Improving Air Quality in Metropolitan Mexico City : An Economic Valuation
Mexico City has for years experienced high levels of ozone and particulate air pollution. In 1995-99 the entire population of the Mexico City metropolitan area was exposed to annual average concentrations of fine particulate pollution (particulates...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Policy Research Working Paper |
| Language: | English en_US |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2013
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2002/02/1703259/improving-air-quality-metropolitan-mexico-city-economic-valuation http://hdl.handle.net/10986/15696 |
| Summary: | Mexico City has for years experienced
high levels of ozone and particulate air pollution. In
1995-99 the entire population of the Mexico City
metropolitan area was exposed to annual average
concentrations of fine particulate pollution (particulates
with a diameter of less than 10 micrometers, or PM10)
exceeding 50 micrograms per cubic meter, the annual average
standard in both Mexico and the United States. Two million
people were exposed to annual average PM10 levels of more
than 75 micrograms per cubic meter. The daily maximum
one-hour ozone standard was exceeded at least 300 days a
year. The Mexico Air Quality Management Team documents
population-weighted exposures to ozone and PM10 between 1995
and 1999, project exposures in 2010, and computes the value
of four scenarios for 2010: A 10 percent reduction in PM10
and ozone. A 20 percent reduction in PM10 and ozone.
Achievement of ambient air quality standards across the
metropolitan area. A 68 percent reduction in ozone and a 47
percent reduction in PM10 across the metropolitan area. The
authors calculate the health benefits of reducing ozone and
PM10 for each scenario using dose-response functions from
the peer-reviewed literature. They value cases of morbidity
and premature mortality avoided using three approaches: Cost
of illness and forgone earnings only (low estimate). Cost of
illness, forgone earnings, and willingness to pay for
avoided morbidity (central case estimate). Cost of illness,
forgone earnings, willingness to pay for avoided morbidity,
and willingness to pay for avoided mortality (high
estimate). The results suggest that the benefits of a 10
percent reduction in ozone and PM10 in 2010 are about $760
million (in 1999 U.S. dollars) annually in the central case.
The benefits of a 20 percent reduction in ozone and PM10 are
about $1.49 billion annually. In each case the benefits of
reducing ozone amount to about 15 percent of the total
benefits. By estimating the magnitude of the benefits from
air pollution control, the authors provide motivation for
examining specific policies that could achieve the air
pollution reductions that they value. They also provide unit
values for the benefits from reductions in ambient air
pollution (for example, per microgram of PM10) that could be
used as inputs into a full cost-benefit analysis of air
pollution control strategies. |
|---|