Optimal investment to control ‘red air day’ episodes: lessons from Northern Utah, USA
Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, ISSN: 2160-6552, Vol: 9, Issue: 2, Page: 227-250
2020
- 1Citations
- 10Usage
- 7Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations1
- Citation Indexes1
- Usage10
- Downloads9
- Abstract Views1
- Captures7
- Readers7
Article Description
We address the issue of optimal investment in ‘preventative capital’ to mitigate episodic, mobile-source air pollution events by calibrating an endogenous-risk model with parameter estimates obtained from a unique dataset related to ‘red air day’ episodes occurring during the winter months in Northern Utah. Our analysis demonstrates that, under a wide range of circumstances, the optimal steady-state level of preventative capital stock–raised through the issuance of a municipal ‘clean air bond’ that provides foundational funding for more aggressive mitigation efforts–can meet the standard for PM2.5 concentrations with positive social net benefits. We estimate benefit-cost ratios ranging between 3.1:1 and 11.3:1, depending upon trip-count elasticity with respect to preventative capital stock. These ratios are clustered in the lower end of the range estimated for the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments in general.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85110809866&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2019.1666747; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21606544.2019.1666747; https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/21606544.2019.1666747; https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/appecon_facpub/1299; https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2324&context=appecon_facpub; https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2019.1666747
Informa UK Limited
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know