Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 85, Issue 1, pp 249–260 | Cite as

Integrated assessment models as a basis for air pollution negotiations

  • Leen Hordijk


During the last decade the issue of integrated assessment has received attention both in the scientific literature and in the negotiation of international air pollution agreements. More than often this literature does not differentiate between the integrated assessment as a process and the development and use of models as a tool for calculating the potentials of various scenarios. This paper describes the difference between the process and the tool, and illustrates this using the negotiations leading to the Second Sulfur Protocol (June 1994, Oslo). The situation in Europe (with a highly visible interaction between science and policy) will be compared with the United States (where new legislation was passed before the integrated assessment was finished). Further, the role of integrated assessment models in these negotiations will be discussed with special attention for the interaction between model builders and model users. Lessons from the recent European experience will be drawn. These include lessons for future protocols on acidification, and combined ozone/acidification/eutrophicationprotocols. These lessons will deal with the scale of the problem, the scope of the integrated assessment models, the development of models in parallel with scientific development and the various modes of interaction with the policy community.

Key words

acid deposition integrated assessment modeling protocols 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alcamo, J.M., Shaw, R.W., Hordijk, L. (Eds): 1990, The RAINS Model of Acidification. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  2. Alcamo, J.M. (Ed.): 1994, IMAGE 2.0: Integrated Modeling of Climate Change. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  3. Amann, M., Klaassen, G., Schöpp, W.: 1991, UN/ECE Workshop on Exploring Sulfur Abatement Strategies, Report SR-91-03, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg.Google Scholar
  4. Amann, M., Hordijk L., Klaassen G., Schöpp, W. and Sorensen, L.: 1992, Energy Policy 20, 1186–1197.Google Scholar
  5. Amann, M. and Klaassen, G.: 1993, Cost-effective strategies for reducing nitrogen deposition in Europe, Report SR-93-002, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg.Google Scholar
  6. Amann, M. and Schöpp, W.: 1993, Reducing excess sulfur deposition in Europe by 60 percent, Background Paper for the UN/ECE Working Group on Strategies, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg.Google Scholar
  7. Amann, M., Baldi, M., Heyes, C., Klimont, Z. and Schöpp, W.: 1995, Integrated assessment of emission control scenarios including the impact of tropospheric ozone, this volume.Google Scholar
  8. ApSimon, H.: 1993, Reduction of European emissions of sulphur dioxide: Results from the ASAM model, Discussion Paper, Imperial College, London.Google Scholar
  9. CIESIN: 1994, Workshop on Integrated Assessment, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  10. ECE: 1993, The State of Transboundary Air Pollution. 1992 Update. Air Pollution Studies 9. United Nations, New York.Google Scholar
  11. Eliassen, A.: 1978, Atmospheric Environment 12, 479–487.Google Scholar
  12. Eliassen, A. and Saltbones, J.: 1983, Atmospheric Environment 17, 1457–1473.Google Scholar
  13. Foell, W.K., Green, C., Amann, M., Bhattacharya, S., Carmichael, G., Chadwick, M., Haugland, T., Hettelingh, J.-P., Hordijk, L., Shah, J., Shrestha, R., Streets, D. and Zhao, D.: 1995, Energy use, emissions, and air pollution reduction strategies in Asia, this volume. Google Scholar
  14. Gough, C., Bailey, P. and Chadwick, M.J.: 1993, Current developments of the CASM model, Discussion Paper, Stockholm Environment Institute, York.Google Scholar
  15. Grennfelt, P., Hov, O. and Derwent, R.G.: 1994, Ambio 23 (7), 425–433.Google Scholar
  16. Haas, P.M., Keohane, R.O. and Levy, M.A. (Eds): 1993, Institutions for the Earth. Sources of Effective Environmental Protection, The MIT Press, Cambridge MA.Google Scholar
  17. Hettelingh, J.-P., Posch, M., de Smet, P.A.M. and Downing, R.J.: 1995, The use of critical loads in emission reduction strategies in Europe, this volume.Google Scholar
  18. Hordijk, L.: 1991, Environmental Science and Technology 25, 596–603.Google Scholar
  19. Jackson, C.I.: 1990, International Environmental Affairs 2 (3), 217–226.Google Scholar
  20. Levy, M.A.: 1993, European acid rain: the power of tote-board diplomacy, in: Haas et al., op. cit.., pp. 75–132.Google Scholar
  21. NAPAP: 1991, The Experience and Legacy of NAPAP, Oversight Board of NAPAP, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  22. NOP: 1994, Programming Note for the Second Phase, National Research Program on Global Air Pollution and Climate Change, Report II-2 (in Dutch), Bilthoven, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  23. Oden, S.: 1968, The acidification of air and precipitation and its consequences in the natural environment, Ecology Committee Bulletin no.1, Swedish National Science Research Council, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  24. OECD: 1977, The OECD programme on long-range transport of air pollutants, Paris.Google Scholar
  25. Roberts, L.: 1991, Science 251, 1302–1305.Google Scholar
  26. Rubin, E.S.: 1991, Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 41, 914–921.Google Scholar
  27. Sand, P.: 1990, Lessons Learned in Global Environmental Governance, World Resources Institute, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  28. Wetstone, G. and Rosencranz, A.: 1983, Acid Rain in Europe and North America: National Responses to an International Problem, Environmental Law Institute, Washington DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leen Hordijk
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Environment and Climate StudiesAgricultural UniversityHB WageningenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations