Ancillary human health benefits of improved air quality resulting from climate change mitigation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation policies can provide ancillary benefits in terms of short-term improvements in air quality and associated health benefits. Several studies have analyzed the ancillary impacts of GHG policies for a variety of locations, pollutants, and policies. In this paper we review the existing evidence on ancillary health benefits relating to air pollution from various GHG strategies and provide a framework for such analysis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We evaluate techniques used in different stages of such research for estimation of: (1) changes in air pollutant concentrations; (2) avoided adverse health endpoints; and (3) economic valuation of health consequences. The limitations and merits of various methods are examined. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for ancillary benefits analysis and related research gaps in the relevant disciplines.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We found that to date most assessments have focused their analysis more heavily on one aspect of the framework (e.g., economic analysis). While a wide range of methods was applied to various policies and regions, results from multiple studies provide strong evidence that the short-term public health and economic benefits of ancillary benefits related to GHG mitigation strategies are substantial. Further, results of these analyses are likely to be underestimates because there are a number of important unquantified health and economic endpoints.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Remaining challenges include integrating the understanding of the relative toxicity of particulate matter by components or sources, developing better estimates of public health and environmental impacts on selected sub-populations, and devising new methods for evaluating heretofore unquantified and non-monetized benefits.</p

Cooperative games and cost allocation problems

Cooperative TU games, Cost allocation problems, Game practice, 91A12, 91A80,

Cost-benefit analysis methods for assessing air pollution control programs in urban environments—A review

The most common method of evaluating beneficial impacts of environmental policies is cost-benefit analysis (CBA). In the present review, CBA methods for air pollution impacts are reviewed. Three types of air pollution effects are identified, including health, productivity, and amenity. Market valuation, stated preference methods, and revealed preference methods are identified for valuing benefits. Three types of costs are deseribed, including private sector costs, societal costs, and governmental regulatory costs. A benefits valuation approach based on Freeman's principals is described. A costs valuation approach based on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Dixon et al. principals is deseribed. Limitations associated with estimates of benefits and costs are summarized. Input assumptions and results are compared for several existing air pollution control analyses. The importance of CBA in environmental policy studies is discussed. Our conceptual approaches should be useful in analyses of urban air pollution impacts and air pollution prevention policies