Iraq coed report 4 2012 final

125
Cost of Environmental Degradation Republic of Iraq April 2012

Transcript of Iraq coed report 4 2012 final

Cost of Environmental Degradation

Republic of Iraq

April 2012

Ministry of Environment of Iraq

Currency Equivalents(Exchange rate effective December 31, 2008)

Currency Unit = Iraqi Dinar (ID)US$1.00 = ID 1,148 (2008)

ii

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this report and the results of the analyses are the sole responsibility of the Author, and could not be attributed in any way, shape or form to the Government of Iraq.

iii

Contents

DISCLAIMER.............................................................................................................................................................III

CONTENTS.................................................................................................................................................................IV

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...........................................................................................................................................VI

PREAMBLE...............................................................................................................................................................VII

GLOSSARY..............................................................................................................................................................VIII

ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................................................XI

ACRONYMS..............................................................................................................................................................XII

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................................................................XIII

INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................................................XIII

COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION...............................................................................................XIV

COMPARISON OF DAMAGE AND REMEDIATION COSTS...........................................................................XV

التنفيذي الملخصXIV.…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…..……………………………………………………………………………………………….XIV المقدمة ………

البيئي التدهور ….….……..XVIII كلفة………………………………………………………………………………

ومعالجتها األضرار تكاليف بين ….….……..…………..XIX مقارنة.……………………………………………

1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................................1

1.1 BACKGROUND...............................................................................................................................................11.2 COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION.........................................................................................11.3 RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES..................................................................................................................21.4 THE PREPARATION PROCESS....................................................................................................................2

2 METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK...........................................................................................................4

2.1 DEFINITION....................................................................................................................................................42.2 METHODOLOGICAL PROCESSES..............................................................................................................42.3 CATEGORIES OF ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................................42.4 CONSEQUENCES OF DEGRADATION.......................................................................................................52.5 MONETARY VALUATION............................................................................................................................62.6 COSTS OF REMEDIATION............................................................................................................................72.7 MARGINAL ANALYSIS.................................................................................................................................8

3 AIR........................................................................................................................................................................9

3.1 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE...............................................................................................................93.2 NATURAL RESOURCES..............................................................................................................................12

4 WATER...............................................................................................................................................................13

4.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................134.2 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE.............................................................................................................144.3 NATURAL RESOURCES..............................................................................................................................16

iv

5 LAND..................................................................................................................................................................17

5.1 NATURAL RESOURCES..............................................................................................................................175.2 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE.............................................................................................................18

6 WASTE...............................................................................................................................................................20

6.1 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE.............................................................................................................206.2 NATURAL RESOURCES..............................................................................................................................21

7 COASTAL ZONE..............................................................................................................................................22

7.1 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE.............................................................................................................227.2 NATURAL RESOURCES..............................................................................................................................22

8 GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT.............................................................................................................................24

8.1 NATURAL RESOURCES..............................................................................................................................24

9 COST OF REMEDIATION..............................................................................................................................27

9.1 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................279.2 POLICY CONTEXT.......................................................................................................................................279.3 AIR..................................................................................................................................................................279.4 WATER...........................................................................................................................................................299.5 LAND..............................................................................................................................................................319.6 WASTE...........................................................................................................................................................329.7 COASTAL ZONES.........................................................................................................................................329.8 GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT..........................................................................................................................33

10 COST ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION............................................................34

10.1 OVERALL ASSESSMENT.......................................................................................................................3410.2 COST OF DEGRADATION......................................................................................................................35

BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................................................................37

ANNEXES....................................................................................................................................................................41

v

Acknowledgments

This report, which was prepared by Fadi M. Doumani (Environmental Economist), was funded under a Trust Fund housed at the World Bank and managed by the Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Iraq. The process leading to the finalization of the report was done under the oversight of the World Bank.

Many colleagues and counterparts from the World Bank provided support and/or technical advice that shaped this report. However, the author takes the full responsibility for any errors or omissions. In particular, I am thankful to Maged Hamed, Senior Environmental Specialist, Sherif Arif, Senior Environmental Consultant and Suiko Yoshijima, Environmental Specialist, who deserves special recognition for their overall guidance and review of the work leading up to this final report. The author would also like to thank the Ministry of Environment staff notably Hikmat Jebraeil (Director, Ministry of Environment) and Faten Azez (Assistant to the Director, Ministry of Environment) as well as Mutasem El-Fadel (Professor, American University of Beirut), who peer reviewed the report.

vi

Preamble

The Republic of Iraq is painfully recovering from 3 disastrous wars (Iraq-Iran War, 1 st Gulf War and 2nd

Gulf War) and their destructive aftermath that put more strain on Iraq’s human, social, natural, cultural and capital assets. The reconstruction drive is well underway and we understand that the Ministry of Environment has among others a pressing priority to mitigate the accumulated environmental degradation of the last three challenging decades. Nevertheless, we trust that the qualitative and quantitative results of this study will help shape the political economy of improving sustainable management and improve the quality of life of the Iraqis in the future.

vii

Glossary

Agent: A hazardous substance or material that has the potential of affecting human health. Attributable risk proportion: The percentage of a particular disease category that would be eliminated, if environmental risk factors were reduced to their lowest feasible values. Benefits transfer: Use the results obtained in one context in a different context by applying GDP differential and the income elasticity, which means that the percentage responsiveness for a good or service differs with the percentage change in income in each country. Burden of disease (BoD): An indicator that measures years’ life lost due to premature mortality and years of life lived with a disability by using a common denominator, the DALY metric. Cause-Effect Framework: Also known as the environment and health DPSEEA, (Driving Force, Pressure, State, Exposure, Effects and Action). The latter was developed by WHO to determine possible entry points for public health interventions. Choice modeling: Respondents are asked to choose their preferred option from a set of alternatives with particular attributes (a variation on the WTP without a monetary value). Cluster of disease and injury: A group of diseases and injuries stemming from one or several stressors that could be relieved by a policy choice, project or intervention. Critical clusters are selected based on their relative magnitude, i.e., vector-borne, water-related and respiratory diseases. Cost-benefit analysis (CBA): A normative technique that optimizes both the target and the means of a policy (macro and sectoral) choice, project, or intervention and is, therefore, more economically efficient than the cost-effectiveness technique. The general premise is well accepted, but becomes controversial when specific numbers are attached, e.g., value of life. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA): A normative technique that, in the absence of proper valuation of the benefits, sets the target (for example, standard for a pollutant or number of death to be averted) and determines the means of a policy choice, project or intervention. Cost of illness: A valuation technique that calculates direct and indirect costs associated with the illness: medical costs, loss in productivity from illness, and premature death losses valued as lost productivity or termed human capital approach. Cross media: A medium such as air, water, food or soil that transmits a pollutant or a contaminant from a medium to another and that affects human health, e. g., air pollutants that are washed into rivers or leach into the aquifer used for drinking water. Disability-adjusted life years (DALY): A non-utilitarian metric that measures the burden of disease and expresses years life lost to premature death and years lived with a disability of specified and normalized severity and duration. The DALY metric measures the decrement or increment in health state. A DALY, which is one lost year of healthy life, could be interpreted in two different ways. A DALY lost stands for the magnitude of the BoD; a DALY averted stands for the magnitude of the BoD to be reduced through a policy choice, project or intervention. Discount rate: It is the rate at which society as a whole is willing to trade off present for future benefits. Dose-response: see Risk Assessment. Effectiveness: Refers to the impact under routine conditions when implementation is imperfect. Environmental externalities: The positive or negative effects of the action of a human agent (generator) on other human agents (affected parties), for which no organized market for this effect exists, e.g., emission of pollutants or spread of disease that affects other individuals. Environmental health: is defined as the burden of disease that lies outside the purview of the health sector. Emerging diseases: Diseases that are emerging or re-emerging due to unsustainable development. Exposure-based evidence: Assessment of exposure estimated on the basis of measured data, and dose-response relationships.Hazards: Chemical, microbiological, vectors and physical agents that, if not controlled, have the potential of affecting human health through pathways.

viii

Health outcome: A change in health status of an individual, group or population which is attributable to a policy choice, project or intervention, regardless whether these were intended to change the health status. Hedonic pricing: Extract effect of environmental factors on good or service prices that include those factors. Human capital approach: A valuation technique that calculates future discounted earnings lost due to premature death. Incidence: The fraction or proportion of a group initially free of the disease, who develop the disease within a given period of time (usually one year), e.g., AIDS, malaria or diarrhea. Incident: Occurs due to lack of attention and safety measures or poor operations and maintenance, and could have health consequences. Media: A medium such as air, water, food or soil that transmits a pollutant or a contaminant that affects human health. Human and animal/insect could also be disease carriers. Modern hazards: Hazards associated with unsustainable development. Multi-criteria analysis (MCA): Analysis used for complex multi criteria problem(s) within decision making. It uses weighting involving different group relative priorities (qualitative and quantitative) as opposed to a CBA. Odds ratio: Ratio of the odds of disease for the experimental group relative to the odds of disease in the control group or the odds in favor of being exposed in diseased subjects divided by the odds in favor of being exposed in non-diseased control subjects. Opportunity cost: refers to what you give up by choosing a certain course of action. Outcome-based evidence: Identification of outcomes associated with risk factor; collection and compilation of disease outcome data; and disease burden due to a risk factor that is estimated by combining the attributable fraction with the disease burden of the outcome. Particulate matter (PM): A mixture of fine (PM2.5 or a particulate with a diameter of 2.5 micrometers) and respirable (PM10 with a diameter of 10 micrometers) solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. Unlike respirable particulates, which adhere to the surface of nose, mouth, and throat, fine particulates are small enough to penetrate deeply into the lungs and could lead to chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD) and possibly cancer. Chemical substances may adhere to or be incorporated into these particulates. The latter could also be electrically charged by electric magnetic fields and increase the chances of cancer. Prevalence: A fraction or proportion of a group possessing a disease at a given point in time, measured by a single examination or survey of a group (usually two weeks), e.g., diarrhea. Production function or change in productivity: Trace the impact of change in ecosystem services on produced goods. Replacement cost: Use actual cost of replacing the lost good or service. Risk assessment: Provides a framework for quantifying the adverse environment-related health effects of a pollutant. Once a hazard has been identified, the researcher attempts to measure the extent to which people in a population are exposed to the hazard, and the impact of the exposure on health, which is measured in a dose-response function. Stressor: Pressure exerted by agents or media on the human body/mind. Measuring the stressor helps translate hazards into risks that affect human health through pathways. Traditional hazards: Hazards associated with lack of development (lack of basic infrastructure and inadequate behavioral practices such as hygiene, exposure to indoor smoke and so on) and land use mismanagement. Transitional hazards: Transition from traditional to modern hazards due to environmentally unsustainable economic growth. Travel cost: Derive demand curve to target a site from data on actual travel costs. Value of enjoyment: it elicits stated preferences by the use of a direct open question about the value placed on the enjoyment of a visit to the recreational place, and so does not require any payment vehicle to be expressed and avoids the possible biases that payments vehicles can bring to CVM studies.

