Coalition projects to cut back costs of cleaning recreational water bodies:the case of Lake Rozkos

• Autorzy: Sauer P. , Fiala P. , Dvorak A. , Kolinsky O.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper presents the application of an optimization model developed for Lake Rozkoš, which is located in a sub-basin of the Elbe River basin in Bohemia. Two scenarios for achieving environmental targets (required status of the lake water) were formulated by specialists, together with an assessment of the investment and operating costs of the projects. The optimal solution (investment program) for 41 polluter-municipalities, where 166 coalitions can be considered (41 individual and 125 joint wastewater treatment plants), was computed. The results suggest that the modelling method presented in this paper has the potential to increase the role of economic considerations in the early stages of planning and decision-making about water treatment programs. In this case, more than 20% of the costs could be saved when selected joint wastewater treatment plants are realized. The approach has the potential to contribute to increasing costeffectiveness of allocation of financial sources from national and European Union sources.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
• Rocznik: 2017
• Tom: 26
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.1701-1714,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Sauer P.

• University of Economics, Prague, W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Prague 3, Czech Republic

autor

Fiala P.

• University of Economics, Prague, W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Prague 3, Czech Republic

autor

Dvorak A.

• University of Economics, Prague, W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Prague 3, Czech Republic

autor

Kolinsky O.

• University of Economics, Prague, W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Prague 3, Czech Republic

Bibliografia

• 1. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, 2000.
• 2. PEREZ M. A New Strategy to Improve Water Quality-One Targeted Watershed at a Time, World Resource Institute, 2014, available at: http://www.wri.org/blog/new-strategy-improve-water- quality%E2%80%94one-targeted-watershed-time?utm_campaign=socialmedia&utm_ source=facebook.com&utm_medium=wri-page, approached January 8, 2014
• 3. WALEGA A., KOWALIK T., BOGDAL A. Estimating the Occurrence of Trends in Selected Elements of a Small Sub-Mountain Catchment Hydrological Regime, Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 22 (5), 2151, 2016.
• 4. HAJKOWICZ S., COLLINS K. A review of multiple criteria analysis for water resource planning and management, Water Resour Manag 21 (9), 1553, 2007.
• 5. REVELLE C., DIETRICH G., STENSEL D. The improvement of water quality under a financial constraint: a commentary on ‘linear programming applied to water quality management’. Water Resour Res 5 (2), 507, 1969.
• 6. LEE C.S., WEN C.G. 1997 Fuzzy goal programming approach for water quality management in a river basin. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 89 (2), 181, 1997.
• 7. HUANG G.H., LOUCKS D.P. An inexact two-stages stochastic programming model for water resources management under uncertainty. Civil Engineering and Environmental Systems 17 (2), 95, 2000.
• 8. de VRIES S., VOHRA R.V. Combinatorial auctions: a survey. INFORMS J Comput 15 (1), 284, 2003.
• 9. CRAMTON P., SHOHAM Y., STEINBERG R (eds.). Combinatorial Auctions, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2006.
• 10. FIALA P., ŠAUER P. Application of Combinatorial Auctions on Allocation of Public Financial Support in the Area of Environmental Protection: Economic Laboratory Experiment. Politická ekonomie, 59 (3), 379, 2011.
• 11. PL. Limnological dindings and possibilities to improve current condition in the Lake Rozkoš [in Czech], Povodí Labe, s.p., Hradec Králové, 1999.
• 12. PL. Control order at the waterwork Rozkoš [in Czech], Povodí Labe, s.p., Hradec Králové, 2007.
• 13. VRV/PL. An Analysis of Importance of Impact of Eutrophication Pollution Sources at the River Basin of Water Lake Rozkoš [in Czech], Vodohospodářský rozvoj a výstavba a.s. nad Povodí Labe, s.p., Praha, 2013.
• 14. GENKENBACH M.F., WEIKARD H.P. Modelling the urban water chain: incentives and cost recovery in wastewater treatment in developing countries. Urban Water J 9 (3), 149, 2012.
• 15. MoA. Methodology for economic and environmental optimization of reducing pollution in watercourses, Ministry of Agriculture, certificate no. 79469/2013-MZe, Prague, 2013 [In Czech].
• 16. ŠAUER P., FIALA P., DVOŘÁK A., KOLÍNSKÝ O. Coalition Projects in Wastewater Treatment: The Case of a Drinking Water Reservoir in the Czech Republic. J. Environ. Prot. Ecol. 16 (4), 1492, 2015.
• 17. ŠAUER P., FIALA P., DVOŘÁK A., KOLÍNSKÝ O., PRÁŠEK J., FERBAR P., REDERER L. Improving quality of surface waters with coalition projects and environmental subsidy negotiation. Pol. J. Environ. Stud 24 (3), 1299, 2015.
• 18. CARRARO C., MARCHIORI C., SGOBBI A. Negotiating on water: insights from non-cooperative bargaining theory. Environ Dev Econ 12 (2), 329, 2007.
• 19. MADANI K. Game theory and water resources. Journal of Hydrology, 381 (3), 225, 2010.
• 20. SLAVIKOVA L., JILKOVA J. Implementing the public participation principle into water management in the Czech Republic: a critical analysis. Regional Studies 45 (4), 545, 2011.
• 21. SAUER P., DVORAK A., FIALA P. Negotiation between Authority and Polluters - Model for Support of Decision Making in Environmental Policy. Politická Ekonomie, 46 (6), 772, 1998.
• 22. SAUER P., DVORAK A., FIALA P. A Procedure for Negotiating Pollution Reduction under Information Asymmetry: Surface Water Quality Case. Environ Resour Econ, 24 (2), 103, 2003.
• 23. DANULETIU D.C., TAMAS-SZORA A., SOCOL A. Affordability and Sustainability of Water Services Investments Financed by EU Funds. J Environ Prot Ecol, 16 (1), 154, 2015.
• 24. SCHOUMANS O.F., CHARDON W.J., BECHMANN M.E., GASCUEL-ODOUX C., HOFMAN G., KRONVANG B., RUBAEK G.H., ULEN B., DORIOZ J.M. Mitigation options to reduce phosphorus losses from the agricultural sector and improve surface water quality: A review. Science of The Total Environment, 468–469, 1255, 2014.
• 25. MELLAND A.R., MELLANDER P.E., MURPHY P.N.C., WALL D.P., MECHAN S, SHINE O., SHORTLE G., JORDAN P. Stream water quality in intensive cereal cropping catchments with regulated nutrient management. Environmental Science & Policy, 24, 58, 2012.
• 26. SHARPLEY A., JARVIE H.P., BUDA A., MAY L., SPEARS B., KLEINMAN P. Phosphorus legacy: Overcoming the effects of past management practices to mitigate future water quality impairment. Journal of Environmental Quality, 42 (5), 1308, 2013.
• 27. WILSON M.A., CARPENTER S.R. Economic Valuation of Freshwater Ecosystem Services in the United States: 1971-1997, Ecological Applications 9 (3), 772, 1999.
• 28. CARSON R.T., MARTIN K.M. (1991). Measuring the benefits of freshwater quality changes: Techniques and empirical findings. In DINAR A., ZILBERMAN D. (eds.) The Economics and Management of Water and Drainage in Agriculture, 389-410. Springer US, 1991.
• 29. BRAUMAN K.A., DAILY G.C., DUARTE T.K.E., MOONEY H.A. The nature and value of ecosystem services: an overview highlighting hydrologic services. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 32, 67, 2007.
• 30. FISHER B., TURNER K., ZYLSTRA M., BROUWER R., de GROOT R., FARBER S., FERRARO P., GREEN R., HADLEY D., HARLOW J., JEFFERIS P., KIRKBY C., MORLING P., MOWATT S., NAIDOO R., PAAVOLA J., STRASSBURG B., YU D., BALMFORD A. Ecosystem Services and Economic Theory: Integration for Policy ‐Relevant Research. Ecological applications, 18 (8), 2050. 2008.
• 31. VOJÁČEK O., PECÁKOVÁ I.: Comparison of Discrete Choice Models for Economic Environmental Research, Prague Economic Papers, 19 (1), 35, 2010.
• 32. CZAJKOWSKI M., MARKOWSKA A., MARKIEWICZ O., BARTCZAK A., SCASNY M., MELICHAR J., SKOPKOVA H. Lake Water Quality Valuation – Benefit Transfer Approach vs. Empirical Evidence. Ekonomia journal 19 (1), 156-193, available at: http://ekonomia.wne.uw.edu.pl/ekonomia/getFile/652 2007, approached November 2, 2016, 2007.
• 33. CZAJKOWSKI M., ŠČASNÝ M. Study on benefit transfer in an international setting. How to improve welfare estimates in the case of the countries’ income heterogeneity? Ecological Economics 69 (12), 2409, 2010.
• 34. KLEMPERER P. Auctions: Theory and Practice. Princeton Univesity Press, Princeton, 2004.
• 35. KRISHNA V. Auction Theory. Academic Press, San Diego, 2002.
• 36. MILGROM P. Putting Auction theory to Work. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, 2004.
• 37. KLEMPERER P. How (not) to run auctions: the European 3G Telecom auctions. European Economic Review, 46 (4-5), 829, 2002.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15244/pjoes/68888