Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-thh2z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-15T19:55:56.786Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The ecological economics of the Baltic Sea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2009

Tomasz Żylicz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper discusses policies aimed at reducing the eutrophication of the Baltic Sea. Discharges of two nutrients—phosphorus and nitrogen—can be mitigated by measures ranging from sewage treatment to creating or enhancing natural ‘nutrient sinks’ such as coastal wetlands. The latter have been identified as low-cost alternatives to removing nitrogen through traditional, end-of-pipe technologies. Implementation of such projects yields additional benefits through enhancing biological diversity by recovering valuable habitats typical of wetland ecosystems. The paper offers several recommendations regarding policy instruments likely to enhance the cost-effectiveness of the Baltic-wide environmental recovery programme now under way.

Type
Research Article
Information
European Review , Volume 1 , Issue 4 , October 1993 , pp. 329 - 335
Copyright
Copyright © Academia Europaea 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Stockholm Environment Institute (1990) ‘Forward to 1950’: Policy Considerations for the Baltic Environment’, Ambio Special Report Number 7, pp. 21–24.Google Scholar
2.Gren, I.-M., and Żylicz, T. (1993) Cost-effectiveness of the Baltic Sea clean-up. Beijer Institute Discussion Papers No. 24.Google Scholar
3.Larsson, U., Elmgren, R. and Wulff, F. (1985) Eurtophication and the Baltic Sea: causes and consequences, Ambio, XIV(1), 9–14.Google Scholar
4.Żylicz, T. (1993) Environmental policy reform in Poland. In Economic Policies for Sustainable Development, Sterner, Thomas (ed.) forthcoming, Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
5.Andréasson-Gren, I.-M. (1989) Costs for measures reducing the load of nitrogen to the Laholm Bay. In Land Use—Water quality Fleischer, L. et al. (Eds.), (in Swedish), Country Board of Halland, Halmstad, 10.Google Scholar
6.Andréasson-Gren, I.-M. (1991) ‘Costs for reducing the nitrogen emission in the Mälar region. The Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, Stockholm, mimeo.Google Scholar
7.Wulff, F. and Niemi, Å. (1992) Priorities for the restoration of the Baltic Sea—a scientific perspective, Ambio, 21(2), 193–195.Google Scholar
8.Bohm, P., and Russell, C. S. (1986) Comparative analysis of alternative policy instruments. In Handbook of Natural Resource and Energy Economics, Vol. I, Kneese, A. V. and Sweeney, J. L. (Eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
9.Opschoor, J. B., and Vos, H. B. (1989) Economic Instruments for Environmental Protection, OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
10.Żylicz, T. (1989) Marketable permits for synergistic pollutants. Mimeo, Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar