A systematic review of the use of environmental economics in the mining industry

• Autorzy: Menegaki Maria , Damigos Dimitris

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.46873/2300-3960.1034

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Environmental economics is increasingly being used in project appraisals, environmental liability estimates and design of market-based instruments. Mining, an actor capable of causing adverse effects on the environment, human health and well-being, has already been affected by these developments, at a great extent. Up to date, several research studies have been carried out to monetise the externalities of mining projects. Nevertheless, a systematic review of these publications has not been carried out, yet. This paper aims to fill this gap in the literature by investigating (i) the main non-market valuation techniques used; (ii) the main external costs or benefits of mining projects monetised; and (iii) the monetary estimates of mining-related externalities. The analysis shows that practically all economic valuation techniques have been implemented towards assessing, in monetary terms, the mining impacts on the environment. However, the findings from the statistical analysis reveal a wide range of monetary estimates, which are attributed not only to the valuation methods and assumptions used but also to the specific characteristics of the mining projects in question. Also, the research draws directions for future work, as the analysis of the published studies indicates areas of limited availability of estimates or high heterogeneity between the available estimates.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

mining; quarrying; externalities; environmental economics; non-market valuation; systematic review

PL

górnictwo; wydobycie; efekt zewnętrzny; ekonomia środowiska; wycena nierynkowa; przegląd literatury

• Wydawca: Elsevier ; Główny Instytut Górnictwa
• Czasopismo: Journal of Sustainable Mining
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: Vol. 19, iss. 4
• Strony: 254--271
• Opis fizyczny: Biblkiogr. 76 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Menegaki Maria

• National Technical University of Athens, School of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, Greece

autor

Damigos Dimitris

• National Technical University of Athens, School of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering, Greece

Bibliografia

• [1] Pearce D. An intellectual history of environmental economics. Annu Rev Energy Environ 2002. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.27.122001.083429.
• [2] Damigos D. An overview of environmental valuation methods for the mining industry, vol. 14; 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.06.005.
• [3] Navrud S, Pruckner GJ. Environmental valuation - to use or not to use? Environ Resour Econ 1997. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026449715284.
• [4] Atkinson G, Groom B, Hanley N, Mourato S. Environmental valuation and benefit-cost analysis in U.K. Policy. J Benefit- Cost Anal 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2018.6.
• [5] Andersson H. Application of BCA in europe-experiences and challenges. J Benefit-Cost Anal 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2018.5.
• [6] Belli P, Anderson J, Barnum H, Dixon J, Tan J-P. HANDBOOK ON ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF INVESTMENT OPERATIONS operational core services network learning and leadership center. 1998.
• [7] Bonnieux F, Rainelli P. Contingent valuation methodology and the EU institutional framework. 1999.
• [8] Florio M, Morretta V, Willak W. Cost-benefit analysis and European union cohesion policy: economic versus financial returns in investment project appraisal. J Benefit-Cost Anal 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2018.4.
• [9] European Commission. Guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects: economic appraisal tool for cohesion policy 2014-2020. https://doi.org/10.2776/97516; 2014.
• [10] Hanemann WM, Strand IE. Natural resource damage assessment: economic implications for fisheries management. Am J Agric Econ 1993. https://doi.org/10.2307/1243452.
• [11] Jones CA. Compensation for natural resource damages from oil spills: a comparison of US law and international conventions. Int J Environ Pollut 1999. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEP.1999.002251.
• [12] Bullock C, O'Shea R. Valuing environmental damage remediation and liability using value estimates for ecosystem services. J Environ Plann Manag 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2015.1085842.
• [13] Stavins RN. Chapter 9 - experience with market-based environmental policy instruments. In: Mäler K-G, Vincent JR, editors. Environ. Degrad. Institutional responses, vol. 1. Elsevier; 2003. p. 355-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0099(03)01014-3.
• [14] European Environment Agency. Marketebased instruments for environmental policy in Europe. 2005.
• [15] Hendryx M. The public health impacts of surface coal mining. Extr Ind Soc 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2015.08.006.
• [16] Dudka S, Adriano DC. Environmental impacts of metal ore mining and processing: a review. J Environ Qual 1997. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1997.00472425002600030003x.
• [17] Matschullat J, Gutzmer J. Mining and its environmental impacts. Environ Geol 2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-8787-0_205.
• [18] Ingram V, Tieguhong JC, Schure J, Nkamgnia E, Tadjuidje MH.Where artisanal mines and forest meet: socioeconomic and environmental impacts in the Congo Basin. Nat Resour Forum 2011;35:304-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-8947.2011.01408.x.
• [19] Carson RT, Wilks L, Imber D. Valuing the preservation of Australia's kakadu conservation zone. Oxf Econ Pap; 1994. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/46.Supplement_1.727.
• [20] Mendonça AF, Tilton JE. A contingent valuation study of the environmental costs of mining in the brazilian amazon. Miner Energy - Raw Mater Rep 2000;15:21-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/14041040009362570.
• [21] Willis KG, Garrod GD. Externalities from extraction of aggregates regulation by tax or land-use controls. Resour Pol 1999;25:77e86. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-4207(99)00012-4.
• [22] Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JPA, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006.
• [23] Palmatier RW, Houston MB, Hulland J. Review articles: purpose, process, and structure. J Acad Market Sci 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0563-4.
• [24] Snyder H. Literature review as a research methodology: an overview and guidelines. J Bus Res 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039.
• [25] Berrang-Ford L, Pearce T, Ford JD. Systematic review approaches for climate change adaptation research. Reg Environ Change 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-014-0708-7.
• [26] Pullin A, Frampton G, Livoreil B, Petrokofsky G. Collaboration for environmental evidence. Guidelines and standards for evidence synthesis in environmental management Version 5.0. 2018.
• [27] Xiao Y, Watson M. Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. J Plann Educ Res 2019. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971.
• [28] Bateman IJ. Valuing preferences regarding environmental change. SAGE Handb Environ Soc 2012. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848607873.n10.
• [29] Haab T, McConnell K. Valuing environmental and natural resources. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781843765431; 2013.
• [30] Richardson L, Loomis J, Kroeger T, Casey F. The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation. Ecol Econ 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.02.018.
• [31] Rosenberger RS, Loomis JB. Benefit transfer. In: Champ PA, Boyle KJ, Brown TC, editors. A prim. Nonmarket valuat. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2003. p. 395-444. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0826-6_12.
• [32] Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5.
• [33] Sutherland RJ, Walsh RG. Effect of distance on the preservation value of water quality (coal mining). Land Econ 1985; 61(3)281-91. https://doi.org/10.2307/3145843.
• [34] Willis KG, Nelson GB, Bye AB, Peacock G. An application of the krutilla d Fisher model to appraising the benefits of green belt preservation versus site development. J Environ Plann Manag 1993;36:73-90. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640569308711928.
• [35] Kim H-S, Harris D. Air quality and view degradations due to copper mining and milling: preliminary analysis and cost estimates for Green Valley, Arizona. Nat Resour Res 1996;5: 91-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02257583.
• [36] Ranasinghe M. Reconciling private profitability and social costs: the case of clay mining in Sri Lanka. Proj Apprais 1997; 12:31-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02688867.1997.9727035.
• [37] Garrod GD, Willis KG. Economic approaches to valuing the environmental costs and benefits of mineral and aggregate extraction. Miner Energy - Raw Mater Rep 2000. https://doi.org/10.1080/14041040009362569.
• [38] Farber S, Griner B. Valuing watershed quality improvements using conjoint analysis. Ecol Econ 2000;34:63-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00153-1.
• [39] Huszar EJ, Netusil NR, Shaw WD. Contingent valuation of some externalities from mine dewatering. J Water Resour Plann Manag 2001;127:369-77. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2001)127:6(369).
• [40] Damigos D, Kaliampakos D. Assessing the benefits of reclaiming urban quarries: a CVM analysis. Landsc Urban Plann 2003;64. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00243-8.
• [41] Damigos D, Kaliampakos D. Environmental economics and the mining industry: monetary benefits of an abandoned quarry rehabilitation in Greece. Environ Geol 2003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-003-0774-5.
