments.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-3
content type line 23
ObjectType-Review-1
ISSN:0044-7447
1654-7209
1654-7209
DOI:10.1007/s13280-021-01580-4