Cost estimation for solid waste management in industrialising regions--precedents, problems and prospects

The importance of cost planning for solid waste management (SWM) in industrialising regions (IR) is not well recognised. The approaches used to estimate costs of SWM can broadly be classified into three categories - the unit cost method, benchmarking techniques and developing cost models using sub-approaches such as cost and production function analysis. These methods have been developed into computer programmes with varying functionality and utility. IR mostly use the unit cost and benchmarking approach to estimate their SWM costs. The models for cost estimation, on the other hand, are used at times in industrialised countries, but not in IR. Taken together, these approaches could be viewed as precedents that can be modified appropriately to suit waste management systems in IR. The main challenges (or problems) one might face while attempting to do so are a lack of cost data, and a lack of quality for what data do exist. There are practical benefits to planners in IR where solid waste problems are critical and budgets are limited.     

Understanding the return on health, safety and environmental investments

INTRODUCTION: Traditionally, health safety and environmental (HS & E) investments have been viewed as expensive but necessary. HS & E professionals had a difficult task of providing data showing that these investments can also contribute to business success. An ORC task force developed a way for traditional financial analysis methods to be applied to HS & E investments and decisions. METHOD: The result of the task force effort is the software called the ORC Return on Health, Safety and Environmental Investments (ROHSEI), a supporting tool to provide a comprehensive look at health, safety or environmental investment projects and their potential financial impacts. RESULTS: Since its development, more than 200 companies, government agencies, and educational institutions have been trained in the ROHSEI process and software. CONCLUSIONS: HS & E professionals who are able to evaluate and communicate the business value of health, safety and environmental efforts will improve understanding of the impacts HS & E projects and contribute to better decision making by their organizations.     

Financial services and disaster risk finance: Examples from the community level

Increased attention has recently been given to the possible role of financial services in the management of natural disaster risk. Local communities have been at the forefront of developing innovative disaster risk finance strategies and implementing risk-oriented incentive programs. In view of increasing risks, including the impacts of climate change, such programs will become more important. This paper examines four models and some recent experiences in using financial services at the community level. The paper offers an overview of advantages and limitations of each model to manage disaster risk in communities. Examples include a federal government initiated scheme of social protection funds, a local government risk reduction scheme, an insurance product provided by a non-governmental organization , and a micro-insurance scheme. Finally, the paper offers some directions about specific ways that the public and private sectors, in collaboration with other partners can improve finance alternatives for disaster management at the community level. It appears that a range of follow-up studies and further dialogue is needed, in order to expand the knowledge on what types of risk finance models can help manage and reduce the financial impacts of natural disasters.     

Revealing climate change opinions through investment behavior: Evidence from Fukushima

In this study we present a novel research approach to obtaining behavior-based evidence of regional climate change attitudes, using the 2011 Fukushima nuclear plant incident as a natural experiment. Our approach allows us to produce the first non-survey-based empirical evidence of a trans-Atlantic divide in public opinion on the environment and climate change that investors assign to fossil-based and renewable energy. This value is based on the perceived potential of these fuel types to substitute for nuclear generation in the aftermath of the Fukushima crisis. We carry out an event study to examine differences in abnormal returns of global coal and renewable energy companies on European and American stock exchanges. We find that investors trading on U.S. markets exhibit a significantly more favorable perception of coal stock profitability, while investors trading on European exchanges display a more favorable perception about profitability of renewable energy stocks.