• [42] Damigos D, Kaliampakos D. The “battle of gold” under the light of green economics: a case study from Greece. Environ Geol 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-006-0201-9.
• [43] Jaeger WK. The hidden costs of relocating sand and gravel mines. Resour Pol 2006;31:146-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2006.12.003.
• [44] Strong A, Flores NE. Estimating the economic benefits of acidic rock drainage clean up using cost shares. Ecol Econ 2008;65:348-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.06.021.
• [45] Williamson JM, Thurston HW, Heberling MT. Valuing acid mine drainage remediation in West Virginia: a hedonic modeling approach. Ann Reg Sci 2008;42:987-99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-007-0189-4.
• [46] Kim T -g. Efficient management of marine resources in conflict: an empirical study of marine sand mining, Korea. J Environ Manag 2009;91:78-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.07.006.
• [47] Lienhoop N, Messner F. The economic value of allocating water to post-mining lakes in East Germany. Water Resour Manag 2009;23:965-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-008-9309-x.
• [48] Sullivan J, Amacher GS. Private and social costs of surface mine reforestation performance criteria. Environ Manag 2010;45:311-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-009-9395-4.
• [49] Muller NZ, Mendelsohn R, Nordhaus W. Environmental accounting for pollution in the United States economy. Am Econ Rev 2011;101:1649-75. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.5.1649.
• [50] Li F, Liu X, Zhao D, Wang B, Jin J, Hu D. Evaluating and modeling ecosystem service loss of coal mining: a case study of Mentougou district of Beijing, China. Ecol Complex 2011; 8:139-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2011.01.002.
• [51] Bai Y, Wang R, Jin J. Water eco-service assessment and compensation in a coal mining region - a case study in the Mentougou District in Beijing. Ecol Complex 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2011.01.003.
• [52] Mishra SK, Hitzhusen FJ, Sohngen BL, Guldmann J-M. Costs of abandoned coal mine reclamation and associated recreation benefits in Ohio. J Environ Manag 2012;100:52-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.01.021.
• [53] Mahapatra D, Shukla P, Dhar S. External cost of coal based electricity generation: a tale of Ahmedabad city. Energy Pol 2012;49:253-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.06.014.
• [54] Pelekasi T, Menegaki M, Damigos D. Externalities, NIMBY syndrome and marble quarrying activity. J Environ Plann Manag 2012;55:1192-205. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2011.638047.
• [55] Collins AR, Hansen E, Hendryx M. Wind versus coal: comparing the local economic impacts of energy resource development in Appalachia. Energy Pol 2012;50:551-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2012.08.001.
• [56] Papagiannis A, Roussos D, Menegaki M, Damigos D. Externalities from lignite mining-related dust emissions. Energy Pol 2014;74:414-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.08.026.
• [57] Cardoso A. Behind the life cycle of coal: socio-environmental liabilities of coal mining in Cesar, Colombia. Ecol Econ 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.10.004.
• [58] Prasodjo E, Sitorus SRP, Pertiwi S, Putri EIK. Economic valuation of coal mining activity in Samarinda city, east Kalimantan, Indonesia. Int J Appl Eng Res 2015;10:26347-62.
• [59] Sergeant A, Poesen J, Duchateau P, Vranken L. A methodological framework to assess the socio-economic impact of underground quarries: a case study from Belgian Limburg. Sci Total Environ 2016;541:559-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.09.079.
• [60] Pérez-àlvarez R, Torres-Ortega S, Díaz-Simal P, Husillos-Rodríguez R, De Luis-Ruiz JM. Economic valuation of mining heritage from a recreational approach: application to the case of El Soplao Cave in Spain (Geosite UR004). Sustain Times 2016. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8020185.
• [61] Lavee D, Bahar S. Estimation of external effects from the quarrying sector using the hedonic pricing method. Land Use Pol 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.005.
• [62] Nkambule NP, Blignaut JN. The external costs of coal mining: the case of collieries supplying Kusile power station. J Energy South Afr 2012;23:85-93. https://doi.org/10.17159/2413-3051/2012/v23i4a3181.
• [63] Adiansyah JS, Rosano M, Biswas W, Haque N. Life cycle cost estimation and environmental valuation of coal mine tailings management. J Sustain Min 2017;16:114-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsm.2017.10.004.
• [64] Màca V, Melichar J, Ščasný M, Kohlovà MB. Valuing environmental health for informed policy-making. Rev Environ Health 2017. https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2016-0035.
• [65] Gulley AL. Valuing environmental impacts of mercury emissions from gold mining: dollar per troy ounce estimates for twelve open-pit, small-scale, and artisanal mining sites. Resour Pol 2017;52:266-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2017.03.009.
• [66] Blanco CF, Marques A, van Bodegom PM. An integrated framework to assess impacts on ecosystem services in LCA demonstrated by a case study of mining in Chile. Ecosyst Serv 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.011.
• [67] Li Z, Hu B. Perceived health risk, environmental knowledge, and contingent valuation for improving air quality: new evidence from the Jinchuan mining area in China. Econ Hum Biol 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2018.07.007.
• [68] Demirbugan A. Changes in ecosystem service benefit in Soma lignite region of Turkey. Resour Pol 2019;64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101522.
• [69] Pavanelli DD, Voulvoulis N. Habitat Equivalency Analysis, a framework for forensic cost evaluation of environmental damage. Ecosyst Serv 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2019.100953.
• [70] Meyerhoff J, Klefoth T, Arlinghaus R. The value artificial lake ecosystems provide to recreational anglers: implications for management of biodiversity and outdoor recreation. J Environ Manag 2019;252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109580.
• [71] Alcon F, Albaladejo-García JA, Zabala JA, Marín-Miňano C, Martínez-Paz JM. Understanding social demand for sustainable nature conservation. The case of a protected natural space in South-Eastern Spain. J Nat Conserv 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2019.125722.
• [72] Wang X, Wang L, Chen J, Zhang S, Tarolli P. Assessment of the external costs of life cycle of coal: the case study of southwestern China. Energies 2020;13. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13154002.
• [73] Rivera NM. Is mining an environmental disamenity? Evidence from resource extraction site openings. Environ Resour Econ 2020;75:485-528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-019-00397-w.
• [74] Bui LT, Nguyen PH, Nguyen DCM. Model for assessing health damage from air pollution in quarrying area - case study at Tan Uyen quarry. Ho Chi Minh megapolis, Vietnam Heliyon 2020;6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05045.
• [75] World Bank. PPP conversion factor, GDP (LCU per international $). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/PA.NUS.PPP%0A. [Accessed 10 November 2020].
• [76] World Bank. Consumer price index (2010 = 100) 2020. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/FP.CPI.TOTL. [Accessed 10 November 2020].