ix

Value of life, value of statistical life, value of lives saved, and value of lives extended: All basically synonymous terms for measures that permit reductions in mortality risks to be monetized. It is, thus, not life itself that is valued, but a reduction in the probability of avoiding a given risk. Values for these terms are derived by dividing an estimate of the value (see WTP) for avoiding (or obtaining) a given change in the risk of death by the risk change. Willingness to pay (WTP) or contingent valuation method (CVM): The WTP is the monetary value an individual is willing to pay for the provision of a good or a service or to reduce the risk of illness, accident, and/or premature death. In case of an intervention, the WTP is considered a benefit measure in a CBA.

x

Abstract

This report is the first step in a process toward using the cost of environmental degradation for priority setting and as an instrument for integrating environmental issues into economic and social development. The report provides estimates of damage cost for several areas of the environment. The estimates should be considered as orders of magnitude and a range is provided to indicate the level of uncertainty. However, the analysis is far from being exhaustive as the damage cost of environmental degradation has not been estimated in several areas of the environment due to data limitations, e.g., the increasing prevalence of cancer especially in areas with high hazardous waste and sites contaminated with depleted uranium. Hence, as areas of priority are identified, further analysis will be required for more accurate estimates.

The annual COED in Iraq in 2008 is estimated at 4.9-8.0 percent of GDP with a mean estimate of 6.4 percent of GDP, or close to ID 6.3 trillion per year (US$ 5.5 billion) excluding damages to the global environment: climate change and biodiversity. When including global externalities, the total amount reaches about 7.1 trillion or US$ 6.2 billion equivalent to 7.1 percent of GDP. The category ranking of damage cost is as follows: the cost of urban air pollution is estimated at 1.5 percent for the ten major cities with collectively about 11.5 million inhabitants; the cost of inadequate potable water, sanitation and hygiene and water resource degradation is the highest and estimated at 3.5 percent of GDP; land use in terms of agricultural land degradation (salinity), rangeland blocked due to unexploded ordnance and victims of unexploded ordnance while the rural people are tending, harvesting or gathering natural products is assessed at 1 percent of GDP; solid waste in term of poor collection and unsanitary dumping is equivalent to 0.4 percent; coastal zones is the lowest because difficult to quantify despite serious oil and gas impact and is estimated at 0.02 percent of GDP; and global damage associated with climate change caused by emissions of carbon dioxide is estimated to be 0.7 percent of GDP. Comparatively, 56 percent of total damage is attributable to damages to health and quality of life (3.5 percent of GDP), and the remaining 44 percent from natural resource degradation (2.9 percent of GDP).

Figure Iraq Cost of Environmental Degradation, 2008

1,542

3,518

949

381

15

685

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

Air Water Land Waste Coasts Global

ID b

illi

on

Category

Iraq Cost of Environmental Degradation, 2008(ID billion)

1.6%

3.5%

1.0%

0.4%

0.02%

0.7%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

Air Water Land Waste Coasts Global

% o

f GD

P

Category

Iraq Cost of Environmental Degradation, 2008(% of GDP)

Few mitigation costs were calculates but justify the averted costs for certain environmental categories and sub-categories.

xi

Acronyms

BT Benefit transferCIF price at port of destination (cost-insurance-freight)CO carbon monoxideCO2 carbon dioxideCOI Cost of illness ApproachDALY Disability Adjusted Life YeardS/m deciSiemens per meter (a measure of electrical conductivity)ECe electrical conductivity at crop root zone levelEPI Environment Performance IndexGDP gross domestic productGES Good Ecological State HCA Human Capital ApproachID Iraqi DinarKm KilometerKm2 Square KilometerMENA Middle East and North AfricaMETAP Mediterranean Environmental Technical Assistance Programμg/m3 microgram per cubic meterMICS III Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey IIIMOE Ministry of EnvironmentN.A. Not availableNOx nitrogen oxideORT oral rehydration therapyPMx particulate matterRAD restricted activity dayRES Renewable energy sourcesSO2 sulfur dioxideSWM solid waste managementTOE Ton of oil equivalentTSP total suspended particulatesUNDP United Nations Development ProgramUNICEF United Nations Children’s FundUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentUS$ US dollarUXO Unexploded ordnanceVSL value of statistical lifeWFD EC Water Framework DirectiveWHO World Health OrganizationWTP Willingness to pay

xii

Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION

In spite of a raising consciousness, the question of the worthiness of a cleaner environment often goes unanswered for policy makers. Indeed, the costs and benefits comparison of environmental preservation or improvement projects is usually much more difficult to formalize than usual industrial or infrastructure projects.

This report is the first step in a process that follows on the steps of the World Bank Mediterranean Environmental Technical Assistance Program (METAP) that was replaced by Sustainable Med, toward using environmental damage cost assessments as an instrument for integrating environmental issues into economic and social development. The objective of this report is to provide an estimate of the cost of environmental degradation in Iraq. Despite the difficulties involved in assigning monetary values to environmental degradation, such estimates can be a powerful tool to raise awareness about environmental issues and facilitate progress toward sustainable development.

Accomplishments in environmental protection since the 2003 War in Iraq was mainly to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, which led to the increase in child health protection that has led to a fall in the under-five mortality rate, and the clean up the major contaminated sites from hazardous waste, depleted uranium and unexploded ordnance although progress is slow.

Nevertheless, pressures on the environment are numerous and affect: air (leaded gas is still used and the vehicle average age is relatively high, oil industries are the most polluting, open dump burning, carbon emissions, etc.): water (most of surface water is contaminated mainly due to the release of untreated or partially treated municipal and industrial effluents, and agricultural runoff,

underground water salinity level is increasing, the flow of the Euphrates and the Tigris are significantly being reduced, coastal zones are contaminated, water services are deficient with rural people being the most exposed to water-borne diseases, etc.); soil as the remnants of the war in terms of hazardous waste and depleted uranium, poor solid waste management, and soil salinity is affecting agricultural yields); biodiversity is neglected, etc. Therefore, there is an urgent need to protect and reverse degradation of freshwater resources, reduce land degradation and soil salinity, further protect rangelands, halt and reverse the increase in urban air pollution, protect coastal resources, and continue to improve industrial pollution control and waste management.

It is hoped that this report will provide an instrument for policymakers to better integrate the environment into economic development decisions. Estimates of environmental damage presented in this report should be viewed as orders of magnitude. The accuracy of all estimates is constrained by data availability and subject to various assumptions and simplifications. A range of values has been presented to reflect this uncertainty. Nevertheless, the estimates presented indicate the severity and magnitude of environmental degradation in Iraq and provide a rationale for continued environmental management and priority setting for environmental action.

The reader should bear in mind that this report only reflects a side of the overall impacts of human activities. Any policy action that causes environmental damages also produces benefits to society. While this report only focuses on environmental degradation costs, understanding and evaluating both the costs and benefits of each development actions is necessary for sound policy making.

xiii

COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION

The cost of environmental degradation in Iraq is estimated at 4.9-8.0 percent of GDP annually, based on 2008 figures, with a mean estimate of around ID 6.3 trillion per year or US$ 5.5 billion equivalent to 6.4 percent of GDP. The main reasons are: (i) the disease burden associated with the lack of safe water and sanitation facilities and inadequate hygiene; (ii) substantial negative impacts on health from air pollution; (iii) significant strain on land resources resulting in agricultural losses; (iv); unsustainable waste management; to a lesser extent (v) insufficient coastal resources preservation; and (vi) poor energy efficiencies and inadequate use of renewable energy.

In addition the cost to the global environment is estimated ID 0.7 trillion equivalent to 0.7 percent of GDP in 2008. The global and local cost of environmental degradation reaches ID 7.1 trillion or US$ 6.2 billion equivalent to 7.1 percent of GDP in 2008.

Estimated costs of damage are organized by environmental category and presented as such in Table A and Figure A. Figure B presents the same mean estimates by economic category, indicating that the cost to health and quality of life is about 3.7 percent of GDP, and 2.9 percent for natural resources.

The most significant negative impacts are water induced namely, surface water pollution, and a lack of access to safe potable water and sanitation, and inadequate domestic, personal and food hygiene (3.5 percent of GDP). Urban air pollution for the cities of Baghdad, Basra, Babel, Niniveh, Najaf, Kirkuk, Missa, Suleymaniyeh, Duhouk and Irbil is ranked second with an estimated cost equivalent to 1.5 percent of GDP.

The estimated cost of natural resource degradation comes predominantly from the loss of agricultural productivity, the loss of rangeland blocked by the availability of unexploded ordnance and the victims of the ordnance equivalent to 1 percent of GDP.

Waste management has potential impacts on health from uncollected and unsafe disposal of municipal, industrial, hazardous and medical waste. In addition, the odors and unsightliness of uncollected waste reduces the quality of life. Damage from inadequate waste collection is estimated at 0.14 percent of GDP.

Loss of fisheries and amenities in coastal zones were equivalent to 0.02 percent of GDP.

Global damage associated with climate change caused by emissions of carbon dioxide is estimated to be 0.7 percent of GDP.

Comparatively, 56 percent of the national total damage is attributable to damages to health and quality of life (3.5 percent of GDP), and the remaining 44 percent from natural resource degradation (2.9 percent of GDP).

xiv

Table A. Annual cost of environmental degradation - mean estimate

ID billion per year

US$ billion per year

Percent of GDP

Air 1,452 1.3 1.5%Water 3,518 3.1 3.5%Land 949 0.8 1.0%Waste 381 0.3 0.4%Coastal zones 15 0.0 0.0%

Sub-Total 6,316 5.6 6.4%Global Env. 0.685 0.6 0.7%

Total 7,091 6.2 7.1%

Figure A. Annual cost of environmental degradation by environmental category (mean estimate as a percentage of GDP)

1.6%

3.5%

1.0%

0.4%

0.02%

0.7%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

Air Water Land Waste Coasts Global

% o

f GD

P

Category

Iraq Cost of Environmental Degradation, 2008(% of GDP)

Figure B. Annual national cost of environmental degradation broken down between human and natural resource impact

56%

44 %

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

Health and quality of life Natural resources

% o

f GD

P

Iraq Cost of Environmental Degradation, 2008(% of GDP)

In addition, continued pollution and over-extraction of water resources may impose significant constraints on domestic water and agricultural development, and requires intense water resources management.

When comparing the cost of environmental degradation at the regional level, Iraq ranks first among Arab countries (Figure C). With 6.4%, Iraq is however second to Iran’s cost of environmental degradation that was equivalent to 7.4% of GDP in 2002.

Figure C. Annual cost of national environmental degradation comparison across selected Arab countries, % of GDP

-

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

Tunisia1999

Syria2007

Jordan2006

Lebanon2005

Morocco2000

Algeria1999

Egypt1999

Iraq2008

% o

f GD

P

COED in Selected Arab Countries(% of GDP)

Coast

Waste

Land

Water

Air

Source: derived from World Bank and METAP COED results <www.worldbank.org>.

COMPARISON OF DAMAGE AND REMEDIATION COSTS

While the estimates presented in this report provide indications of the areas of the environment with the largest damage cost to society, the benefits of reducing environmental damage should be compared to the costs of remedial actions for improving the environment. Such a comparison of benefits and costs can be useful to identify actions for which benefits exceed costs, and for ranking actions with the largest net benefits. In making such comparisons, a note of caution is warranted:

Environmental damage is unlikely to be completely eliminated no matter how stringent and comprehensive the remedial actions.

Quantification of environmental damage and its monetary valuation can never be completely accurate.

The principle of marginal analysis needs to be applied to identify remedial actions that are likely to provide the greatest benefits per unit of cost.

Elements for the evaluation of possible investments to reduce or prevent environmental degradations are provided but there is a need to further assess and quantify current and potential future damage costs of water resources pollution.

xv

Table B and Table C recap the averted and remedial (when available) costs by category.

Table B. Marginal averted cost, ID billionCategory Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

Air 1,042 1,092 1,142

Water Services Surface

713373340

1,762732

1,030

6,7941,0945,700

Land 77 77 77

Waste 95 197 286

Coasts N.A. N.A. N.A.

Sub-Total 1,927 3,128 8,299

Global 0.01 0.02 0.02

Total 1,927 3,128 8,299

Table C. Marginal remedial cost, ID billionCategory Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

Air N.A. N.A. N.A.

Water Services Surface

N.A.1,900

N.A.3,800

N.A.5,700

Land N.A. N.A. N.A.

Waste 2.9 5.8 8.6

Coasts N.A. N.A. N.A.

Sub-Total - - -

Global N.A. N.A. N.A.

Total

xvi

من والمتأتية " جزئيا المعالجة أو المعالجة غيرالسائلة والنفايات الصحي الصرف مياه

في وتزايد الزراعي، الصرف ومياه الصناعية،في كبير وانخفاض الجوفية، المياه ملوحة

المناطق وتلوث ، ودجلة الفرات نهري مجاريوتعر;ض المياه خدمات في ونقص الساحلية،

سيما ال المياه، تنقلها التي لألمراض السكانعرضة األكثر وهم الريفية المناطق سكان

( )… وبقايا التربة ؛ الخ االمراض، هذه لمثلالخطرة، النفايات حيث من الحرب

النفايات إدارة وسوء المستنفذ، واليورانيومعلى تؤثر التي التربة وملوحة الصلبة، ) التنوع في وإهمال ؛ الزراعية المحاصيل

... حاجة هناك لـذا، ذلك إلى وما البيولوجي،المائية الموارد تدهور وعكس لحماية ملحة

وملوحة التربة تدهور من والحد العذبة،وعكس ووقف المراعي حماية وزيادة التربة،

المناطق في الهواء تلوث في الزيادة اتجاهومواصلة الساحلية، الموارد وحماية الحضرية،

وإدارة الصناعي بالتلوث ;م التحك تحسينالنفايات.

أداة توفير هو التقرير، هذا من [رجى ي مافي البيئة دمج لتحسين السياسات لواضعي . إلى النظر وينبغي االقتصادية التنمية قراراتهذا في الواردة البيئية األضرار تقديرات . دقة من يحد ما إن حجمها لناحية التقرير

وخضوعها البيانات توفر التقديرات، جميع . تقديم تم وقد والتبسيط االفتراضات لمختلفاليقين عدم حالة لتعكس القيم من مجموعة

تشير. الواردة التقديرات فإن ذلك، ومع هذهالعراق، في البيئي التدهور وحجم خطورة إلىاإلدارة الستمرار المنطقي األساس وتوفر

. البيئي للعمل األولويات ووضع البيئية

.هذا أن اعتباره في يضع أن للقارئ وينبغي

اآلثار من جانب سوى يعكس ال التقرير . يأتي عمل أي وإن البشرية لألنشطة الشاملةينتج بيئية بأضرار يتسبب معينة سياسة ضمن . هذا يركز حين ففي للمجتمع فوائد عنه أيضا

فإن البيئي، التدهور تكاليف على فقط التقريرمن اي وفوائد تكاليف من كل وتقييم فهم

لوضع ضروري أمر لهو التنموية النشاطاتسليمة .سياسة

التنفيذي الملخص

المقدمة

لدى الرفيع الوعي مستوى من الرغم علىالبيئة قيمة مسألة تبقى ما " غالبا المسؤولين،

لصانعي بالنسبة إجابة دون نظافة االشدبين. المقارنة فإن وبالفعل، السياسات

مشاريع أو البيئة على الحفاظ وفوائد تكاليففي تكون، " رسميا صوغها عند البيئي التطوير

مقارنة الصعوبة من اكبر درجة على العادة،التحتي البنى مشاريع أو الصناعية بالمشاريع

المألوفة.

عملية في أولى كخطوة التقرير هذا يأتيللمساعدة الدولي البنك برنامج ضمن تندرج

( المتوسط األبيض البحر لبلدان البيئية الفنيةMETAP )ببرنامج استبداله تم والذي

( المستدام Sustainableالمتوسط Med )، تكاليف تقييمات استخدام على تقوم عملية

البيئية المسائل لدمج كأداة البيئية االضرار . إن واالجتماعية االقتصادية التنمية ضمن

لكلفة تقدير تقديم هو التقرير هذا من الهدف . من الرغم وعلى العراق في البيئي التدهور

النقدية القيمة بتحديد المتعلقة الصعوباتالتقديرات هذه مثل فإن البيئي، للتدهور

حول الوعي لزيادة قوية أداة توفر أن يمكنتحقيق نحو التقدم وتسهيل البيئية المسائل

المستدامة .التنمية

xvii

منذ البيئة حماية مجال في االنجازات وتهدفعام المقام 2003حرب في العراق، في

لأللفية، اإلنمائية األهداف تحقيق إلى األول،صحة حماية في الزيادة إلى أدت والتيمعدل في انخفاض إلى وبالتالي الطفل

كما الخامسة، سن دون األطفال وفياتالرئيسية الملوثة المواقع تنظيف الى تهدف

اليورانيوم ومن الخطرة، النفايات منان إال ، المنفجرة غير والقذائف المستنفذ

. " بطيئا يزال ال الصعيد هذا على التقدم

ولها كثيرة البيئة على الضغوط فإن ذلك، ومع ( : الغاز [ستخدم ي يزال ال الهواء على تأثيرعمر ومتوسط الرصاص، على المحتوي

هي النفطية والصناعات ،" نسبيا مرتفع السيارةالطلق، بالهواء النفايات وحرق ،" تلويثا األكثر

( )... اغلب المياه ؛ وغيرها الكربون، انبعاثاتبشكل يعود والسبب ملوثة، الجارية المياه

السائلة النفايات تسييب إلى رئيسي

xviii

الموارد لتدهور التقديرية الكلفة تعوداإلنتاجية فقدان الى اغلبها في الطبيعية

الذخائر بسبب المراعي وفقدان الزراعية،الى الذخائر ضحايا وصل وقد المنفجرة، غير

يعادل المحلي 1ما الناتج من المئة فياإلجمالي.

على محتملة آثار لديها النفايات إدارة إنلم والتي المجم;عة غير النفايات من الصحة

والمتعلقة آمن غير بشكل منها التخلص يتم. والطبية والخطرة والصناعية البلدية بالنفايات

والمناظر الروائح تقل;ل ذلك، إلى باإلضافةنوعية من المجم;عة غير للنفايات القبيحة

غير. جمع عن الناجمة االضرار وتقدر الحياةبـ للنفايات vالناتج 0.14كاف من المئة في. اإلجمالي المحلي

السمكية الثروة في الخسائر وقد;رتيعادل بما الساحلية، المناطق في والمرافق

0.02. اإلجمالي المحلي الناتج من المئة في

رقم العراق: أالجدول في البيئي التدهور ،كلفةاميركي دوالر مليار و عراقي دينار مليار

٪ الناتج من المحلياإلجماليفي 2008

US$ مليارسنويا

دينار مليارعراقيسنويا

البيئية الفئة

1.6% 1.3 1,541 الهواء3.5% 3.1 3,518 المياه1.0% 0.8 949 األرض0.4% 0.3 381 النفايات0.0% 0.0 15 الساحل

6.4% 5.6 6,405 المجموعالفرعي

0.7% 0.6 685 تغيرالمناخ7.1% 6.2 7,091 المجموع

رقم العراق: أالرسم في البيئي التدهور ، كلفةاإلجمالي المحلي الناتج ٪من

1.6%

3.5%

1.0%

0.4%0.02%

0.7%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

˯ϮϬϟ ϩΎϴϤϟ ν έϷ ΕΎϳΎϔϨϟ ϞΣΎδϟ ΥΎϨϤϟήϴϐΗ

ϣΞΗ

ΎϨϟ

ϲϠΤ

Ϥϟ

ϲϟΎϤ

ΟϹ

ΔΌϔϟ

ήόϟϲϓϲ ΌϴΒϟέϮϫΪΘϟΔϔϠϛϕ( OϦϣΞΗΎϨϟϲ ϠΤϤϟϲϟΎϤΟϹ ) 2008

xix

البيئي التدهور كلفة

بـين العراق في البيئي التدهور كلفة 4.9تقدراإلجمالي 8.0و المحلي الناتج من المئة في

أرقام على بناء ،" تقدير 2008سنويا مع ، بـ أو 6.3وسطي " سنويا عراقي دينار تريليون

يعادل$ 5.5 ما أي دوالر المئة 6.4مليار في . األسباب أما اإلجمالي المحلي الناتج من

الى : ) فتعود الناجم( 1الرئيسية المرض عبءالصرف ومرافق السليمة المياه نقص عنه

( النظافة؛ في ونقص سلبية( 2الصحي آثارالهواء؛ ) تلوث اء جر; من الصحة على (3كبيرة

إلى أدى مما المزروعة لألراضي كبير إجهادالزراعية؛ ) المحاصيل في غير( 4خسائر إدارة

( أقل حد وإلى للنفايات؛ حماية( 5مستدامة( و الساحلية؛ للموارد كافية كفاءة( 6غير

في كفاية وعدم الطاقة استخدام في ضئيلة. المتجددة الطاقة استخدام

العالمية للبيئة الكلفة تقدر ذلك، إلى باإلضافةيعادل 0.7بـ ما أي عراقي دينار 0.7تريليون

لعام اإلجمالي المحلي الناتج من المئة فيوالمحلية. 2008 العالمية الكلفة وتصل

إلى البيئي عراقي 7.1للتدهور دينار تريليونيعادل$ 6.2أو ما أي أمريكي، دوالر 7.1مليار

عام في اإلجمالي المحلي الناتج من المئة في2008.

البيئية لألضرار التقديرية التكاليف ترتيب ويتمالنحو هذا على وتقدم البيئية، الفئات بحسب

.) ( /) ( الرسم ويعرض أ الرسم أ الجدول في ) بحسب) نفسها المتوسطة التقديرات ب

في التكلفة ان الى مشيرا االقتصادية، الفئةتعادل هي الحياة ونوعية المئة 3.7الصحة في

) اإلجمالي المحلي الناتج من 56من المئة في ( الطبيعية الموارد اما و ، الخسائر مجموع

المحلي 2.9فتعادل الناتج من المئة في.44اإلجمالي( الخسائر مجموع من المئة في

(

تلوث عن الناتجة تلك هي السلبية اآلثار أهموعدم السطحية، المياه تلوث سيما ال المياه،

والصرف السليمة الشرب مياه على الحصولالمنزلية، النظافة في كفاية وعدم الصحي،

( الغذائية والمواد المئة 3.5والشخصية في .) المرتبة في يأتي اإلجمالي المحلي الناتج من

: والبصرة بغداد مدن في الهواء تلوث الثانيةوميسا، وكركوك والنجف ونينوى وبابل

تقديرية بتكلفة واربيل ودهوك، والسليمانية،المحلي 1.5تعادل الناتج من المئة في

اإلجمالي.

xx

األضرار تكاليف بين مقارنة ومعالجتها

هذا في الواردة التقديرات أن حين فيالبيئة مجاالت على مؤشرات تقدم التقرير

المجتمع، على الضرر كلفة من قدر بأكبرمن الحد فوائد بين مقارنة إجراء ينبغي

العالجية اإلجراءات وتكاليف البيئية األضرار . بين المقارنة هذه لمثل يمكن البيئة لتحسين

بغية مفيدة تكون ان والتكاليف الفوائدفوائدها تتجاوز التي اإلجراءات على التعر;ف

أكبر صافي بحسب ترتيبات وإلجراء التكاليف،المقارنات،. هذه بمثل القيام وعند الفوائد

: والحذر الحيطة اخذ يتعين

على • " كليا القضاء يتم أن المحتمل غير منالعالجية اإلجراءات كانت مهما البيئية األضرار

وشاملة صارمة

شامل• تقييم إجراء " قطعيا الممكن غير منالبيئية لألضرار ونقدي كمي ودقيق

الى• يحتاج الهامشي التحليل مبدأ إنالتي العالجية االجراءات تحديد بغية التطبيقلكل الفوائد من قدر أكبر توفر أن شأنها من

التكاليف من وحدة

االستثمارات لتقييم الالزمة العناصر توفير يتمالبيئي، التدهور لمنع أو من للحد الممكنةوتقدير تقييم مواصلة إلى حاجة هناك ولكن

من المستقبل في والمحتملة الحالية التكاليف . الجدول يوفر المائية للموارد التلوث ضرر ) ( ) التجنب) لتكاليف خالصة ج والجدول ب. ) الفئة ) بحسب توفرها عند والمعالجة

المناخ ;ر بتغي المرتبطة العالمية االضرار وتقدربـ الكربون أكسيد ثاني انبعاثات عن الناجم

اإلجمالي 0.7 المحلي الناتج من المئة .في

في واإلفراط المتواصل التلوث ان الى أضفقيودا يفرض قد المائية الموارد استخراج

والتنمية المنزلية لألغراض المياه على كبيرةللموارد مكثفة إدارة يتطلب مما الزراعية،

.المائية

: العراق في البيئي التدهور كلفة ب رقم الرسمالمحلي الناتج ٪من ، االقتصادية الفئة بحسب

اإلجمالي

65%

44%

0 .0%

0 .5%

1 .0%

1 .5%

2 .0%

2 .5%

3 .0%

3 .5%

4 .0%

οήέ λΤϴΔϭϧϮϋϴΔ ϟΤϴΎΓ ΗΪϫϮέϟϤϮέΩϟτΒϴόϴΔ

\

ϣϦ

ϟϨΎΗ

Ξ

ϟϤΤϠ

ϲϹ

ΟϤΎϟ

ϲ

ϛϠϔΔϟΗΩϫϭέϟΑϳϲϓϲ ϟόέϕ

(8002$ϣϥϟϧΎΗΞϟϣΣϠϲϹΟϣΎϟϲ)

على البيئي التدهور كلفة مقارنة وعندالمرتبة في العراق يأتي اإلقليمي، المستوى

) وبنسبة ) ، ج الرسم العربية الدول بين األولىإيران 6.4 خلف الثاني المركز العراق يحتل ، ٪

يعادل كان الذي البيئي التدهور لكلفة بالنسبةعام 7.4 في اإلجمالي المحلي الناتج من ٪

2002.

: بعض في البيئي التدهور كلفة ج رقم الرسماإلجمالي المحلي الناتج ٪من ، العربية الدول

-

1 . 0

2 . 0

3 . 0

4 . 0

5 . 0

6 . 0

7 . 0

ΗϮϧ β γϮέϳΎ ϻέΩϥ ϟΒϨΎϥ ϟϤϐήΏ ϟΠΰή ϣ μή ϟόήϕ

ϣOϦ

ϟϨΎΗΞ

ϟϤΤϠ

ϲϹΟ

ϤΎϟ

ϲ

ϛϠϔΔϟΗΩϫϭέϟΑϳϲϓϲΑό νϟΩϭϝϟόέΑϳΔ(ϣϥϟϧΎΗΞϟϣΣϠϲϹΟϣΎϟϲ)

ϟδΎΣϞ

ϟϨϔΎϳΎ Ε

Ϸέ ν

ϟϤϴΎϩ

ϟϬϮ˯

.من مستمد المصدر: الدولي البنك

xxi

التكاليف : / الفوائد تحليل ب رقم في الجدولعراقي ،العراق دينار مليار

التكلفة تجنب أو االستفادة البيئية الفئة

3السيناريو السيناريو

2 السيناريو

1

1,142 1,092 1,042 الهواء

6,7941,0945,700

1,762732

1,030

713373340

الخدماتالمياهسطحية  

77 77 77 األرض

286 197 95 النفايات

غيرمتوفر

غيرمتوفر

غيرمتوفر الساحل

8,299 3,128 1,927 الفرعي المجموع

0.02 0.02 0.01 تغيرالمناخ

8,299 3,128 1,927 المجموع

/ : التكاليف الفوائد تحليل ج رقم في الجدولعراقي ،العراق دينار مليار

عالجية االستثمار التكلفة أو البيئية الفئة

2السيناريو 3السيناريو 1السيناريو

غيرمتوفر متوفر غير متوفر غير الهواء

متوفر غير5,700

متوفر غير3,800

متوفر غير1,900

الخدماتالمياهسطحية  

غيرمتوفر

متوفر غير متوفر غير األرض

8.6 5.8 2.9 النفايات

غيرمتوفر متوفر غير متوفر غير الساحل

- - - المجموعالفرعي

غيرمتوفر متوفر غير متوفر غير تغيرالمناخ

غيرمتوفر متوفر غير متوفر غير المجموع

xxii

1 Introduction

1.1 BACKGROUND

Iraq has long faced environmental degradation and threats that were exacerbated by the 2003 War and its aftermath, which have impinged on the quality of growth, life and the commons. The 2004 UNEP Assessment of Environmental ‘Hot Spots’ in Iraq lead to the prioritization of 5 highly contaminated sites with hazardous waste whose clean up has started in 2006: Al-Mishraq, Qassiya, Khan Dhari, Al Suwaira and Ouireej. Moreover, the UNEP Support for Environmental Management of the Iraqi Marshlands has initiated in 2006 the introduction of potable water for the marsh Arab populations and the restoration of the integrity of the marsh ecosystem that is also meant to improve their livelihood. However, the drought that started in 2008 increased water shortages throughout the country by 2010 and triggered a migration notably from marshlands. Also, areas contaminated with depleted uranium were identified and measures are being taken to clean them up. A recent study there has been a 4-fold increase in all cancer. Interestingly, the spectrum of cancer is similar to that in the Hiroshima survivors who were exposed to ionizing radiation from the bomb and uranium in the fallout. By comparing the sample population rates to the cancer rates in Egypt and Jordan, researchers found there has been a 38-fold increase in leukemia (20 cases) almost a 10-fold increase in female breast cancer (12 cases) and significant increases in lymphoma and brain tumors in adults (Busby et al., 2010). More specifically, there is 1,730 km2 where 1.6 million of Iraqis live that is contaminated with unexploded ordnance (UXO). The United Nations is working on an assessment of the latter but in the meantime, 50 percent of agricultural land and 90 percent of rangeland are considered as risky areas that are still increasing the prevalence of accidental injuries or death from UXO.

Iraq is a lower middle-income country with a per capita GDP of about US$ 2,090 in 2009. After

the important oil sector (crude oil export revenues represents 60 percent of GDP on 2009), agriculture in Iraq has been affected by the unsettled security situation that prevailed after the 2003 War, the dislocation of the rural social fabric (especially of the Marsh Arabs) that was compounded by droughts, migration and a reduction of the availability of water. Close to 22 percent of total land area is under cultivation and agriculture contributed to 9 percent of GDP in 2007 that declined to 4 percent in 2008 and employs 17 percent of the active population. This long-standing reliance on agriculture has led to stresses on arable land and freshwater resources as well as rangelands. Intensification, especially the increase in irrigated production, has led to agricultural withdrawal being responsible for 87 percent of total freshwater withdrawal (World Bank 2010).

