Improving port sustainability performance:
Cost-benefit and carbon footprint analysis for assessing infrastructure investments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34647/jmv.nr16.id100Schlagworte:
infrastructure, ports, triple-bottom-line framework, cost-benefit-analysis, environmental economicsAbstract
The European Union tightened its climate targets in July 2021. Sectors of the economy - including ports - must contribute by reducing their emissions. This paper strives welfare economics by including externalities such as environmental costs and presents results for evaluating infrastructure investments in ports. By applying a combined cost-benefit and carbon footprint analysis the authors show how decision-makers can assess port investments in infrastructure economically and environmentally. Using European port redevelopment as an example, this article illustrates that including externalities in the cost comparisons of port investment options could lead to new discussion making. Moreover, decarbonizing the economy does not just bring only economic benefits by efficiency increase but can also reduce cost to society. The idea of the triple bottom line (TBL) framework is addressed and discusses the role of the inclusion of social sustainability for port infrastructure investments.
Literaturhinweise
Acemoglu D, Laibson D, List J (2016): Economics. Harlow.
Ackerman F, Heinzerling L, Massey R (2005): Applying Cost-Benefit to Past Decisions: Was Environmental Protection Ever a Good Idea? Administrative Law Review, 57(1), pp. 155-192.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.576161
Alamoush A S, Ballini F, Ölçer A I (2021): Revisiting port sustainability as a foundation for the implementation of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs). Journal of Shipping and Trade, 6(19), pp.1-40, DOI: 10.1186/s41072-021-00101-6
https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-021-00101-6
PMCid:PMC8574933
Barbier E B, Markandya A, Pearce D W (1990): Environmental Sustainability and Cost-Benefit Analysis. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 22(9), pp. 1259-1266, DOI: 10.1068/a221259
https://doi.org/10.1068/a221259
Boadway R (2006): Principles of Cost-Benefit Analysis. Public Policy Review, 2 (1), pp. 1-44.
Claeys G, Guetta-Jeanrenaud L (2022): Who is suffering most from rising inflation?, Brussels. Retrieved from https://www.bruegel.org/2022/02/who-is-suffering-most-from-rising-inflation/ [access 01.10.2022]..
Deutsche Welle (DW) (2022): EU unveils plan to reduce Russia energy dependency: DW: 08.03.2022. DW.COM. Retrieved from https://www.dw.com/en/eu-unveils-plan-to-reduce-russia-energy-dependency/a-61047997 [access 01.09.2022].
Dźwigoł, H, Dźwigoł-Barosz M, Zhyvko Z, Miśkiewicz R, Pushak H (2019): Evaluation of the energy security as a component of national security of the country. Journal of Security and Sustainability Issues, 8(3), pp. 307-317. DOI: 10.9770/jssi.2019.8.3(2)
https://doi.org/10.9770/jssi.2019.8.3(2)
Erb K, Niedertscheider M, Dietrich J P, Schmitz C, Verburg P H, Jepsen M R, Haberl H (2014): Conceptual and empirical approaches to mapping and quantifying land-use intensity. Ester Boserup's Legacy on Sustainability, pp. 61-86. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-8678-2_5
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8678-2_5
European Commission (eds.) (2015): Guide to Cost-Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects: Economic Appraisal Tool for Cohesion Policy 2014-2020., Brussels. DOI: 10.2769/97516
European Commission (eds.) (2020): Communication From The Commission To The European Parliament, The Council, The European Economic And Social Committee And The Committee Of The Regions, Brussels.
European Environmental Agency (EEA) (eds.) (2022): European Maritime Transport Environmental Report 2021, Luxembourg. Retrieved from https://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/maritime-transport/ [access 15.07.2022].
European Investment Bank (EIB) (eds.) (2013): The Economic Appraisal of Investment Projects at the EIB, Projects Directorate, Luxemburg.
European Investment Bank (EIB) (eds.) (2014): Induced GHG Footprint, Methodologies for the Assessment of Project GHG Emissions, Version 10.0, Luxemburg.
European Sea Ports Organisation (eds.) (ESPO) (2022): Maritime EU ETS: Europe's Ports Call For An Ambitious Scope That Avoids Carbon And Business Leakage, Brussels. Retrieved from https://www.espo.be/news/maritime-eu-ets-europes-ports-call-for-an-ambitiou.
European Seaports Organisation (ESPO) (eds.) (2018): The infrastructure investment need and financing challenge of European Ports, Brussels.
Eurostat (2022): International trade in goods by mode of transport. Eurostat Data Browser. European Commission. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=International_trade_in_goods_by_mode_of_transport&stable=0 [access 15.09.2022].
Fenhann J V (2017): CO2 Emissions from International Shipping. UNEP DTU Partnership Working Paper Series 2017 Vol. 4.
Forsyth P, Niemeier H M, Njoya E T (2021): Economic Evaluation of Investments in Airports: Recent Developments, Journal of Benefit Cost Analysis, 12(1), pp. 85-121, DOI: 10.1017/bca.2020.31
https://doi.org/10.1017/bca.2020.31
Froese J, Jahn, M, Wedemeier J, Wuczkowski M (2019): Action plan: Low carbon regional ports, HWWI Policy Paper 119, Hamburg.
Haberl H, Fischer-Kowalski M, Krausmann F, Martinez-Alier J, Winiwarter V (2011): A socio-metabolic transition towards Sustainability?
Challenges for another great transformation. Sustainable Development, 19(1), pp. 1-14. DOI: 10.1002/sd.410.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.410
Hänsel M C, Drupp M A, Johansson, D J, Nesje F, Azar C, Freeman M C, Groom B, Sterne T (2020): Climate Economics support for the UN climate targets. Nature Climate Change, 10(8), pp. 781-789. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-020-0833-x
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0833-x
International Maritime Organization (IMO) (eds.) (2022): Third IMO GHG Study 2014: Executive Summary and Final Report. London. Retrieved from https://wwwcdn.imo.org/localresources/en/OurWork/Environment/Documents/Third%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20Study/GHG3%20Executive%20Summary%20and%20Report.pdf [access 01.09.2022].
Internationale Institut für Nachhaltigkeitsanalysen und -strategien (IINAS) (eds.) (2017): GEMIS - Globales Emissions-Modell integrierter Systeme, Version 4.95, Retrieved from http://iinas.org [access 01.06.2017].
Jahn M, Wedemeier J (2018): Developing low carbon port potential: Cost-benefit & carbon footprint analyses, HWWI Policy Paper 111, Hamburg.
Jahn M, Wedemeier J (2021): Developing low carbon port potential: Cost-benefit & carbon footprint analyses, EXCEL Tool, Hamburg. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10419/186137 [access 14.03.2023].
Koopman C, Mouter N, (2020): Cost-Benefit Analysis, Advances in Transport Policy and Planning 6(2020), 1-42, DOI: 10.1016/bs.atpp.2020.07.005
https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.atpp.2020.07.005
MARAD (eds.) (2020): Preparing a Benefit-Cost Analysis for a Port Infrastructure Development Program Grant, U.S Department of Transportation, March 2020, Washington.
Martišauskas L, Augutis J, Krikštolaitis R (2018): Methodology for energy security assessment considering energy system resilience to disruptions. Energy Strategy Reviews, pp. 22, 106-118. DOI: 10.1016/j.esr.2018.08.007
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2018.08.007
Miller G D (2010): The security costs of Energy Independence. The Washington Quarterly, 33(2), pp. 107-119.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01636601003661761
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (eds.) (NASEM) (2017). Valuing Climate Damages: Updating Estimation of the Social Cost of Carbon Dioxide. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nitt-Driesselmann D, Wedemeier J (2021): Green port development - Welche Rolle kommt Häfen bei der Erreichung der Klimaziele zu?, Wirtschaftsdienst, 101(4), pp. 290-293. DOI: 10.1007/s10273-021-2897-2
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10273-021-2897-2
PMid:33897058 PMCid:PMC8052205
Nitt-Driesselmann D, Steffens L, Wedemeier J (2022): Port economy. DUAL Ports CBA/CFA. HWWI-Update (2022), Hamburg. Retrieved from https://update.hwwi.org/index.php?id=9349 [access 14.03.2023].
Nordhaus W, Yang Z (1996): A Regional Dynamic General-Equilibrium Model of Alternative Climate-Change Strategies, American Economic Review, 86(4), pp. 741-765.
Norman W, MacDonald C (2004): Getting to the bottom of "Triple bottom line". Business Ethics Quarterly, 14(2), pp. 243-262. DOI: 10.5840/beq200414211
https://doi.org/10.5840/beq200414211
Notteboom T, Pallis A, Rodrigue J P. (2022): Port Economics, Management and Policy, 1st Edition, New York.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429318184
PMCid:PMC7781181
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (eds.) (2018): Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment: Further Developments and Policy Use, Paris.
Pearce D, Atkinson G, Mourato S (2006): Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment - Recent Developments. OECD (eds.), Paris.
Phaneuf, D J.; Requate, T (2017): A course in environmental economics: Theory, policy, and Practice, Cambridge.
https://doi.org/10.1017/9780511843839
Pindyck R S, Rubinfeld D L (2018): Mikroökonomik, 7. aktualisierte Auflage, München.
Port of Vancouver (eds.) (2020): Summary of cost-benefit/impact analyses. Projects and initiatives to be cost recovered through GIF2022, November 2020, Vancouver.
Rees, D., Rungcharoenkitkul, P. (2021): Bottlenecks: causes and macroeconomic implications. Bank for International Settlements, Vol. 48, pp. 1-7. Basel.
Umweltbundesamt (eds.) (2017): Prozessorientierte Basisdaten für Umweltmanagementsysteme, Retrieved from www.probas.umweltbundesamt.de [access 18.04.2017].
Wang C, Man Y (2022): Major Shipping Firm Sees Signs of Supply-Chain Bottlenecks Easing. Bloomberg News, New York, NY. Retrieved from: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-27/major-shipper-sees-signs-of-supply-chain-bottlenecks-easing [access 17.03.2022].
Weisbrod G (2008): Models to predict the economic development impact of transportation projects: historical experience and new applications. The Annals of Regional Science, 42(3), pp. 519-543. DOI: 10.1007/s00168-007-0184-9
Veröffentlicht
Ausgabe
Rubrik
Copyright (c) 2023 Jan Wedemeier, Lasse Steffens
Dieses Werk steht unter der Lizenz Creative Commons Namensnennung - Nicht-kommerziell - Keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 International.
