Advertisement

Use of Formal Methods in Evaluating Countermeasures to Coastal Water Pollution. A Case Study of the Kristiansand Fjord, Southern Norway

  • A. Heiberg
  • K.-G. Hem
Part of the NATO · Challenges of Modern Society book series (NATS, volume 12)

Abstract

The environmental problems occurring in modern industrial societies are frequently characterized by a high degree of complexity. Often the effects of pollutants released into the environment are uncertain and difficult to assess. Moreover, the pollution may affect widely different areas such as the natural environment, human health, outdoor recreation, and industrial activities. The diversity of the pollution-induced effects normally complicates the decision-maker’s task of setting priorities and choosing among available control options to a considerable extent. Among the issues to be addressed is how to balance the various impact areas and how to compare the benefits of pollution control with the cost of putting an action into effect. Undoubtedly, methods or procedures that could facilitate the handling of such problems would be of great help in the decision-making process.

Keywords

Water Clarity Municipal Sewage Norwegian Institute Organic Micropollutants Abatement Measure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Burns, L.A., Cline, D.M., and Lassiter, R.R., 1982, “Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS): User Manual and System Documentation,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Research Laboratory, Athens, Georgia, EPA-600/3-82-023.Google Scholar
  2. Cox, L.A. Jr., 1986, Theory of regulatory benefits assessment: econometric and expressed preference approaches, in: “Benefits Assessment: The State of the Art” J.D. Bentkover, V.T. Covello, and J. Mumpower, eds., Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  3. Edwards, W., 1977, Use of multiattribute measurement for social decision making, in: “Conflicting Objectives in Decisions,” B.E. Bell, R.L. Keeney, and H. Raiffa, eds., John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Green, N.W., Knutzen, J., and Asen, P.A., 1985, “Baseline Investigation of the Kristiansand Fjord. Report 3: Shallow Water Communities 1982–1983” (in Norwegian), Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Oslo, Report 800035.Google Scholar
  5. Heiberg, A., Hem, K.-G., Green, N., and Tryland, O., 1987, “Evaluation of Measures against the Pollution of the Kristiansand Fjord. An Example of a Cost-Benefit Analysis within the Environmental Sector,” Center for Industrial Research, Oslo, Report 830123-5.Google Scholar
  6. Hurlbert, S.N., 1971, The non-concept of species diversity, Ecology, 53: 577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Keeney, R.L., and Raiffa, H.F., 1976, “Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-offs,” John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Kingsbury, G.L., and Chessin, R.L., 1984, “Monitoring Trigger Levels for Process Characterization Studies,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  9. Knutzen, J., Martinsen, K., and Enger, B., 1986, “Baseline Investigation of the Kristiansand Fjord. Report 4: Contaminants in Fish and other Organisms” (in Norwegian), Norewgian Institute for Water Research, Oslo, Report 8000356.Google Scholar
  10. Knutzen, J., and Martinsen, K., 1986, “Measure-orientated Monitoring of Micropollutants in Fish and other Organisms from the Kristiansand Fjord 1985” (in Norwegian), Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Oslo, Monitoring Report 262/86.Google Scholar
  11. Molvaer, J., Solheim, H.I., and Källqvist, T., 1986, “Baseline Investigation of the Kristiansand Fjord. Report 5: Water Replacement and Water Quality” (in Norwegian), Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Oslo, Report 0-8000352.Google Scholar
  12. Naes, K., 1985, “Baseline Investigation of the Kristiansand Fjord. Report 2: Metals in the Water Masses, Metals and Organic Pollutants in the Sediments, 1983” (in Norwegian), Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Oslo, Report 8000353.Google Scholar
  13. Rygg, B., 1984a, “Soft Bottom Fauna Investigations. A Useful Tool in the Assessment of Marine Receiving Waters” (in Norwegian), Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Oslo, 0F-806l2.Google Scholar
  14. Rygg, B., 1984b, Ecological detrimental effects of copper pollution in the marine environment, Vann, 4: 464 (in Norwegian).Google Scholar
  15. Rygg. B., 1985, “Baseline Investigation of the Kristiansand Fjord. Report 1: Soft Bottom Fauna Investigations 1983” (in Norwegian), Norwegian Institute for Water Research, Oslo, Report 8000355.Google Scholar
  16. Tollefsen, O., Hem, K.-G., and Heiberg, A., 1988, “Evaluation of Pollution Countermeasures in the Kristiansand Fjord by use of the Simplified Multiattribute Rating Technique” (in Norwegian), Center for Industrial Research, Oslo, Report 830123-7.Google Scholar
  17. Von Winterfeldt, D., and Edwards, W., 1986, “Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research,” Cambridge, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. Heiberg
    • 1
  • K.-G. Hem
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Industrial ResearchOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations