|
|||||
|
|
A Comparison of Alternative Strategies for Cost-Effective Water Quality Management in Lakes |
|
| Authors: | Daniel Boyd Kramer Stephen Polasky Anthony Starfield Brian Palik Lynne Westphal Stephanie Snyder Pamela Jakes Rachel Hudson Eric Gustafson |
| Institution: | (1) James Madison College and the Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, Case Hall, East Lansing, Michigan 48825-1205, USA;(2) Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota 55108, USA;(3) Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota 55108, USA;(4) North Central Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Grand Rapids, Minnesota 55744, USA;(5) North Central Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Evanston, Illinois 60201, USA;(6) North Central Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 1992 Folwell Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota 55108, USA;(7) North Central Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 5985 Highway K, Rhinelander, Wisconsin 54501, USA |
| Abstract: | Roughly 45% of the assessed lakes in the United States are impaired for one or more reasons. Eutrophication due to excess phosphorus loading is common in many impaired lakes. Various strategies are available to lake residents for addressing declining lake water quality, including septic system upgrades and establishing riparian buffers. This study examines 25 lakes to determine whether septic upgrades or riparian buffers are a more cost-effective strategy to meet a phosphorus reduction target. We find that riparian buffers are the more cost-effective strategy in every case but one. Large transaction costs associated with the negotiation and monitoring of riparian buffers, however, may be prohibiting lake residents from implementing the most cost-effective strategy. An erratum to this article is available at . |
| Keywords: | Water quality Cost effectiveness Septic systems Riparian buffers |
| 本文献已被 PubMed SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ | |