No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Ragweed in Denmark: Should We Prevent Introduction or Mitigate Damages?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 31 October 2019
Abstract
In this article, we conduct a number of benefit–cost analyses to clarify whether the establishment of ragweed in Denmark should be prevented (pure prevention) or if the damage from this invasive species should be mitigated (pure mitigation). The main impact of the establishment of ragweed in Denmark would be a substantial increase in the number of allergy cases, which we use as a measure of the physical damage from this species. As valuation methods, we use both the cost-of-illness and benefit transfer methods to quantify the total gross benefits of these two policy actions. Based on the idea of an invasion function, we identify the total and average net benefits under both prevention and mitigation and find that all are significantly positive regardless of the valuation method. Therefore, both prevention and mitigation are beneficial policy actions, but the total and average net benefits under mitigation are larger than those under prevention in all the scenarios we consider. This finding implies that the former policy action is more beneficial. Despite this result, we propose that prevention, not mitigation, may be the proper policy because of information externalities, altruistic preferences, possible catastrophic events, and ethical considerations.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis, 2019
References
Anzivino, Luc V., Fontaine, Dior, and Sonko, Antonio. 2011. “2.e Rapport en Region sur l′Ambroisie en Region Rhone Alpes: Analyse des Donnees Medico-Economiques, Environmentales et Enquete Aupres des Cllectivites Territoriales”. Technican Report, Observatoire Regional de la Sante Rhone-Alpes.Google Scholar
Asthma Allergy Denmark. 2014. “Fact Sheet on Ragweed,” Web Publication. Available at https://hoefeber.astma-allergi.dk/typerafpollen/bynkeambrosie/faktaombynkeambrosie (accessed June 26, 2014).Google Scholar
Baumol, William J. and Oates, Wallace E.. 1988. The Theory of Environmental Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Beck, George. 2012. Economics of Invasive Weed Control: Chemical, Manual/Physical, Biological and Doing Nothing. Montana: IPM Technical Webinar Series, Center for Invasive Species Management, Montana State University.Google Scholar
Bergmann, Karl-Christian, Demata, Pascal, Worm, Margitta, Fokkes, Wylike J., Camilla, Teresa, Tabar, Ann J., Nguyen, Helen, Montagut, Armella, and Zeldin, Robert K.. 2014. “Efficacy and Safety of Sublingual Tablets of House Dust Mite Allergic Extracts in Adults with Allergic Rhinitic.” Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 133: 1608–1614.Google Scholar
Boadway, Robin F. and Bruce, Neill. 1984. Welfare Economics. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Born, Wanda, Raucshmayer, Felix, and Brauer, Ingo. 2005. “Economic Evaluation of Biological Invasions – A Survey.” Ecological Economics, 55: 321–336.Google Scholar
Burbach, Gerry J., Heinzerling, Lorenz, Rohnelt, Christian, Bergman, Karl C., Behrendt, Harry, and Zuberbier, Toni. 2009. “Ragweed Sensitization in Europe – GA(2)Len Study Suggests Increasing Prevalence.” Allergy, 64: 664–665.Google Scholar
Calderon, Moises and Brandt, Tove. 2008. “Treatment of Grass Pollen Allergy Focused on a Standardized Grass Allergy Extract – Gralix.” Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, 4: 1255–1260.Google Scholar
Conrad, Jon M. and Clark, Colin W.. 1987. Natural Resource Economics. Notes and Problems. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Danish Ministry of Taxation. 2014. “The Danish Tax System,” Danish Ministry of Taxation, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Danish Nature Agency. 2014. “Facts Sheet on Ragweed,” Danish Nature Agency, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Danish Veterinary and Food Administration. 2012. “Report on 2012 Campaign on Seeds from Ragweed in Wild Bird Seeds,” Fødevarestyrelsen, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Danish Veterinary and Food Administration. 2013. “Report on 2013 Campaign on Seeds from Ragweed in Wild Bird Seeds,” Fødevarestyrelsen, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Epanchin-Nil, Robin S. and Hastings, Andre. 2010. “Controlling Established Invaders: Integrating Economics and Spread Dynamics to Determine Optimal Management.” Ecology Letters, 13: 528–541.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2011. “Commission Regulation no. 574/2011 Amending Annex I to Directive 2002/32/EC of the European Parliament,” European Commission, Brussels.Google Scholar
European Commission. 2015. “Guide to Cost–Benefit Analysis of Investments Projects. Economic Appraisal Tool for Cohesion Policy 2014–2020,” European Commission, Brussels.Google Scholar
Farley, Tony A. 2006. “When is it Ethical to Withhold Prevention?.” The New England Journal of Medicine, 374: 1303–1306.Google Scholar
Finnoff, David, Shogren, Jason F., Leung, Brett, and Lodge, David. 2005. “The Importance of Bio-Economic Feedback in Invasive Species Management.” Ecological Economics, 52: 367–381.Google Scholar
Freemann, Myrick A. 1993. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values. Brussels, Belgium: Resource for the Future.Google Scholar
Gren, Ingmar M., Isacs, Luck, and Carlson, Matthi. 2009. “Costs of Alien Invasive Species in Sweden.” Ambio, 38: 35–140.Google Scholar
Hanley, Nick and Roberts, Michaela. 2019. “The Economic Benefits of Invasive Species Management.” People and Nature, 1: 124–137.Google Scholar
Hanley, Nick, Shogren, Jason F., and White, Ben. 1997. Environmental Economics: In Theory and Practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Havert, Christian and Doebeli, Marc. 2004. “Spatial Structure Often Inhibits the Evaluation of Cooperation in the Snowdown Game.” Nature, 428: 643–646.Google Scholar
Hertwig, Ralf, Barron, Greg, Weber, Elke U., and Ereu, Ido. 2004. “Decisions from Experience and the Effect of Rare Events in a Risky Choice.” Psychological Science, 15: 534–539.Google Scholar
Horan, Richard D., Finnoff, David, Berry, Kevin, Reeling, Carson, and Shogren, Jason F.. 2018. “Managing Wildlife Faced with Pathogen Risks Involving Multi-Stable Outcomes.” Environmental and Resource Economics, 70: 713–730.Google Scholar
Horan, Richard D., Perrings, Charles, Lupi, Frank, and Bulte, Eric H.. 2002. “Biological Pollution Prevention Strategies Under Ignorance: The Case of Invasive Species.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 84: 1303–1310.Google Scholar
Jacobsson, Frank, Carstensen, Lars, and Borgquist, Lennart. 2005. “Caring Externalities in Health Economic Evaluation: How are They Related to Severity of Illness?.” Health Policy, 73: 172–182.Google Scholar
Jay, Grace M.M., Morad, Munice, and Bel, Angela. 2003. “Biosecurity: A Policy Dilemma for New Zealand.” Land Use Policy, 20: 121–129.Google Scholar
Johnston, Robert J., Rolfe, John, Rosenberger, Robert, and Brouwer, Roy. 2015. Benefit Transfer of Environmental and Resource Values. A Guide for Researchers and Practitioners. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Kahneman, David and Tversky, Andre. 1979. “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk.” Econometrica, 47: 263–291.Google Scholar
Larsen, Jørgen Nedergaard, Borge, Louise, and Jacob, Henrik. 2016. “Allergy Immunology Therapy: The Future of Allergy Treatment.” Drug Discovery Today, 21: 26–37.Google Scholar
Lee, Stan, McCann, David, and Messenger, John. 2007. Working Time around the World. Trends in Working Hours, Laws and Policies in a Global Perspective. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Leung, Brett, Lodge, David M., Finnoff, David, Shogren, Jason F., Lewis, Mark A., and Lamberti, George. 2002. “An Ounce of Prevention or a Pound of Cure: Bioeconomic Risk Analysis of Invasive Species.” Proceedings Biological Science, 269: 2407–2413.Google Scholar
Luskin, Andre T., Scherger, John F., and Pollart, Stan M.. 2004. “Beyond the Nose: The Systemic Inflammatory Effects of Allergic Rhinitis.” Hospital Physician, 13: 13–22.Google Scholar
