Transition Studies Review

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 225–243 | Cite as

Allocating Costs of Environmental Management among Generations: A Case of Environmental Liabilities in Transition Economies

  • Satoru KomatsuEmail author
  • Andrey Kalugin
  • Shinji Kaneko
Environment, Climate and Global Warming


The objective of this paper is to examine cost allocation in relation to remediating environmental liability issues in Russia, where significant environmental damages, continuing from the Soviet era, present serious impediments to pursuing sustainable development. The research attempts to highlight citizens’ preferences for remediating facilities and sites with environmental liabilities, and elicits preference differences among citizens using choice experiment methods. Intergenerational issues are involved in addressing environmental liabilities in transition economies because the causes and effects are spread among generations. Therefore, evaluating citizens’ preferences provides more policy implications for future remediation initiatives. The econometric analysis reveals that citizens demonstrate positive preferences for reducing pollution of drinking water and soil decontamination. The research also suggests that the households with higher incomes, older household heads (or spouses), and more young children have higher preferences for remediating environmental liabilities in Russia. Estimation of the marginal willingness to pay (MWTP) for age and income segments of the households allows the government to determine a suitable taxation policy. The findings provide new insights on cost allocation in relation to remediating environmental damages in transition economies that have suffered from these serious environmental legacies.


Environmental management Willingness to pay Preference Generation Transition economics 

JEL Classification

O13 P28 Q56 



We would like to thank Dr. David Prentice of La Trobe University, and Dr. Taro Ohdoko of Kobe University for the helpful suggestions on an earlier version of this manuscript. This research is supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) (Number: 23710057), and the Global Environment Research Fund “Establishing of Methodology to Evaluate Middle to Long Term Environmental Policy Options toward Asian Low-Carbon Society (S-6)” from the Ministry of Environment, Japan.


  1. Auer MR, Reuveny R, Adler L (2001) Environmental liability and foreign direct investment in Central and Eastern Europe. J Env Dev 10:5–34Google Scholar
  2. Bluffstone RA (2007) Privatization and contaminated site remediation in Central and Eastern Europe: do environmental liability policies matter? Ecol Econ 63:31–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bluffstone RA, Panayotou T (2000) Environmental liability and privatization in Central and Eastern Europe: toward an optimal policy. Env Resour Econ 17:335–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyd J (1996) Environmental liability reform and privatization in Central and Eastern Europe. Eur J Law Econ 3:39–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. de la Motte R (2007) A tale of two cities: public participation and sustainability in decision-making on water systems in two Polish cities. Util Pol 15:134–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dogaru D, Zobrist J, Balteanu D, Popescu C, Sima M, Amini M, Yang H (2009) Community perception of water quality in a mining-affected area: a case study for the certej catchment in the Apuseni Mountains in Romania. Environ Manage 43:1131–1145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Earnhart D (2004) Liability for past environmental contamination and privatization. Env Res Econ 29:97–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gnedenko ED, Gorbunova ZV (1998) A contingent valuation study of projects improving drinking water quality. Modern Toxicol Probl, vol 3. Accessed 03 oct 2012
  9. Gnedenko E, Gorbunova Z, Safonov G (1999) Contingent valuation of drinking water quality in Samara city. EERC Working Paper Series, 98–263eGoogle Scholar
  10. Green WH (2007) NLOGIT 4.0, Econometric Software IncGoogle Scholar
  11. IMF (International Monetary Fund) (2009) Representative exchange rates for selected currencies for December 2009, Exchange rate archives by month. Available at Retrieved on 16 Sept 2011
  12. Kalugin A, Komatsu S, Kaneko S, Slozko O (2010) Citizens’ perception of past environmental damage and liability in countries with transition: evidence from Kemerovo, Russia. Transition Stud Rev 17:763–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kemerovo City Government (2011) General information about Kemerovo. Available at Retrieved on 16 Sept 2011
  14. Kemerovo Region Committee of Natural Resources (2009) State Report on the State of Environment and Environmental Protection in Kemerovo Region in 2008. Available at Retrieved on 16 Sept 2011
  15. Kemerovo Region Department of Russian Consumer Supervision (2009). State Report on Sanitary and Epidemiological Situation in Kemerovo Region in 2008. Kemerovo, 186 pp (in Russian)Google Scholar
  16. Kuriyama K, Shoji Y (eds) (2005) Environmental valuation of recreation: an application to the National Park Management. Keiso-shobo, Tokyo (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  17. Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology of the Russian Federation (2008) State Report on the State of the Environment and its Protection in the Russian FederationGoogle Scholar
  18. Perfilieva EV (2006) Past environmental liabilities in Kemerovo Oblast (in World Bank (2007) Past environmental liability in the Russian Federation, Final Draft Report)Google Scholar
  19. Russian Public Opinion Fund (2001) Ecological problems. Report of the nation-wide survey (in Russian). Available at Retrieved on 14 Jan 2011
  20. Russian Public Opinion Fund (2005) Ecological situation in the regions. Report of the nation-wide survey (in Russian). Available at Retrieved on 14 Jan 2011
  21. Russian Public Opinion Fund (2007) Environmental in Russia: the assessment of the situation. Report of the nation-wide survey (in Russian). Available at Retrieved on 14 Jan 2011
  22. Shahgedanova M, Burt TP (1994) New data on air pollution in the former Soviet Union. Global Environ Change 4:201–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Train KE (2006) Discrete choice methods with simulation, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Vorobyov AY, Zhukov SV (1996) Russian economic growth: lessons from liberalization, medium-term constraints, and ecological challenges. World Dev 24:359–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. World Bank (2007a) Past environmental liability in the Russian Federation. Final Draft ReportGoogle Scholar
  26. World Bank (2007b) Past environmental liability in the Russian Federation. Brochure. Available at Retrieved on 1 Aug 2011
  27. Zaitcev VI, Mikhailuc AP (2001) Hygienic estimation of environmental pollution caused by the long-term operation of concentrated chemical enterprises. Letopis publishing house, Kemerovo, Russia (in Russian)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School for International Development and CooperationHiroshima UniversityHiroshimaJapan
  2. 2.Hiroshima YMCA school of languagesHiroshimaJapan

Personalised recommendations