A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Does Mussel Farming Promote Cost Savings and Equity in Reaching Nutrient Targets for the Baltic Sea?
Mussel farming has been suggested as a low-cost option for reducing nutrient content in eutrophied waters. This study examines whether mussel farming contributes to reductions in total nutrient abatement cost and increases in equity for achieving nutrient load reduction targets to the Baltic Sea under different international policy regimes (cost-effective, country targets set by the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP), and nutrient-trading markets). A cost-minimizing model is used to calculate the cost savings, and the analytical results show that mussel farming is a cost-effective option only when the marginal abatement cost is lower than for other abatement measures. The numerical cost-minimizing model of the Baltic Sea indicates that the largest abatement cost reductions from introduction mussel farming, approximately 3.5 billion SEK (9.36 SEK = 1 Euro), are obtained under the cost-effective and nutrient-trading systems. Equity, as measured by abatement cost in relation to affordability in terms of gross domestic product, is improved by mussel farming under the cost-effective regime but reduced under the BSAP country targets and nutrient-trading regimes.
Does Mussel Farming Promote Cost Savings and Equity in Reaching Nutrient Targets for the Baltic Sea?
Mussel farming has been suggested as a low-cost option for reducing nutrient content in eutrophied waters. This study examines whether mussel farming contributes to reductions in total nutrient abatement cost and increases in equity for achieving nutrient load reduction targets to the Baltic Sea under different international policy regimes (cost-effective, country targets set by the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP), and nutrient-trading markets). A cost-minimizing model is used to calculate the cost savings, and the analytical results show that mussel farming is a cost-effective option only when the marginal abatement cost is lower than for other abatement measures. The numerical cost-minimizing model of the Baltic Sea indicates that the largest abatement cost reductions from introduction mussel farming, approximately 3.5 billion SEK (9.36 SEK = 1 Euro), are obtained under the cost-effective and nutrient-trading systems. Equity, as measured by abatement cost in relation to affordability in terms of gross domestic product, is improved by mussel farming under the cost-effective regime but reduced under the BSAP country targets and nutrient-trading regimes.
Does Mussel Farming Promote Cost Savings and Equity in Reaching Nutrient Targets for the Baltic Sea?
Ing-Marie Gren (author) / Sarah Säll (author) / Abenezer Zeleke Aklilu (author) / Wondmagegn Tirkaso (author)
2018
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
Metadata by DOAJ is licensed under CC BY-SA 1.0
Stakeholder Perspectives on Blue Mussel Farming to Mitigate Baltic Sea Eutrophication
| DOAJ | 2021
To what extent does organic farming rely on nutrient inflows from conventional farming?
| DOAJ | 2013
To what extent does organic farming rely on nutrient inflows from conventional farming?
| IOP Institute of Physics | 2013
Travel time savings, accessibility gains and equity effects in cost–benefit analysis
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2017