Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Costs and benefits associated with marine oil spill prevention in northern Norway
KTH, Skolan för arkitektur och samhällsbyggnad (ABE), Hållbar utveckling, miljövetenskap och teknik, Vatten- och miljöteknik. Anthesis Enveco AB, Sverige. (SEED)
KTH, Skolan för arkitektur och samhällsbyggnad (ABE), Hållbar utveckling, miljövetenskap och teknik, Miljöstrategisk analys (fms). (SEED)
Kemikalieinspektionen.
Enveco.
Vise andre og tillknytning
2017 (engelsk)Inngår i: The Polar Journal, ISSN 2154-896X, E-ISSN 2154-8978, Vol. 7, nr 1, s. 165-180Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

The purpose of this study is to analyse conflicts regarding natural resources and ecosystem services involving different stakeholder groups using cost–benefit analysis (CBA). The paper is formed around a specific case study in Lofoten–Vesterålen in northern Norway, investigating costs and benefits of decreasing the probability of a major oil spill from shipping in the area. Benefits of decreasing the probability of a spill are far greater than costs, which means that measures to improve maritime safety would be economically profitable for society. Figures showing the effects of the impacts on fisheries and tourism sectors indicate that, compared to the total value for society, the market values of decreasing the probability of a spill are very small. On the other hand, non-market values associated with the protection of ecosystem services are of a much greater magnitude. These results suggest that the neglecting of non-market ecosystem service values in economic assessments for the Arctic may cause a biased picture of costs and benefits associated with measures to prevent environmental degradation. When feeding into decisions, such assessments may lead to too little preventive action from an economic perspective.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Taylor & Francis, 2017. Vol. 7, nr 1, s. 165-180
Emneord [en]
Cost–benefit analysis, ecosystem services, Arctic, non-use values, oil spill, natural resource conflict
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-218736DOI: 10.1080/2154896X.2017.1310491Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85017207515OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-218736DiVA, id: diva2:1161445
Merknad

QC 20171130

Tilgjengelig fra: 2017-11-30 Laget: 2017-11-30 Sist oppdatert: 2017-11-30bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstScopus

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Hasselström, LinusHåkansson, Cecilia
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
The Polar Journal

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
urn-nbn
Totalt: 295 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf