ReviewAmbio2022
How unnecessarily high abatement costs and unresolved distributional issues undermine nutrient reductions to the Baltic Sea.
Review in Ambio, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Managing multi-functional peri-urban landscapes: Impacts of horse-keeping on water quality.Ambio · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper systematically reviews the literature on how to reduce nutrient emissions to the Baltic Sea cost-effectively and considerations for allocating these costs fairly among countries. The literature shows conclusively that the reduction targets of the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) could be achieved at considerably lower cost, if countries would cooperate to implement the least costly abatement plan. Focusing on phosphorus abatement could be prudent as the often recommended measures-wastewater treatment and wetlands-abate nitrogen too. An implication of our review is that the potential for restoring the Baltic Sea to good health is undermined by an abatement strategy that is more costly than necessary and likely to be perceived as unfair by several countries. Neither the BSAP nor the cost-effective solution meet the surveyed criteria for fairness, implying a need for side-payments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.