Transcript A Manual for Implementing Integrated Groundwater Management

Sustainable/Green Water Resources
Management
Prof. Dr. Phoebe Koundouri
Head of Research Unit of Environmental & Natural Resource Economics
ATHENS UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS
Web Pages:
http://www.aueb.gr/deos/gr/koundouri.html
http://www.aueb.gr/deos/gr/akadhmaikoprosopiko.html
http://www.aueb.gr/pages/prosopiko/faculty_gr_short.php?facid=1094
E-mail: [email protected]
NEW Website of the Research Unit of Environmental & Natural
Resources Economics will be running on Monday at www.RENAR.aueb.gr 1
WFD: A truly integrated Directive
2
WFD, A MILESTONE IN
EUROPEAN WATER POLICY
Never-ending process
An obligation of result
WFD:
3 key
principles
Continuous transparency
3
AN OBLIGATION OF RESULT
A compulsory goal: "good status of water"
a general obligation:
 applies to all member-states
 applies to surface and groundwater
a secondary goal:
prevent deterioration of status
Actions to be defined with regards to the goal
how to fill-in the potential gap between
"business as usual" scenario and the goal?
update measures in order to reach the goal
Good
status
X
X
2003
2015
Limited possibilities for exemptions
extensions of deadlines
achievement of less stringent
environmental objectives
4
Underlining Concept:
Sustainable Development
Sustainable development (SD) is a
pattern of resource use that aims to
meet human needs while preserving
the environment so that these needs
can be met not only in the present,
but also for future generations.
5
Triple goal of SD over
space (i) and time (t)



Environmental/ Ecological Sustainability
(ecosystem resilience, resource-specific
equilibrium)
Economic Sustainability (economic
efficiency by economic sector)
Social Sustainability (affordability & equity
by income group)
6
Where do economics come in?



Articles 5: Socio-Economic
characterization of RB
Article 9: cost-recovery and allocation
Annex III: guidance for economic analysis,
program of measures & CBA
7
WFD: A Manual of Implementation
3-step economics approach
Step 1
Economic characterization
of the river basin
Step 2
The assessment of the recovery of
the costs of water services
Step 3
The economic assessment of potential
measures for balancing
water demand & supply
8
Step 1:
Economic characterization of the river basin &
identification of significant issues
Step1_A.
Evaluation of the economic significance of
water in the region.
Step1_B.
Identification of key economic drivers
influencing pressures and water uses.
Step1_C.
How will these economic drivers evolve over
time & how will they influence pressures?
Step1_D.
How will water demand and supply evolve
over time & which problems their paths are
likely to cause?
Time & Money Constraints Define the Detail of Step 1!
Construct
Baseline
Scenario
9
Step1_A. Evaluate the Economic Significance
of Water Uses in the Region






Residential (e.g. population connected to public water supply
system, population with self-supply, number of water supply
companies, etc.).
Industrial (e.g. turnover for key sub-sectors, employment in
sectors, etc.)
Agricultural (e.g. total cropped area, cropping pattern,
livestock, gross production, income, farm population, etc.)
Tourism (e.g. total number of tourist days, daily expense per
tourist day, employment and turnover in the tourism sector,
etc.)
Health Related Services
Environmental and Ecosystem Services
10
Step1_B. Identify Key Economic Drivers
Influencing Pressures and Water Uses





General socio-economic indicators and variables (e.g.
population growth, income, employment).
Key sector policies that influence significant water uses (e.g.
agricultural and environmental policies).
Production or turnover of main economic sectors /
significant water uses.
Implementation of planned investments linked to existing
regulation, likely to affect water availability.
Implementation of future (environmental and other) policies
likely to affect water uses.
11
Step1_C. Evolution of Economic Drivers &
their Influence on Pressures

Trend
variables



Critical
Uncertainties
Water Policy
Variables




Changes in demographic factors, e.g. population growth in specific
urban areas.
Economic growth and changes in economic activity composition,
e.g. changes in the relative importance of services/sectors.
Changes in land planning, e.g. new areas dedicated to specific
economic activities, etc.
Changes in social values and policy drivers, e.g. globalization.
Changes in natural conditions, e.g. climate changes.
Changes in non-water sector policies, e.g. changes in agricultural
policy or industrial policy that will affect production and
consumption in economic sectors.
Planned investments in the water sector, e.g. for developing water
services, for restoring the natural environment/mitigating for
damage caused by given water uses.
Development of new technologies likely to impact water use for
industrial production and related pressures.
12
Step1_D. Evolution of Demand and
Supply
- Evaluation of spatial and dynamic availability of significant water bodies.
- Apply appropriate methodologies to assess sector-specific water demand.
Structure
&
Processes
Environmenta
l
Anthropocentri
c
Values
Human
Benefits
Functions
Environment
Use
Values
Non-Use
Values
Total Economic Value
Use Value
Actual use
Value
Direct Use
Value
Option Value
Indirect Use
Value
Non-use Value
Existence
Value
For Others
Bequest
Value
Altruistic
13
Value
Market Failure
Environmental resource is a Public Good
Not explicitly traded in any market
No market price exists to reveal TEV (Hidden demand).
We need to retrieve TEV via WTP
Non-market Valuation Methods
14
Estimating Demand in Step1
i. Identification of Sector Water Demands in the Watershed Area
Households
Industry
Agriculture
Environment
ii. Valuation Techniques for Specific Types of Water Demand
Use Value
Revealed preference methods (indirect methods)
Hedonic Pricing Method
Travel Cost Method
Averting Behaviour Method
Residual Analysis (Production Cost Method)
Non-use
Existence & Values for others:
Contingent Valuation Methodology
Choice Experiments: Field, Lap
Meta-Analysis Method
Methods not strictly based on economic welfare
Replacement Cost Methods
Restoration Cost Methods
15
Hedonic Valuation Method (HVM)
A resource can be defined in terms of services it yields or an `attribute' it
embodies. This attribute may be embodied in other goods or assets which are
marketed, and which do have observable prices. Using these prices you can
derive economic value.
E.g: Farm prices in an area with good groundwater are most likely higher than in an area
without either ground- or surface water. Comparing differences in farm prices across a
region and controlling for other influences, then the difference in prices of these farms
would lie in groundwater access.
Problems:
-Only capable of measuring the subset of use values that people are WTP for
through the related market.
- If consumers are not fully informed about the qualities of the attributes being
valued, hedonic price estimates are of little relevance.
16
Travel Cost Method (TCM)
Infers the value of a set of attributes from expenditure (time and
money spent on the trip) on outdoor recreational facilities or visits to
nature reserves.
E.g: Valuing the effects on the demand for recreation of a change in
water quality in a river.
Problems:
- Capable of measuring the subset of values that people are WTP for in the
related market.
- Very few applications outside resource-based recreational amenities.
- Data-intensive.
- What value should be assigned to time costs of travel?
- Statistical problems & sample bias.
17
Averting Behavior Method
(ABM)
Use of expenditures undertaken by households that are designated to
offset an environmental risk, in order to infer WTP for avoiding
environmental degradation.
E.g: Use of water filters.
Problems:
- Limited to cases where households spend money to offset
environmental hazards.
- Insufficient studies to comment on convergent validity.
18
Residual Analysis Method
(RAM)
Values all inputs for the good produced at their market price – except for
the water itself. The remaining value of the good, after all other inputs
are accounted for, is then attributed to the water input.
E.g: Valuing water as an input in production of different crops.
Problems:
- Only part of use-value of water can be captured.
- Market imperfections can bias valuation estimates.
19
Contingent Valuation Method
(CVM)
CVM relies on a constructed, hypothetical market to produce monetary
estimates of value. The value of an environmental resource to an
individual is expressed as:
- Maximum Willingness-to-Pay (WTP)
- Minimum Willingness-to-Accept (WTA, Compensation)
E.g: Conduct survey to obtain peoples’ bids (either WTP or WTAC) for a
specified change in the quality of water in a river, contingent upon the description
of a hypothetical market where water quality is traded.
Problems:
- Interviewing bias
- Strategic bias
- Hypothetical bias
- Non-response bias
- Yea-saying bias
- Information bias
20
Choice Experiment Method
(CEM)
CEM is a survey-based technique which can estimate the total economic
value of an environmental stock/flow or service and the value of its attributes,
as well as the value of more complex changes in several attributes.
E.g: Each respondent is presented with a series of alternatives of the
environmental stock/flow or service with varying levels of its price and nonprice attributes and asked to choose their most preferred option in each set of
alternatives.
Problems:
- Simplified version of reality … but CEM eliminates or minimises several of
the CVM problems (e.g. strategic bias, yea-saying bias, embedding effects).
21
Operational at the policy level?
Question: How can these methods be made operational in the
context of the development of groundwater management strategies
at the policy level?
Answer: Recent years have seen a growing interest in the potential
for producing generally applicable models for the valuation of nonmarket environmental goods and services, which do not rely upon
expensive and time-consuming original survey work, but rather
extrapolate results from previous studies of similar assets.
This approach is called meta-analysis for the use and non-use
values generated by environmental resources.
22
Meta-Analysis Method (MAM)
Meta-analysis is the statistical analysis of the summary of findings of
empirical studies: i.e. the statistical analysis of a large collection of
results from individual studies for the purpose of integrating the
findings.
E.g: Freshwater fishing meta-analysis of valuation studies.
Meta-analytical research seems to have been principally triggered by:
- Increases in the available number of environmental valuation studies.
- Seemingly large differences in valuation outcomes as a result of use of
different research designs.
23
Environmental BenefitsTransfer



Transposing monetary environmental values estimated at one
site (study site) to another (policy site).
Values must be adjusted to reflect site specific features.
When time or resources are limited, this provides an alternative
to conducting a valuation study. Using meta-analysis for benefits
transfer has advantages.
E.g: Environmental Valuation Reference Inventory (www.evri.ca)
Problems
- May involve bias
- Validity and reliability issues
24
List of case studies on watervaluation from my research team
Direct use values:
Irrigation for agriculture PF, RC, MP
Domestic and industrial water supply PF, RC, MP
Energy resources (hydro-electric) CV
Transport and navigation CV
Recreation/amenity HP, TC, CVM, CEM
Wildlife harvesting CEM
Indirect use values
Nutrient retention RC
Pollution abatement RC
Flood control and protection RC, CEM
Storm protection RC, PF
External eco-system support RC, CEM
Micro-climatic stabilisation PF, CEM
Reduced global warming RC, CEM
Shoreline stabilisation RC, CEM
Soil erosion control PF, RC, CV, CEM
25
List of case studies on watervaluation from my research team
Option values
Potential future uses of direct and indirect uses
CVM, CEM
Future value of information of biodiversity CVM,
CEM
Non-use values
Biodiversity CVM, CEM
Cultural heritage CVM, CE
Bequest, existence and altruistic values CVM, CE
26
Methodology for Constructing Baseline
Scenario Using Parameters from in Step 1
1



Consider three possibilities of evolution of population.
Consider two possibilities of evolution of demography of other cities in the region.
Consider possible evolution of rural population.
2
Build scenarios using basic assumptions and quantify the water balance with these assumptions.
3
Apply step two over time.
4
Based on steps 1,2,3, imagine a plot that tells the story of the system from now until at least
2030, giving consistency to the assumptions and water balance curves.
27
How to apply the ‘Baseline scenario’?
Starting from initial
status it is possible
to elaborate a
baseline scenario.
The baseline scenario
refers to the situation
without doing
anything else than
planned today.
Measures to
close the
gap are
needed!
Water Balance/
‘Good Water
Status’
gap
Initial status
2003
2015
Date at which ‘Water Balance’
should be met.
2021
28
Step2:
Assess Cost-Recovery of Water Services
Step2_A.
How much do current water services cost?
Step2_B.
Who pays these costs?
Step2_C.
What is the current cost-recovery level?
Step2_D.
Propose cost-recovery mechanisms.
29
Step2_A&B. Current cost of services
Who pays for these costs?
Estimate costs of water services by sector.
Do users and/or institutional mechanisms recover these costs?
FINANCIAL COSTS
CAPITAL OPERATION & RESOURCE
TOTAL
MAINTENANCE ADMIN
ECONOMIC COST
(O&M)
COST
VALUE
COST
COST OF
RESOURCE
COST
ENVIRONMENTAL
COST
FORGONE
EXTERNAL COST OF
VALUE OF
WATER
ALTERNATIVE QUALITY
USES
REDUCTION
(present/future)
WATER
ABSTACTION
PAID
BY
USERS
Analysis per use: Households, Tourism, Industry,
Agriculture, Ecosystem, etc. per RBD
Step2_C. Current cost-recovery level.
Elements to be investigated:





Status of key water services (e.g. number of persons
connected).
Costs of water services (financial, environmental & resource
costs).
Institutional set-up for cost-recovery (e.g. prices and tariff
structure, direct & indirect subsidies, cross-subsidies).
Contribution from key water uses to the recovery of costs.
Resulting extent of cost-recovery levels, linked with the
affordability for water users.
31
Results for cost-recovery
for Greece
32
Βαθμός Ανάκτησης Κόστους ανά
Υδατικό Διαμέρισμα
Υδατικό Διαμέρισμα
Βαθμός Ανάκτησης Κόστους (%)
Αττικής
106.13
Θράκης
78.28
Κεντρικής Μακεδονίας
78.27
Ανατολικής Μακεδονίας
70.74
Βόρειας Πελοποννήσου
68.22
Ηπείρου
68.11
Ανατολικής Στερεάς Ελλάδας
57.61
Δυτικής Μακεδονίας
51.71
Κρήτης
50.91
Δυτικής Πελοποννήσου
50.54
Δυτικής Στερεάς Ελλάδας
46.19
Νήσων Αιγαίου
37.84
Ανατολικής Πελοπονήσσου
34.18
Θεσσαλίας
29.82
33
Βαθμός Ανάκτησης Κόστους Ύδρευσης
Ανά Υδατικό Διαμέρισμα
Υδατικό Διαμέρισμα
Βαθμός Ανάκτησης Κόστους Ύδρευσης
(%)
Αττικής
108.14
Θράκης
103.29
Κεντρικής Μακεδονίας
86.58
Ανατολικής Μακεδονίας
79.39
Βόρειας Πελοποννήσου
77.31
Ανατολικής Στερεάς Ελλάδας
75.1
Ηπείρου
71
Δυτικής Πελοποννήσου
62.21
Δυτικής Στερεάς Ελλάδας
61.29
Δυτικής Μακεδονίας
53.55
Κρήτης
49.67
Νήσων Αιγαίου
42.94
Ανατολικής Πελοποννήσου
37.89
34
Βαθμός Ανάκτησης Κόστους
Άρδευσης ανά Υδατικό Διαμέρισμα
Υδατικό Διαμέρισμα
Βαθμός Ανάκτησης Κόστους Άρδευσης
(%)
Κρήτης
56.25
Δυτικής Μακεδονίας
41.05
Ανατολικής Μακεδονίας
27.38
Ηπείρου
22.44
Αττικής
21.30
Βόρειας Πελοποννήσου
19.41
Ανατολικής Στερεάς Ελλάδας
15.98
Ανατολικής Πελοποννήσου
15.66
Δυτικής Στερεάς Ελλάδας
14.28
Κεντρικής Μακεδονίας
12.04
Δυτικής Πελοποννήσου
11.44
Θράκης
11.05
Θεσσαλίας
6.38
35
Step2_D. Identify potential cost-recovery
mechanisms/Green Investments?
Potential cost-recovery mechanisms:

Pricing

Tradable permits

Quotas

Taxes/subsidies

Direct Controls

Educational/Awareness Campaigns

Voluntary Agreements

Legal Instruments, etc.
Green Investments in:

Pollution Control and Remediation

Resource Conservation and Management

Land Use and Infrastructure

Renewable Energy Sources
36
Step3:
The economic assessment of potential
measures for reaching good water status
Step3_A.
Identify least-cost set of measures.
Step3_B.
Assessment of cost of measures.
Step3_C.
Assessment of the impact of measures on
economic sectors/uses.
Step3_D.
Are costs of measures disproportionate?
37
Step3_A. Search for Least-Cost Set of
Measures
COST EFFECTIVENESS OF PACKAGE OF MEASURES:

Economic instruments (e.g. abstraction/pollution taxes,
tradable permits, subsidies).

Measures to increase awareness regarding water scarcity,
aiming at reducing abstraction/pollution.

Direct controls on pollution dischargers.


