Estimating the economic burden from illnesses associated with recreational coastal water pollution - A case study in Orange County, California

University of California, Riverside, Riverside, California, United States
Journal of Environmental Management (Impact Factor: 2.72). 08/2005; 76(2):95-103. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.11.017
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A cost-of-illness framework was applied to health and income data to quantify the health burden from illnesses associated with exposure to polluted recreational marine waters. Using data on illness severity due to exposure to polluted coastal water and estimates of mean annual salaries and medical costs (adjusted to 2001 values) for residents of Orange County, California, we estimated that the economic burden per gastrointestinal illness (GI) amounts to 36.58 dollars, the burden per acute respiratory disease is 76.76 dollars, the burden per ear ailment is 37.86 dollars, and the burden per eye ailment is 27.31 dollars. These costs can become a substantial public health burden when millions of exposures per year to polluted coastal waters result in hundreds of thousands of illnesses. For example, exposures to polluted waters at Orange County's Newport and Huntington Beaches were estimated to generate an average of 36,778 GI episodes per year. At this GI illness rate, one can also expect that approximately 38,000 more illness episodes occurred per year of other types, including respiratory, eye, and ear infections. The combination of excess illnesses associated with coastal water pollution resulted in a cumulative public health burden of 3.3 million dollars per year for these two beaches. This paper introduces a public health cost variable that can be applied in cost-benefit analyses when evaluating pollution abatement strategies.

Download full-text


Available from: Jan Semenza, Jun 11, 2014
1 Follower
198 Reads
  • Source
    • "The excess illnesses associated with coastal water pollution can also result in substantial economic burdens. A study in Orange County, CA, estimated 3.3 million US dollars per year in excess illness costs for Newport and Huntington Beaches associated with bathing in marine waters [5]. Swimming-related illness is predominately associated with exposure to microbial pathogens, which may enter the water through point sources such as sewage outfalls. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: New approaches should be considered as the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) moves rapidly to develop new beach monitoring guidelines by the end of 2012, as these guidelines serve as the basis by which states and territories with coasts along the oceans and Great Lakes can then develop and implement monitoring programs for recreational waters. We describe and illustrate one possible approach to beach regulation termed as the "Comprehensive Toolbox within an Approval Process (CTBAP)." The CTBAP consists of three components. The first is a "toolbox" consisting of an inventory of guidelines on monitoring targets, a series of measurement techniques, and guidance to improve water quality through source identification and prevention methods. The second two components are principles of implementation. These include first, "flexibility" to encourage and develop an individualized beach management plan tailored to local conditions and second, "consistency" of this management plan to ensure a consistent national level of public health protection. The results of this approach are illustrated through a case study at a well-studied South Florida recreational marine beach. This case study explores different monitoring targets based on two different health endpoints (skin versus gastrointestinal illness) and recommends a beach regulation program for the study beach that focuses predominately on source prevention.
    Journal of Environmental and Public Health 01/2013; 2013:138521. DOI:10.1155/2013/138521
  • Source
    • "Stormwater runoff can significantly decrease water quality by reducing color and clarity, increasing algae blooms that endanger marine wildlife, and temporarily increases the risk of waterborne illness such as gastroenteritis and infection (Dwight et al., 2005; Gaffield et al., 2003; Hawaii DBEDT, 2006; Rabinovici et al., 2004). Consequently, Hawaii authorities discourage beach use during times of peak pollution by issuing " Brown Water Advisories " after heavy storms. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Much of Hawaii’s economy relies on its unique marine environments, which are threatened by degradation from stormwater runoff. Using a stated preference method of choice-based conjoint (CBC) analysis, based on stylized photographs, this study examines both residents’ and visitors’ marginal value for levels of attributes associated with Hawaiian beach recreation. Each attribute (sand quality, water quality, congestion and water safety conditions) was significant for both residents and tourists, with water quality being the single most important attribute. There is little distinction between resident and tourist marginal value, except for a greater value lost for below average water quality among tourists.
  • Source
    • "For a program to meet the efficiency goal, benefits must exceed costs. Targeting the efficiency objective increases the likelihood that government actions will place burdens on businesses and consumers that are only in proportion to improvements in health safety (Dwight et al., 2005; Jeuland & Whittington, 2009), or the environment (Diebel et al., 2008) 6 . Those opposed to the exclusive use of economic efficiency argue that other goals are also important, such as equity and sustainability. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper reviews recent developments in cost–benefit analysis for water policy researchers who wish to under-stand the applications of economic principles to inform emerging water policy debates. The cost–benefit framework can provide a comparison of total economic gains and losses resulting from a proposed water policy. Cost–benefit analysis can provide decision-makers with a comparison of the impacts of two or more water policy options using methods that are grounded in time-tested economic principles. Economic efficiency, measured as the difference between added benefits and added costs, can inform water managers and the public of the economic impacts of water programs to address peace, development, health, the environment, climate and poverty. Faced by limited resources, cost–benefit analysis can inform policy choices by summarizing trade-offs involved in designing, applying, or reviewing a wide range of water programs. The data required to con-duct a cost–benefit analysis are often poor but the steps needed to carry out that analysis require posing the right questions.
    Water Policy 01/2012; 14(2). DOI:10.2166/wp.2011.021 · 0.83 Impact Factor
Show more