The Environment Performance Index (EPI) was developed to benchmark the environmental performance of a country relative to other countries. The index has two major environmental objectives: (a) reducing environmental stresses on human health; and (b) promoting ecosystem vitality and sound natural resource management. This index is composed of a combination of 25 performance indicators divided among six well-established policy categories. The higher the score the better is the environment performance of the country in achieving environmental sustainability. EPI ranks Iraq 150 over 163 countries with a score of 41 in 2010 indicating a lower performance towards environmental sustainability.1

1.2 COST OF ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION

In 1995, the World Bank published the “Middle East and North Africa Environmental Strategy.” The strategy provided an order of magnitude for the regional cost of environmental degradation as a percentage of regional GDP. The main areas for which the strategy provided estimates for the cost of degradation were the detrimental impacts

1 Esty and Levy (2010).

1

on health from the lack of safe water and sanitation facilities, urban air pollution, and the cost of natural resource degradation (soil erosion and salinization as well as rangeland and forest degradation). The strategy was based on 1990 data and was a first attempt to quantify the impacts of environmental degradation on health and economic activity in the Middle East and North Africa. In addition, the strategy identified areas of resource inefficiencies (such as energy and water) that had high economic costs and contributed to environmental degradation.

The World Bank prepared its Corporate Environment Strategy and updated Middle East and North Africa regional strategy in 2001 and 2011.1 The 2001 regional strategy committed to demonstrating the economic importance of a clean environment by underscoring the assessment of the damage costs of environmental degradation. Hence, starting in the early 2000s, several country-specific and sector-specific studies were undertaken in the region. They provided estimates of the cost of environmental degradation (COED) for specific environmental issues and subsets of issues. These include studies in Algeria, Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, and Syria that were commissioned by the Mediterranean Environmental Technical Assistance Program (METAP) that was since 2009 replaced by the Sustainable Med program. Until 2009, funding was provided by the World Bank as well as other development partners. The World Bank Group is expected to follow the platform of “Diving Deeper into Country Priorities and Enhancing Attention to Cross-Cutting Issues” with the 2011 Strategy.

This assessment could also represent an analytical tool to assess environmental sustainability, as called for in Millennium Development Goal number 7, especially for water and sanitation improved provision as well as land use targets.

1 World Bank (2001).

1.3 RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The COED could help improve the process of environmental priority setting to achieve reductions in the overall cost of environmental degradation. The report is the first step in a process to use environmental damage cost assessments as an instrument in environmental management, prioritization, and policy setting. The specific objectives of the report are three-fold:

i Provide an estimate of the COED in Iraq using the most recent data available.

ii Provide an analytical framework that can be applied periodically by professionals in Iraq to assess the COED over time.

iii Provide a basis for a training program for ministries, agencies, institutes and other interested parties to incorporate assessments of the cost of environmental degradation into policy making and environmental management.

1.4 THE PREPARATION PROCESS

The study for this report has been a collaborative effort between the Ministry of Environment (MOE) of Iraq and the World Bank. It started in October 2010 with discussions of study design and methodologies at the World Bank resident mission in Beirut. Initial data collection started since that date and the analysis of the COED was completed in May, 2011 and finalized in April 2012. This analysis was then reviewed by the Iraqi counterparts until the end of April, 2012 and the report was finalized in April, 2012. An official workshop was organized in Beirut in April, 2012 to share the final results and discuss the way forward in terms of environmental action prioritization and requirements for further technical, scientific and economic assessments (Agenda and List of Participants are appended in Annex 5).

During the preparation of the study, a review of relevant literature and documents was carried out. Data from various government documents,

2

statistical analyses, World Bank economic and sector work, and reports from various researchers and international agencies were utilized. In addition, analysis from other countries was utilized to supplement the estimates for the cost of environmental degradation included in this report. Chapter 2 provides an overview of the methodologies applied in the report. Analysis and estimated degradation cost in the areas of air, water, land, solid waste, the coastal zone, and the global environment are presented in Chapters 3-8. Chapter 9 attempts to determine averted costs and occasionally mitigation costs for certain environmental categories and sub-categories. Chapter 10 provides all the results, a brief discussion of priority setting, and recommendations for further work on the valuation of environmental degradation.

Annexes 1 2 and 3 present details and explanations of quantified degradation costs. Annex 4 maps institutional and policy responsibilities for the environmental themes and subthemes considered. Annex 5 includes the Agenda and List of Participants to the workshop organized in Beirut on April 12-13, 2012.

3

2 Methodological framework

2.1 DEFINITION

This report provides first order estimates of the cost of environmental degradation in Iraq. An attempt was made to capture the most significant costs of degradation. However, data limitations are a constraint, implying that estimates in some environmental areas are not included. Hence, the total estimate of environmental degradation, as presented in this study, is likely to understate the true costs of degradation to society.

The cost of environmental degradation can be understood as a measure of the lost welfare of a nation due to environmental degradation. Such a loss in welfare includes, but is not necessarily limited to:

i Loss of healthy life and well-being of the population (e.g.: premature death, pain and suffering from illness, absence of a clean environment, discomfort).

ii Economic losses (e.g.: reduced soil productivity and value of other natural resources, lower tourism revenues).

iii Loss of environmental opportunities (e.g., reduced recreational value of lakes, rivers, beaches, forests).

In this report the cost of environmental degradation is expressed as a percentage of GDP to provide a sense of magnitude. It is also useful to compare the cost of degradation to GDP to assess the relative magnitude over time. If the cost of degradation as a percentage of GDP grows over time, it suggests that the welfare loss from environmental degradation is growing faster than GDP. This means that economic and human activities are having increasingly negative environmental consequences for the nation relative to their economic affluence. If the contrary is the case, it suggests that environmental consequences are being reduced relative to the nation’s economic affluence.

2.2 METHODOLOGICAL PROCESSES

The process of estimating the cost of environmental degradation involves placing a monetary value on the consequences of such degradation. This often implies a three-step process:

i Quantification of environmental degradation (e.g. monitoring of ambient air quality, river/lake/sea water quality, soil loss, and soil quality).

ii Quantification of the consequences of degradation (e.g. negative impacts on health from air pollution, changes in soil productivity, changes in forest density/growth, reduced natural resource based recreational activities, reduced tourism demand).

iii A monetary valuation of the consequences (e.g., estimating the cost of ill health, soil productivity losses, reduced recreational values).

Environmental science, natural resource science, health science and epidemiology, economics and other sciences are often applied to quantify the environment’s degradation and condition and the resulting consequences. For valuation of the consequences, and to quantify the consequences of degradation, environmental economics and natural resource economics are applied.

2.3 CATEGORIES OF ANALYSIS

To estimate the cost of environmental degradation for various aspects of the environment, the analysis and estimates are organized into these categories:

i Air;ii Water;iii Land (soil and wild life);iv Waste;v Coastal zones and cultural heritage;

andvi Global environment.

4

For each of these categories there are separate analyses and cost estimates for:

i. Health and quality of life; andii. Natural resources.

2.4 CONSEQUENCES OF DEGRADATION

Several methodologies and approaches have been applied to provide quantitative estimates of the consequences of environmental degradation. Explanations of the estimates are provided in Annexes 1, 2 and 3 for each area for which the cost of degradation is estimated. An overview of the main principles is provided here.

2.4.1 Health and Quality of Life

Impacts on health from environmental degradation are expressed as Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs). This is a methodology that has been developed and applied by WHO and the World Bank in collaboration with international experts to provide a common measure of disease burden for various illnesses and premature mortality.1 Illnesses are weighted by severity so that a relatively mild illness or disability represents a small fraction of a DALY, while a severe illness represents a larger fraction of a DALY. One lost year of healthy life represents one DALY, and future years lost are discounted at a fixed reference rate of 3 percent.

For air pollution, impacts on health are estimated based on ambient air quality data in nine cities and international studies on the negative impacts on health from air pollution. In this report, each premature death due to air pollution represents 10 DALYs (see Chapter 3).

For lack of comfort due to urban air pollution, figures from international literature were adapted to Iraqi standard of living using Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) approach. PPPs are price relatives, which show the ratio of the prices in

1 See Murray and Lopez (1996) for a more detailed explanation of the DALY metric.

national currencies of the same good or service in different countries. It allows adjusting for differences in power parities between countries in order to compare cost of living between these countries. PPPs are commonly used by International Organizations such as the World Bank, the OECD, the International Monetary Fund, etc. The International Comparison Program (ICP) of the World Bank, combined with an Eurostat-OECD PPP Progam, gives estimates of PPPs for several economies.

For waterborne illnesses - associated with inadequate water and sanitation services and hygiene - the loss of DALYs presented in this report are predominantly due to mortality and morbidity in children under five caused by diarrheal illnesses. Each child death represents the loss of 33 DALYs (see Chapter 3).

For inadequate solid waste collection, no estimate of potential health impacts is provided in the report. The social cost of inadequate collection is estimated directly by the willingness-to-pay (WTP) approach (see Chapter 4).

In some cases, social costs of damages were estimated directly by the WTP approach using results from international literature adjusted to Iraqi GDP, and deflated with Consumer Price Index to estimate 2008 values.

2.4.2 Natural Resources

The main areas of natural resource degradation quantified in this report are agricultural land and rangeland degradation, coastal zone degradation, and some areas of water resources degradation.

For water resources degradation the analysis of the consequences of water pollution relies on a benefit transfer based on Baker et al. (2007) study to improve the quality of surface water (Land and marine water) by eliciting the state preference of the community through 2 WTP techniques. As water resources quality is of great importance for the domestic, industrial and agricultural sectors as well as for river ecosystems in Iraq, further analysis in this area is considered important to improve the quality of

5

the resource by selecting and optimizing investments.

The consequences of land degradation are quantified in terms of productivity declines in crop cultivation and rangeland forage yields. Also, the impact of UXO is considered on the replacement cost for barley in the areas that are blocked due to UXO and the victims that fall braving the risk in tending, harvesting and fetching natural products.

The cost of coastal zone degradation is estimated based on: (i) an indication of possible fishery losses due to pollution; and the WTP to improve the direct and indirect use of the coast.

The global environment is based on the different of what is allowed in term of carbon emission (2 tons per capita per year) to keep future temperature increase within the 2º Celsius mark and the incremental carbon emissions above this threshold.

2.5 MONETARY VALUATION

Chapters 3-8 provide a discussion and explanation of the monetary valuation of the cost of environmental degradation for each of the environmental categories assessed in the report. The notes in Annexes 1, 2 and 3 provide further details. A range has been used for most estimates to reflect uncertainties. An elaboration of some health impact valuation issues follows here.

2.5.1 Morbidity

The cost of negative impacts on health is estimated by applying a combination of valuation techniques. For morbidity the cost-of-illness (COI) approach has been used. This approach estimates treatment costs and the cost of lost work days or time provided by care givers. In addition, DALYs lost to morbidity have been valued in relation to GDP per capita to account for the cost of pain and suffering of illness which is not included in the COI approach.

2.5.2 Adult Mortality

The relationship between PM2.5 air pollution and long term premature mortality on adults greater than 30 years is usually assumed to be log-linear that may be applied to estimate the relative risk of mortality from concentration levels of PM2.5:

Relative Risk, RR = [(X + 1)/(X0 + 1)]β

Where X is annual concentration of PM2.5; and X0 is a threshold level below which it may be assumed that the relative risk of mortality from PM2.5 is 1.0 (no mortality effect from PM2.5). The β coefficient is 0.1551 for cardiopulmonary mortality and 0.2322 for lung cancer mortality.1

The attributable fractions assess the proportion of cases in a population attributable to certain risk factors. One of the most frequently applied approaches calculating the AF is the Levin formula, which requires only the RR estimate and the prevalence of the risk factor (p):

AF = p*(RR-1)/1+p*(RR-1)

Where p is derived from WHO’s Burden of Disease prevalence of risk factors and RR is derived from the above formulas.

The cost of adult mortality from air pollution is estimated based on the WTP for mortality risk reduction. Since such studies are not available for Iraq, the WTP estimated in Europe and North America has been applied by adjusting for the GDP per capita differentials for Iraq. Since it has been found that the elderly are most at risk of mortality from air pollution (WHO, 1994), the WTP estimates have been adjusted for differences in life years lost between mortality from air pollution and the overall mortality risks for which the WTP estimate was originally calculated.

The WTP estimates are used as an upper bound for the cost of mortality. As a lower bound, DALYs lost to mortality have been valued at GDP per capita. This valuation has similarities to the human capital approach (HCA) that estimates the cost of mortality as lost future income from the time of death.

1 Pope et al. (2009).

6

It should be noted that the WTP approach provides a cost of mortality in this report that is about four times higher than the approach of DALYs valued at GDP per capita. Thus the lower bound estimate of the cost of a DALY lost due to adult mortality would be a gross understatement of the cost of environmental degradation if WTP provides a better representation of welfare cost.

2.5.3 Child Mortality

Worldwide, most WTP studies assessing mortality risk are for adult mortality risk valuation. Almost no such studies are available for children. The human capital approach has therefore been applied in this study by estimating the present value of lifetime income, approximated by the GDP per capita, for income during the ages of 20 to 65 years, at a discount rate of 3 percent.1 At a real income growth of zero and two percent per year, this corresponds to a valuation of DALYs at 100 percent of GDP per capita.

2.5.4 Surface Water Pollution

Non-market economic value of a change in water quality that could accrue from different wastewater and waste policy options was used to determine the surface water degradation. A benefit transfer method was used to cover non-market use and non use type of benefits derived from water resource quality improvements (Annex 3).

2.5.5 Land

Loss of productivity due to salinization was used and derived from and Kotuby-Amacher et al., (2000). Different produce/fruits are considered to derive the forgone opportunity cost of planting high value added produce/fruits. Also, replacement cost (international price of barley) was used to quantify the reduction of the rangeland output due to droughts. UXO are causing death and injuries and the DALY, HCA, VSL and COI were used (see above).

1 A discount rate of 3 percent is used, which is consistent with the rate used for the loss of DALYs.

2.5.6 Waste

Uncollected waste was costed at rural and urban 1.5% of Household disposable income over a year. Waste dumping was costed at ID 22,960 per m3 for clean up where 340 kg/m2 over 1 m of depth (Bassi et al., 2011).

2.5.7 Coastal Zones

Loss of productivity of fisheries was used and derived from FAO, 2009. Use and non-use value Loss were derived thanks to a benefit transfer (METAP, 2009).

2.5.8 Global Environment

The World Resource Institute identifies 2 tons of CO2 per year per capita as the threshold not to be exceeded to limit the temperature growth to 2°C. The marginal CO2 per capita emitted in Iraq beyond the suggested 2 tons are assigned the most recent social cost of CO2 (Nordhaus, 2011).

2.6 COSTS OF REMEDIATION

The following chapters present estimates of the cost of environmental degradation and of the costs of remediation. As previously stated, damage costs express the national welfare loss associated with environmental degradation. Damage costs also provide a perspective on the extent of the potential benefits that would occur with good environmental management and remedial actions. The assessment of remediation costs provides an indication of the resources needed to at least partially avoid current environmental degradation. Only a limited number of remedial actions, and their costs, are presented in this report. It therefore remains uncertain to what extent these actions would restore environmental quality. Thus any comparison of degradation costs and remediation costs (i.e., potential benefits compared to costs of environmental improvements) should be undertaken with great care and undergo a more detailed assessment before utilization as a policy tool.

7

2.7 MARGINAL ANALYSIS

The objective of this report has been to estimate the cost to society of environmental damage in the areas of water, air, land, waste, coastal zones, and the global environment. This provides a perspective on the overall damage costs and areas of the environment with the highest cost.

For each area of the environment, however, careful consideration needs to be given to the costs of remedial action and the cost of such action in comparison to the benefits such as a reduction in environmental degradation cost.

A marginal (incremental) analysis should be applied to assess the benefits (reductions in damage costs) and costs of remedial action. Only in specific and limited cases can it be expected that incremental benefits from an additional remedial action will be the same as for a previous action. In most cases, incremental benefits decline and it becomes increasingly costly to improve environmental quality. Thus the costs and benefits of each action should be assessed to the extent possible, and actions with the greatest benefits per unit of cost should receive priority. This process should be continued to the point where benefits of an action equal the cost. Implementing actions to improve the environment beyond this point would result in a net welfare loss.

In practice, however, it may prove very difficult (if not impossible) to assess benefits and costs accurately enough on a marginal basis. In such cases, other principles may be used, such as precautionary concerns, the irreversibility of environmental damage, intergenerational concerns, and gender, poverty alleviation and equity objectives. These principles may also be combined with marginal analysis for cases in which benefits and costs can be quantified.

One approach for estimating remediation costs is to review the investments that industrialized countries such as the United States, Japan, and Germany have made in the 70s and 80s to reduce industrial and domestic pollution to improve

water and air quality and comply with increasingly stringent norms.

In 1995, Morocco’s National Strategy for Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development used this approach and estimated that the cost of reducing environmental degradation costs from 8.2 to 2.3 percent of GDP would represent 1.91 percent of GDP.1 Therefore, in Morocco, benefits equal to 5.9 percent of GDP would be about three times bigger than remediation costs.

1 UNDP-UNESCO (1995).

8

3 Air

3.1 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE

Significant sources of air pollution in Iraq include power stations, oil and other industries, open burning of solid waste and traffic. Moreover, sand storms (30 days reported in Baghdad and 5 in Mosul in 2008) are increasingly recognized as causing cardiopulmonary diseases. At the beginning of the 2000s, excessive emissions from traffic were in part due to Iraq’s ageing vehicle fleet (15-20 years average age) and the fuel quality (leaded fuel). The renewal of a part of the Iraqi vehicle fleet since 2003 is likely to marginally reduce air pollution from specific priority pollutants, e.g., CO, NOx, SOx, HC, PM and lead. Only a lead phase out initiative will decrease lead in the air, but not enough to drastically improve urban ambient air quality.

There is substantial research evidence from around the world that outdoor urban air pollution has significant negative impacts on public health and results in premature deaths, bronchitis, respiratory disorders, and cancer. The air pollutant that has shown the strongest association with these health endpoints is particulate matter (PM), and especially fine particulate of less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) or smaller. The gaseous pollutants (SO2, NOx, CO, HC, and ozone) are generally not thought to be as damaging, albeit having important adverse health consequences.

Particulate matter (PM) is solid matter or liquid droplets from smoke, dust, fuel ash, or condensing vapors that can be suspended in the air. It consists of a range of different sized particles from coarser particles to smaller particles such as PM10 and PM2.5. Recent evidence suggests that the smaller particulate cause the greatest health damage. This study therefore focuses on PM10 and PM2.5, the

smallest measure of PM for which data are available in Iraq or can be extrapolated.

In 2005, WHO published guideline values of PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations, below which health risks are considered as acceptable. Threshold values are 20 µg/m3 per year for PM10

and 10 µg/m3 per year for PM2.5. Moreover, WHO recently capped the upper values for premature mortality at 100 µg/m3 per year and a 120 µg/m3 per year is used for cities without concentration data.

There are three main steps to quantify the health impacts from air pollution. First, the pollutant needs to be identified and its concentration measured. Second, the number of people exposed to that pollutant and its concentration needs to be calculated. Third, the health impacts from this exposure should be estimated based on epidemiological information. Once the health impacts are quantified, the value of this damage can be estimated.

There are no recent or comprehensive data on PM and PM10 concentrations in Iraqi cities. The only available data are Total suspended particulate (TSP) values that significantly exceed the revoked TPS thresholds by WHO and USEPA: 786 µg/m3 per year in Baghdad in 2008 with April and May being peak months (± twice the average) due to the sand storm season; 304 µg/m3 per year in Niniveh (Mosul) in 2007. Also, SO2 concentrations are monitored in Baghdad and seems to be below the national and daily suggested concentrations of SO2 (0.1 parts per million) in Baghdad in 2008. Also, lead is monitored in Niniveh and seems below the suggested WHO threshold of 0.5 µg/m3 per year in 2007 although a recent study suggests that lead concentration ranges between 0.6 to 1 µg/m3 per year (University of Alaska: <www. sciencenews.org>). Hence, official figures need to be revisited as they also do not reflect urban air quality as perceived by inhabitants. Nevertheless, if considered as a proxy, a professional journal studying a cohort of foreign military personnel suggests that the cardiopulmonary prevalence among the cohort that left Iraq infer a threshold 10 times the allowed thresholds in the United States

9

(University of Alaska: <www. sciencenews.org>).

As PM10 is a component of TSP, it is possible to estimate levels of PM10 where TSP is available. When PM10 concentrations were not available, they were extrapolated based on TSP concentrations, using an average countrywide PM10/TSP ratio. The ratio between PM10 and TSP can vary greatly due to different sources of pollutants and climatic conditions. However, the ratios found in other countries where COED assessments were performed suggest a variation between 0.4 and 0.5. Moreover, PM2.5 are preferred to evaluate mortality health impacts and Pope et al. (2002) and Cohen et al. (2004) provide a base coefficient of 0.5 and 0.6 respectively for PM2.5/PM10 proportions in developing countries. A 0.5 is used for Iraq. However, given the lack of time series mean pollutants, a capping of the upper thresholds (as performed in WHO, 2004c) at 120 µg/m3 for PM10 per year, the PM10 levels are beyond the threshold with 393 per year for Baghdad and 152 per year for Niniveh. TPS are only available for Baghdad, Niniveh, Missa, nevertheless An Najjaf, Babel, Basra, Duhouk, as Suleimaniyeh, Moussil and Irbil were also considered in the analysis with a capped PM10 at 120 µg/m3.

The second step in estimating health impacts is to determine how many people are exposed to the pollutant. It was assumed that 90 percent of the 10 cities’ population with a total population of 10.9 million inhabitants is exposed to air pollution.

Some health outcomes affect only certain segments of the population such as adults or children. As only total population data are available at the city level, the number of adults and children in each city was estimated by applying the percentage of Iraq’s population under 5 years, under 15 years and over 30 years of age to the city population data (COS, 2010).

3.1.1 Dose Response Coefficients

The third step is to determine the health impacts that result from exposure to PM10 and PM2.5. For this, the study relied upon scientific literature.

Scientific studies estimate a dose-response coefficient linking PM2.5 concentrations with mortality and PM10 concentrations with morbidity outcomes. The health endpoints considered are premature mortality, chronic bronchitis, hospital admissions of patients with respiratory problems, emergency room visits, restricted activity days, lower respiratory infections in children, and respiratory symptoms. The dose-response coefficients from Lvovsky et al. (2000), Pope et al. (2002) and Neuberger et al. (2008) that is derived from Pope et al. (2002) and Pope et al. (2009) are shown in Table 3-1.

Dose-response coefficients for morbidity are expressed as an overall change in health effects associated with a change in pollution concentration. The dose-response coefficient for mortality is expressed as a percentage change in the baseline crude mortality rate, reported to be 4 per 1,000 people (WHO, 2006). These figures were applied to cities in Iraq.

The majority of dose-response studies have been undertaken in developed countries and there are questions regarding the validity of their use in Iraq. However, Lvovsky et al. (2000) find that recent studies support their use in cross-country contexts.

3.1.2 Mortality and Morbidity

Using the approach above, it is estimated that 9,469 people die prematurely every year due to urban air pollution in 5 cities in Iraq. The number should be greater if we account for all major cities in Iraq. In addition, it is estimated that urban pollution in the 5 cities causes about 2,680 cases of chronic bronchitis, 17.6 million restricted activity days, 651,453 lower respiratory infections in children, and approximately 56 million respiratory symptoms per year. It is also estimated that urban air pollution is responsible for 11,782 hospital admissions, and 231,120 emergency room visits (see Annex 2).

10

Table 3-1. Air : Dose-response coefficients

Annual Health EffectDose-response per 1 μg/m³ of

PMMortality (% change in all-cause mortality rate for children under 5)

0.8 (PM10)

Chronic bronchitis (per 100,000 adults) 0.87 (PM10)Respiratory hospital admissions (per 100,000 adults)

1.2 (PM10)

Emergency room visits (per 100,000 population)

23.5 (PM10)

Restricted activity days (per 100,000 adults)

5.750 (PM10)

Lower respiratory illness in children (per 100,000 children)

169 (PM10)

Respiratory symptoms (per 100,000 adults)

18.300 (PM10)

Mortality avoided for 100,000 adult >30 years

Impact of reduction of 1

PM2.5 μ/m3

Equation 1: Risk Reduction (Chap. 2) [(X + 1)/(X0 + 1)]β

Equation 2: Attribution Factor (Chap. 2) p*(RR-1)/1+p*(RR-1)

Source: Pope et al. (2002) for mortality associated with PM10 and Pope et al. (2009) for mortality associated with PM2.5; Lvovsky et al. (2000) for morbidity; and WHO (2009) for death rate per disease.

To compare the health impacts of mortality and morbidity, the impacts were converted to DALYs (see Chapter 2 for more information on this approach). The number of DALYs lost per case of mortality or morbidity is from Lvovsky et al. (2000), Pope et al. (2002) and Pope et al. (2009) and is in Tables 3-1 and 3-2. In total, about 100,329 DALYs are lost each year due to mortality while 22,229 DALYs are lost to morbidity (see Annex 2).

Table 3-2. Air: DALYs for Health EffectsHealth Effect DALYs lost per

10,000 casesMortality 100,000Chronic bronchitis 22,000Respiratory hospital admissions 160Emergency room visits 45Restricted activity days 3Lower respiratory illness in children 65Respiratory symptoms 0.75

Source: Lvovsky et al. (2000) for mortality associated with PM10; and Larsen (2004) for morbidity.

4.1.1 Valuation

There are several approaches to value the health impacts of air pollution. For mortality, the most

common approaches are the human capital approach and the WTP approach.

The human capital approach estimates the discounted lost lifetime income of an individual from his/her time of death. This approach is thus limited to the economic contribution of the individual. The WTP approach estimates the individuals’ willingness to pay for reducing the risk of premature mortality. WTP therefore reflects the cost to society of the risk of death of for instance air pollution. In Europe and the United States, WTP studies show that the cost of mortality risk is 4-8 times higher than estimates from the human capital approach.

For morbidity, a common approach is to estimate the COI. This includes treatment and medical costs and the cost of lost work days. However, this approach does not account for pain and suffering associated with illness. An approach that seeks to overcome this shortcoming is to estimate an individual’s WTP to avoid illness. Cropper and Oates (1992) report that WTP estimates are in most cases 3-4 times higher than the cost of illness.

In the absence of WTP studies of mortality risk and morbidity in Iraq, this report uses alternative approaches to estimate the cost to society of air pollution. For mortality, a DALY lost due to air pollution is valued at GDP per capita and represents a “low” estimate. This approach has similarities to the human capital approach. As a “high” estimate, WTP for mortality risk reduction estimated in Europe and the United States has been used by adjusting for GDP per capita differentials for Iraq. The adjusted WTP is then modified to reflect an approximate number of DALYs lost due to air pollution (see Table 3-2) relative to DALYs lost as found in WTP studies1.

1 Most WTP studies focus on valuing mortality risk from road or work accidents. On average, this reflects a risk of premature death at around the age of 40, which represents the loss of about 20 DALYs. However, for air pollution, the victims of mortality are often the elderly, resulting in an average loss of 10 DALYs. The WTP estimates are therefore adjusted by this ratio to reflect the lower number of DALYs lost due to air pollution.

11

For morbidity, two approaches are used. DALYs of morbidity are valued at GDP per capita to represent the cost associated with the pain and suffering of illness. In addition, the COI approach is applied to estimate the cost of work days lost and the treatment and medical costs of chronic bronchitis, hospital admissions, emergency room visits, and restricted activity days (RADs). The estimated COI is in Annex 2.

While the predominant share of the cost of urban air pollution is associated with health effects, air pollution is also causing discomfort, the acceleration of infrastructure and real estate decaying, and sometimes reduced visibility and scenic beauty. There are no data to assess any possible costs of asset decaying, discomfort and reduced visibility and scenic beauty in Iraq. However, a study in Rabat, Morocco (Belhaj, 2003) assessed households’ WTP for improved air quality. The average WTP per household per month for a 50 percent reduction in air pollution is estimated at 67 to 82 ID in 1995. While most of this WTP is likely to be associated with health concerns, a ten percent share has been used to provide an order of magnitude of the possible cost of discomfort associated with air pollution. The results of this study were transferred to Iraq after accounting for Purchasing Power Parity conversion rates differentials between Iraq and Morocco in 1995 and adjusting the results to 2007 prices. This resulted in a WTP estimate of between ID 5,547 and ID 6,789 per household per month (see Annex 2). This amounts to about ID 6 and 7.4 billion per year, or somewhat less than 0.1 percent of GDP.

Table 3-3. Air: Annual damage cost - mean estimateAir Percent of

GDPHealth/Quality of life Urban air pollution - particulates

Mortality (DALYs lost) 0.71%Morbidity (DALYs lost) 0.34%Cost of illness 0.64%Cost of discomfort 0.01%

Infrastructure and real estate decaying N.A.Natural Resources (impacts on agricultural productivity)

N.A.

Total 1.70%

Based on the methods above, the damage cost of urban air pollution on health and the quality of life is estimated at ID 1.2 and 2.2 trillion per year with a mean estimate of ID 1.7 trillion. This represents 1.7 percent of GDP per year (see Table 3-3).

In addition to urban air pollution, indoor air pollution is a serious health threat in many developing countries. However this is a minimal issue in Iraq given the practically universal access (95 percent) to commercial fuels, and very minimal dependence on indoor use of biomass energy.

4.2 NATURAL RESOURCES

Some air pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide and sulfur compounds, can harm natural resources (agricultural production, forests and lakes). The cost of such damage has not been estimated for Iraq, but it may be expected to be substantially less than the damage cost to health.

12

5 Water

5.1 INTRODUCTION

Iraq belongs to the cluster of transboundary water resources (Egypt, Iraq and Syria) in the Middle East and North Africa and is not considered a water scarce country: according to the FAO, 2009, total renewable water resources were around 75.6 cubic kilometers and around 2,463 cubic meters per capita in 2008 (Figure 4-1). This figure seems, however, exaggerated as Iraq is facing increased droughts and significantly lower flows from the Tigris and the Euphrates with a minimum needed of 500 cubic meter per second against 300 received in 2011 (National Center for Water Resources, 2011). Iraqi water management depends on the source of water, which carries different costs for storage, extraction, and protection, and include surface water, rain water, and ground water: surface water constitutes the main supply source in Iraq that is highly dependent on the upstream riparian countries; Iraq belongs to the arid climatic zone characterized by low precipitation, high variability and high evapotranspiration; and groundwater is occasionally used (6 percent of agricultural water use) to compensate for water shortages as its salinity level is high especially in the south.

However, water availability is in certain cases unevenly distributed across the country in relation to population centers and irrigated agricultural land: the Euphrates (388,000 km2 of catchment area), the Tigris (235,000 km2 of catchment area), Shatt el Arab (108,000 km2 of catchment area), Arabian interior (142,494 km2

area) and Orumiyeh (17 km2 area) resulting in local pressures on water resources, reliance on declining groundwater tables especially in the south, and water quality problems. Moreover, the decrease of resource availability strains water shares as agriculture capture the largest volume (87 percent) followed by industrial (8 percent) and domestic (5 percent) use. This in turn is affecting people’s health (water-borne diseases)

and livelihood (agriculture output, livestock heads and fish catch are declining, especially in rivers, reservoirs and marshes). Moreover, climate change downscaling models project an alarming complete dry up of the Euphrates and the Tigris due to the excessive water abstraction, the reduction of rainfall and the reduction flows from riparian countries by 2040.

Figure 4-1. Tigris and Euphrates Basins and major tributaries

Source: New Eden Group website: <www.newedengroup.org>.