Mahoro, Andre G., Korsholm, Ulrik S., Baktanov, Anders A., and Rasmussen, Andre. 2007. “Elevated Birch Pollen Episodes in Denmark: Contributions from Remote Sources.” Aerobiologia, 23: 171–179.Google Scholar
Mant, John, Hobbs, Frank D., Fletcher, Karl, Raalfe, Andre, Fitzmaurice, David, Lip, Gerry Y.H., and Murray, Eric. 2007. “Warfarin Versus Aspirin for Stroke Prevention in an Elderly Community Population with Atrial Fibrillation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.” Lancet, 370: 493–503.Google Scholar
Marbuah, Gerry, Gren, David M., and McKie, Bret. 2014. “Economics of Harmful Invasive Species: A Review.” Diversity, 6: 500–523.Google Scholar
McCarthy, Marc A., Possingham, Harry P., and Gill, Andre M.. 2001. “Using Stochastic Dynamic Programming to Determine Optimal Fire Management for Banksia Arnalo.” Journal of Applied Ecology, 38: 585–592.Google Scholar
Naylor, Robert L. 2000. “The Economics of Invasive Alien Species.” In Invasive Species in a Changing World, edited by Mooney, H.A. and Nobbs, R.J.. New York, NY: Island Press.Google Scholar
O’Connell, Marc E. 2009. Preventing Mental, Emotional and Behavioral Disorders Among Younger People: Progress and Possibilities. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.Google Scholar
Office of Technology Assessment. 2013. Harmful Non-Indigenous Species in the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Olson, John A., Kidholm, Kristian, Donaldson, Carl, and Sharkley, Peter. 2004. “Willingness to Pay for Public Health Care: A Comparison of Two Approaches.” Health Policy, 70: 217-228.Google Scholar
Panzacchi, Manuela, Cocchi, Roberto, Genovesi, Piero, and Bertoloni, Sandro. 2007. “Population Control of Coypu Myocastor Coypus in Italy Compared to Eradication in UK: A Cost–Benefit Analysis.” Wildlife Biology, 13: 159–171.Google Scholar
Pearce, David, Atkinson, Gerry, and Mourato, Stan. 2006. Cost-–Benefit Analysis and the Environment. Recent Developments. Paris, Italy: OECD.Google Scholar
Perrings, Carl, Williamson, Marc, and Diamazzone, Stan. 2000. The Economics of Biological Invasions. London, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Petersen, Kristian D., Gyrd-Hansen, Dorthe, and Dahl, Ralf. 2005. “Health Economic Analyses of Subcutaneous Specific Immonotheapy for Grass Pollen and Mite Allergy.” Allergol et Immonopathol, 33: 20–29.Google Scholar
Petersen, Kristian D., Linneber, Anders, Dahl, Ralf, Larsen, John N., Løvenstein, Henrik, and Kronborg, Kristian. 2010. “Willingness to Pay for Allergy-Vaccination Among Danish Patients with Respiratory Allergy.” International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 26: 20–29.Google Scholar
Rajmis, Sandra, Thiele, Jan, and Marggraf, Rainer A.. 2016. “Cost–Benefit Analysis of Controlling Giant Hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum) in Germany Using a Choice Experiment Approach.” NeoBiota, 31: 19–41.Google Scholar
Ravn, Henrik P. 2015. “Invasive Arter – En Tematisk Udredning.” IGN Rapport, Institut for Geovidenskab og Naturforvaltning, Københavns Universitet.Google Scholar
Reyns, Nikolaas, Casaer, Jim, Smer, Lieven D., Devos, Koen, Huysentruyt, Frank, Robertson, Peter A., Vebeke, Tom, and Adriaens, Tim. 2019. “Cost–Benefit Analysis for Invasive Species Control: The Case of Greater Canada Goose Branta Canadensis in Flanders (Northern Belgium).” PeerJ, 13: 1–28.Google Scholar
Simms, Christian and Finnoff, David. 2013. “When is a “Wait and See” Approach to Invasive Species Justified?.” Resource and Energy Economics, 35: 225–235.Google Scholar
Slavin, Ralf G. 2009. “Treating Rhinitis in the Population: Special Considerations.” Allergy Astma Clinical Immunol, 5: 1–9.Google Scholar
Steinback, Sten and Ribes, Anders C.. 2014. “Common Ragweed Invasion in Sweden: Impacts of the Lag Phase on Human Health.” Paper Presented at the EAAE 2014 Congress, Ljubljana, Slovenia.Google Scholar
Tarricone, Rolf. 2006. “Cost-of-Illness Analysis: What Room in Health Economics?.” Health Policy, 77: 51–63.Google Scholar