Abstract
Most developing countries are just beginning to takeenvironmental protection seriously. In some cases it is common tocopy regulations from developed countries; however, determininghow much protection is required is difficult, ideally requiringthat the costs and risks be considered to propose a realistic andeffective policy. Chile has serious problems with arsenicpollution associated to emissions from its copper smelters. Toregulate these emissions, a strict ambient concentrationstandard, applicable to the whole country, is being proposed thatreduces risks to an acceptable level. However, little is knownabout the exposure and health effects associated to currentemission levels, and the corresponding costs of reducingemissions. The results of a three-year project that combinesengineering, economics and health information sheds light onthese costs and risks for different values of ambient standards.These show that there are ``win--win'' options that obtainsignificant health improvements at low, even negative, costs.However, costs quickly increase as the concentration standardbecomes more stringent, with few additional health benefits. Inmany locations naturally high background levels of arsenic makeit very costly or even impossible to reach the desired goal.These results make it necessary to examine the use of a case-by-caseregulation for each source, rather than a general one basedon a unique ambient quality goal. They also suggest that copyingstandards or risk criteria used in developed contexts can beextremely expensive.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Díaz, C., H. Schwarze and J. Taylor (1995), ‘The Changing Landscape of Copper Smelting in the Americas’, Proceedings of Copper 95 International Conference, Vol. IV — Pirometallurgy of Copper, Santiago, Chile, November 26–29.
Ditz et al. (1995), Green Ledgers: Case Studies in Corporate Environmental Accounting. World Resources Institute, May.
Ferreccio, C., C. González, V. Milosavljevic and A. M. Sancha (1997), ‘Impacto en salud atribuible a exposición a arsénico: Un estudio de casos y controles’, ‘Protección de la Competitividad de los Productos Mineros de Chile: Antecedentes y Criterios para la Regulación del Arsénico’. Santiago, Chile: Universidad de Chile.
Fondef (1997), Protección de la Competitividad de los Productos Mineros de Chile: Antecedentes y Criterios para la Regulación del Arsénico, Final Report. Santiago, Chile: Universidad de Chile.
‘The Gallon Environmental Letter’ (1997), Canadian Institute for Business and the Environment, Vol. 1,No. 20, November 18.
George, Gottling and Newman (1995), ‘Modernization of Kennecott Utah Copper Smelter’, Proceedings of Copper 95 International Conference, Vol. IV — Pirometallurgy of Copper. Santiago, Chile, November 26–29.
Halsnaes, K. (1997), ‘Assessment of International Mitigation Costing Studies in Developing Countries’, UNEP Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment. Denmark: Riso National Laboratory.
Hanniala, P. (1996), ‘The Environmental and Economic Benefits of the Outokumpu Flash Smelting Technology for Different Kinds of Concentrates’, Proceedings of Clean Technology for the Mining Industry. Concepción, Chile: Universidad de Concepción.
Moore, C. and A. Míller (1994), Green Gold. Boston, Estados Unidos: Beacon Press.
O'Ryan, R. (1996), ‘Cost-Effective Policies to Improve Urban Air Quality in Santiago, Chile’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management(November) 31, 302-313.
Smith, A. et al. (1992), ‘Arsenic in the Environment and Its Incidence on Health’, International Seminar Proceedings, Vol. 97. Santiago, Chile, May, pp. 135-145.
UNEP/WHO Global Environment Monitoring Programme (1986), ‘Guidelines for Integrated Air, Water, Food and Biological Exposure Monitoring’, Heal Project, Human Exposure Assessment Location. Geneva: World Health Organization.
US EPA (1984), ‘Health Assessment Document for Inorganic Arsenic’, Final Report. EPA 600/8-83-021 F, March. Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, Washington DC 20460.
Van Houtver, G. and M. Cropper (1996), ‘When is a Life to Costly to Save? The Evidence from U.S. Environmental Regulations’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30, 348-368.
WHO (1987), Air Quality Guidelines for Europe. Denmark: WHO Regional Publications, European Series No. 23.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
O'Ryan, R., Díaz, M. Risk-Cost Analysis for the Regulation of Airborne Toxic Substances in a Developing Context: The Case of Arsenic in Chile. Environmental and Resource Economics 15, 115–134 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008300206313
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008300206313