4.7 Article

The economic benefits of reducing the levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) near primary schools: The case of London

Journal

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Volume 181, Issue -, Pages 615-622

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.06.039

Keywords

Nitrogen dioxide (NO2); Children's health; Monetary benefits; Primary schools; London

Funding

  1. Colt Foundation
  2. SINPHONIE project
  3. UCL Impact Awards
  4. EPSRC [EP/K011839/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/K011839/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Providing a healthy school environment is a priority for child health. The aim of this study is to develop a methodology that allows quantification of the potential economic benefit of reducing indoor exposure to nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in children attending primary schools. Using environmental and health data collected in primary schools in London, this study estimates that, on average, 82 asthma exacerbations per school can be averted each year by reducing outdoor NO2 concentrations. The study expands upon previous analyses in two ways: first it assesses the health benefits of reducing children's exposure to indoor NO2 while at school, second it considers the children's perspective in the economic evaluation. Using a willingness to pay approach, the study quantifies that the monetary benefits of reducing children's indoor NO2 exposure while at school would range between 2.5 pound k per school if a child's perspective based on child's budget is adopted up to 60 pound k if a parent's perspective is considered. This study highlights that designers, engineers, policymakers and stakeholders need to consider the reduction of outdoor pollution, and particularly NO2 levels, near primary schools as there may be substantial health and monetary benefits. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available