Agri-environment programs providing financial and technical
assistance for, e.g. reallocation of crop production mix over
agricultural land, adoption of water-saving technologies
coupled with land-allocation restrictions, etc.
Green Investments
38
Classification of Economic Instruments
Economic Instrument
Advantages
1. Standards and Quotas
Disadvantages
Not economically
efficient
2. Water abstraction
charges
Adjustment of price signals to reflect
actual resource costs; encourage new
technologies; flexibility; generation
of revenues
Low charges will have minimal
impact on user behavior and
will continue in resource overutilization; Difficult to police
3. Pollution charges
Same as water abstraction
charges; polluter-pays principle
Same as water abstraction
charges
4. Subsidies on water
saving measures
5. Tradable permits
Readily acceptable
Financial Constraints
Quantity based targets that
are able to attain least-cost
outcome. Allows flexibility.
May entail high
transaction costs
6. Voluntary agreements
Readily acceptable
7. Liability legislation
Assess and recover damages
ex-post but can also act as
prevention incentives
Needs High Env
Awareness
Require an advanced
legal system; high control
39
costs; burden of proof
Step3_B. Assessment of Cost of Measures
- Estimate a range of costs along with key
parameters influencing costs over time (cost
change with developments in sectors).
- Allocate costs of measures to water users and
identify winners and losers, in order to potentially
feed into the analysis of disproportionate costs to
justify derogation (Step3._D).
40
Step3_C. Impact of Measures on Key
Economic Sectors/Uses

-

-

Net impacts on public expenditures and revenues: e.g.
impacts on expenditures for agri-environment schemes
revenues of economic instruments
impacts of changes in the prices charged for publicly owned
water services.
Wider economic and social impacts: e.g.
significant changes in patterns of employment
economic impacts on industries & local economic development
from changes in the price of water supply, level of
discharges and water quality.
Effects on the retail price index and inflation.
41
Step3_D.
Disproportionate Costs/Derogation
Important for
budget-constrained
developing countries!
Disproportionality
If the achievement of good water status has
significant adverse effects on the wider environment
& human activities.

Measures to improve water
quality are expensive
If the beneficial objectives served by the artificial
or modified characteristics cannot reasonably be
achieved by other means.

Heavily Modified Water bodies
Water bodies substantially changed in character
as a result of physical alterations by human activity.
Less stringent
objectives
Time derogation
!! Disproportionality is a political judgment informed by economic information: CBA
- Disproportionality does not begin when measured costs exceed quantifiable benefits.
- The margin of excess costs should be appreciable & have a high level of confidence.
- Disaggregated analysis to the level of separate socio-economic groups and
sectors is needed, especially if the ability to pay is an issue for a particular group.
42
Step3_D. CBA: Cost-Benefit Analysis
Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) is an economic tool for government
policy and investment project analysis used widely.
Can incorporate environmental impacts of policies/projects within
CBA to correct for market failure
“Social” appraisal of policies and projects, carried out by
aggregation of benefits from, and costs of a policy/project over
individuals and over time
Welfare theoretic underpinning: Economic efficiency with a
temporal dimension
43
CBA Steps

Stage 1: Definition of policy/project:



The reallocation of resources being proposed
The population of gainers and losers being
considered
Stage 2: Identification of policy/project
impacts:


Define all impacts that will result from
policy/project implementation
Consider additionality (net impacts) and
displacement (crowding out)
44
CBA Steps

Stage 3: Identification of economically relevant impacts:
Environmental impacts of a policy/project are relevant in
CBA if either


They change the utility of at least one person in the society
They change the quantity or quality of the output of some
positively valued commodity
Stage 4: Physical quantification of relevant impacts:



Determine physical amounts of costs and benefits and when
they occur in time
Use environmental impact analysis to estimate the impact of
policy/project on the environment
Estimations will be made with uncertainty, calculate the
expected value of costs and benefits
45
CBA Steps

Stage 5: Monetary valuation of relevant
effects



All physical measures of impacts should be
valued in common units to be comparable
Common unit = money
CBA analyst must



Predict prices for value flows extending into the
future
Correct market prices where they are distorted
Calculate prices where non exists using environmental
valuation methods
46
CBA Steps
Stage 6: Discounting of costs and benefits:




Once costs and benefits are expressed in
monetary units they should be converted to
present value terms by discounting
PV= Xt[(1+r)-t] where X= cost or benefit; r =
discount rate; [(1+r)-t] discount factor; t= time
The higher the value of t the lower the
discount factor
The higher the discount rate for a given t the
lower the discount factor
47
CBA Steps

Stage 7:Applying the net present value test:

Apply NPV test to choose those policies and projects that are
efficient in terms of their use of resources
Bt  Ct 

t
t  0 1  r 
n



Where Bt = benefits of the project at period t, Ct = the costs
of the project at period t, r = the discount rate, n = the number
of years over which the project will operate
NPV is the present value of the project’s/policy’s net benefit
stream, obtained by discounting the stream of net benefits
produced by the project/policy over its lifetime, back to its
value in the chosen base period, usually the present.
If NPV>0 accept policy or project (Based in Kaldor-Hicks
Criterion) since it would improve social welfare
48
Is Discounting so straight
forward?
‘Humanity has the ability to make development sustainable: to ensure
that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability
of future generations to meet their own needs.’ WCED, 1987
‘There is something awkward about discounting benefits that arise a
century hence. For even at a modest discount rate, no investment will
look worthwhile.‘
The Economist (1991), March 23, p 73
In the decade since that comment in The Economist, the nature of the
problem with long-run discounting has become clearer.
49
The Need for Time Declining
Social Discount Rate…
There are powerful reasons for choosing a declining social time
preference rate. This conclusion is supported by robust recent
theoretical work, which has taken several different approaches
to the subject.
Although there is a paucity of empirical evidence on the pattern
of that rate's decline, it may be better to use those data, which
are available rather than to continue practicing discounting
with non-declining rate in the long term. The data best suited
the policy-makers' need were produced by Newell & Prizer
(2003) and Koundouri et al (2005).
50
Constant discount
rates (CDRs) s
Utility
discounting
ρ
Time declining
discount rates
(TDDRs) s(t)
Consumption
discounting μg
Uncertainty about
discount rate (s)
Weitzman
Koundouri et al.
Uncertainty
about the
future
Future
fairness
Uncertainty
about
growth (g)
Gollier
Chichilnisky
Heal
Li & Löfgren
Observed
individual
choice
Hyperbolic
discounting
Cropper et
al
51
Case Study: Floods Defense



Over the last ten years, flood-defence investment has
been characterized by annual expenditure that has been
assumed to offset significant damage; i.e., a cost–benefit
ratio much greater than unity.
Stochastic model designed to assess the costs and
benefits of investment in a particular cell (protected
area) of flood defences for Shrewsbury for the
Environment Agency.
The model determines the net benefit of investment by
comparing the damage suffered in a ‘do nothing’ scenario,
with damages in the case where 100-year flood defences
have been constructed. The benefits can then be
compared with the costs of constructing and maintaining
the defences.
52
Benefit–cost ratio for a particular
cell of flood defences in Shrewsbury
1.6
1.4
Benefit Cost Ratio
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
Flat Rate (6%)
Flat Rate (3.5%)
Gamma
Discounting
Gamma
Sliding Schedule
Li and Lofgren
Hyperbolic
Discounting
53
Suggested Step Schedule of
Discount Rates
Period of Years
Discount Rate (%)
0 – 30
3.5
31 – 75
3.0
76-125
2.5
126-200
2.0
201-300
1.5
301 +
1.0
54
Effect of shift from flat 3.5% to
the step schedule of discount rates
Project time horizon
Potential effect on project NPV
0-30 years
Small, generally insignificant
30-100 years
Significant (± 50%)
100-200 years
Large impact (± 100%)
200-400 years
Major impact (± 150%)
55
Summary of the
3-Step Methodology
Economic analysis needs
to be integrated with other
field expertise (hydrology,
geology, engineering,
sociology, etc.) and be
considered all along the
management & decisionmaking process.
1- Characterisation of the river basin




economic significance of water uses
trends in key indicators and drivers
dynamic path of demand and supply of water
gaps in water status by the agreed date of meeting ‘water balance’?
2- Assess current cost-recovery



how much water services cost and who pays this cost?
how much of this cost is recovered?
potential cost-recovery mechanisms
3- Identification of measures and economic impact




construction of a cost-effective programme of measures
assessment of cost-effectiveness of potential measures
financial & socio-economic implications of the programme of measures
56
are costs disproportionate?
Derogations
Thank you.
Prof. Dr. Phoebe Koundouri
Head of Research Unit of Environmental & Natural Resources Economics
ATHENS UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS
Web Pages:
http://www.aueb.gr/deos/gr/koundouri.html
http://www.aueb.gr/deos/gr/akadhmaikoprosopiko.html
http://www.aueb.gr/pages/prosopiko/faculty_gr_short.php?facid=109
4
E-mail: [email protected]
NEW Website of the Research Unit of Environmental & Natural Resources
Economics will be running on Monday at www.RENAR.aueb.gr
57