In terms of water and sanitation services, water coverage was 97.5 percent in urban areas and only 50.3 percent in rural areas in 2007, but water quality and regularity remain questionable. Improved sanitation coverage reaches 76 percent in urban areas and 66 percent in rural areas in 2007 (WHO/UNICEF, 2010).

Due to the collapse of wastewater treatment systems (13 treatments plants including 2 major ones in Baghdad running at 25 percent of their capacity of 800 million m3 per day), the sewage or “heavy water” discharged into Iraqi rivers every year from domestic and industrial sources range between 250,000 and 300,000 tons (COS, 2010) with likely cross-contamination

13

(infiltration and exfiltration) from the sewer network that affects the water quality in the distribution network. Also, the industrial, oil, and medical sector untreated effluents are discharged into rivers to which need to be added the seepage and runoff of hazardous material stemming from armament remnant dumps and sites where depleted uranium was used.

The UN suggests that 1 out 6 Iraqis is not provided with improved drinking water and for that matter sanitation, especially in rural areas, which translate into about 1 million children having access to unsafe water. This in turn is causing a very high prevalence of diarrheal diseases across the country for children under 5 (e.g., 34.2 percent in Tikrit, Al Rifai et al., 2010) and older (76.8 percent cases of diarrhea among foreign troops stationed in Iraq if we consider it as a proxy for the local population, Putnam et al. 2006). Poor water quality in terms of high levels of chloride (red cells), nitrate (blue baby syndrome), lead (hypertension and lead poisoning) and sodium (hypertension) have some bearing on the population but data was not readily available to derive the burden associated with these pollutants in drinking water. Moreover, cases of cancer are being increasingly reported (e.g., 340 cases had been registered between 2001 and 2008 in Basra, Ministry of Health’s Enhancing Health Directorate of Basra, 2009) although the causality with the water quality remains to be established.

Yet, Iraq urgently needs better water resources management, pipes, water connections, treatment plants, hazardous site cleanup and sanitation to resolve water shortages, services and quality.

This chapter estimates of environmental damage costs associated with the health impacts of low quality potable water, inadequate sanitation and hygiene, and the economic impacts of water resources pollution. However, these cost estimates are likely understating the true cost, as data availability made it possible to quantify only some of the costs of water resources pollution.

5.2 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE

Sub-standard quality and an inadequate quantity of potable water for drinking and hygiene purposes, inadequate sanitation facilities and sanitary practices, and inadequate personal, food and domestic hygiene have a cost to society. It is well known that these factors are associated with waterborne illnesses and mortality (Feltwell et al., 2005). The most common of these illnesses and the most established link between inadequate water, sanitation, and hygiene is that of diarrheal disease which most severely affects young children. Impacts presented here include diarrheal child mortality, diarrheal morbidity, and the caregivers’ time for attending to ill children.

5.2.1 Mortality

Using the formula and assumptions in the Global Burden of Disease (WHO, 2004a, update of Murray and Lopez, 1996), the death of a child under five represents the loss of 33 DALYs (disability adjusted life years). Thus diarrheal deaths represent an annual loss of about 143,458 DALYs (see Annex 2).

5.2.2 Morbidity

There are many more cases of non-fatal diarrheal diseases, causing discomfort to victims and imposing the cost of treatment and time of caregivers. Discomfort – and reduced wellbeing and restricted activity – associated with diarrheal illness is estimated in DALYs lost.

It is difficult to infer a prevalence and incidence of diarrhea in Iraq as WHO and UNICEF did not report any figure in their surveys. A cross-sectional hospital-based study of 259 children aged under 5 years was carried out in Tikrit, Iraq, to identify the prevalence of nosocomial diarrhoea and sources of contamination in the ward environment. Nosocomial diarrhea was diagnosed in 84 children (32.4 percent). However, this figure cannot be used in this context and a diarrhea prevalence of 15 percent among children under 5 years was used and is

14

based on professional judgment. A severity weight of 0.1051 has been assigned to diarrhea (Global Burden of Disease, WHO 2004a). Therefore, the DALYs lost from one day of diarrhea is 0.105 divided by 365 days per year. Thus, 2,611 DALYs per year are lost from morbidity (see Annex 2).

5.2.3 Valuation

Mortality and morbidity associated with diarrheal illness has a cost to individuals, families, and society at large. The cost is not only in the form of medical costs, but includes the cost of pain and suffering and loss of life.

For mortality, a monetary cost cannot be placed on the loss of life. However, valuation techniques provide a monetary measure of an individual’s or household’s WTP to reduce the risk of mortality. The sum of WTP of individuals and households is then used to measure the cost to society of a particular risk of mortality. This approach has increasingly been applied in many countries in Europe and North America for more than 20 years to improve safety standards and environmental regulations.

The HCA, which estimates the cost of mortality as the loss of lifetime income from the time of death, is applied for each DALY lost as a lower bound and the WTP approach which has been widely used to study adult mortality risk is used as an upper bound for each DALY lost. Applying this approach to cases of diarrheal child mortality in Iraq provides an estimated cost of ID 1.5 trillion per year, or 0.5-2.5 percent of GDP.

For morbidity, two approaches for estimating the cost of health impacts are commonly used. One approach is to estimate the COI. This involves estimating treatment costs and the cost of lost work days. In the case of children, this would be treatment costs and the cost of time for care given by a family member or another person. This approach is applied in the next sub-section.

1 The severity weight of 0.105 reflects the severity of the diarrhea illness on a scale of 0 (perfect health) to 1 (death).

The COI approach does not, however, reflect the cost of pain and suffering from illness. The second approach – the WTP approach – incorporates this cost by estimating the amount individuals are willing to pay to avoid an illness. No such studies, however, are available for Iraq and not many studies worldwide have applied this approach for children.

The valuation of DALYs lost then measures the cost of discomfort, reduced well-being, and restricted activity. This method of valuation is applied in this report, and a DALY is valued at 50 and 100 percent of GDP per capita. The cost is about ID 4.2-8.4 billion per year (see Annex2). This cost should be viewed as an additional cost to the cost of illness (treatment and care giving) estimated in the next sub-section. As presented in Table 4-1 (see also Annexes 1 and 2), the cost of DALYs lost is estimated to be only one-third the cost of treatment and care giving for diarrheal illness. In contrast, studies in the United States and Europe indicate that adults’ WTP for avoiding illness is 3-4 times higher than treatment costs (Cropper and Oates, 1992).

5.2.4 Cost of Treatment and Care Giving

Severe cases of diarrhea are often taken to a health clinic for treatment, however most cases are under-reported as public health clinics do not receive all cases of diarrhea per year.

The cost of visiting a doctor, of medication for a severe case of diarrhea and treatment of severe diarrhea are illustrated in Annex 2.

In addition, when a child is seriously ill, a caregiver, often a mother or relative, takes time to look after the child. This time has an opportunity cost, either in terms of leisure or other activities. For each case of severe diarrhea it is assumed that a caregiver takes one day to look after a child. This time is valued at the daily wage of an unskilled worker. The total cost of lost time due to care giving is ID 10.6 billion (see Annex 2).

Children with mild and moderate cases of diarrhea are often not taken to health clinics.

15

There are about 9 million cases of diarrhea per year. Given that an estimated 1.3 million are severe cases (see above), there are about 7.7 million cases of mild and moderate diarrhea not treated at health clinics. Of these cases, about 67.7 percent were treated through oral rehydration therapy (ORT). At an estimated cost of ID 2,300 per ORT treatment, the total cost of treating mild and moderate cases of diarrhea is ID 13.3 billion per year.

The total cost of treatment and care giving to ID 122 billion per year, or 0.12 percent of GDP (see Annex 2 and Table 4-1).

5.3 NATURAL RESOURCES

Water quality influences human uses of the affected resources, leading to changes in use values and non-use values of the resource. It is difficult however, to quantify the relationship between changes in pollutant discharges and the improvements in societal well-being that are not associated with direct use of the affected ecosystem or habitat. The fact that these values exist, however, is indisputable, as evidenced, for example, by society’s willingness to pay to improve surface water quality.

River and lake pollution may be impairing ecological functions, fishery resources, and groundwater quality among other things. Raw wastewater and industrial discharge as well as all contaminants stemming from the war and unsafely processes (oil spill and seepage, hazardous waste, armament dump and sites contaminated with depleted uranium, etc.) in the Tigris and the Euphrates is considered to negatively affect water resources in general: water courses, underground water, lakes, swamps and the sea.

Non-market economic value of a change in water quality that could accrue from different policy options is calculated for surface water quality. A benefit transfer method is used in this context and is based on Baker et al. (2007) (see Annex 3 for more details).

The baseline water quality information used from Iraq to feed the benefits transfer model indicates that presently 100% of the catchment area of rivers and lakes in the country fails to achieve Good Ecological State (GES) according to the EC Water Framework Directive (WFD).

The targets used for the assessment are those which have been used by the original valuation study, which are (as a target for their models) compliance with the WFD at national level. WTP values as presented in Baker et al. (2007) relate to a permanent increase in real annual payments (increase in water bills and other expenses) that a household is willing to pay for reaching 100% of all water bodies in the country reaching GES by certain key dates.

Table 4-1 presents the environmental damage costs associated with inadequate potable water, sanitation and hygiene and surface water pollution. In total, the estimated cost amounts to 3.54 percent of GDP or ID 3.5 trillion per year.

Table 4-4. Water: Annual damage cost - mean estimateWater Percent of

GDPHealth/Quality of life Mortality (DALYs lost) 1.46%Morbidity (DALYs lost) 0.01%Cost of illness 0.12%Natural ResourcesSurface water 1.95%Total 3.54%

More accuracy could be achieved in valuing water quality impacts on health costs if health data (especially under-five diarrheal diseases-related) were more accurate and available in urban and rural areas.

Moreover, there are likely other aspects of water pollution and water management for which this report does not estimate the costs. One particular aspect is agricultural water management as the agricultural sector is already experiencing water scarcity due to drought. Continued pollution of surface and ground water pose a serious threat to agricultural development.

16

6 Land

6.1 NATURAL RESOURCES

The agricultural sector share of GDP was close to 9 percent in Iraq in 2007 and down to 4 percent in 2008 due to the drought that has hit the Middle East Region and particularly Iraq. More than 12.4 percent of total land area was under cultivation in 2008 (FAO aquastat, <www.fao.org>). This represents 5.5 million hectares, of which the entire area could potentially be irrigated. Iraq depends heavily upon imported food to satisfy local demand. The estimated Import Dependency Ration (IDR) for cereals in 2007 is 56 percent, reaching as high as 62 percent for wheat. National food security is jeopardized by the instability in year on year production levels – mainly due to dependence upon rainfall for the production of strategic crops such as wheat and barley. FAO estimates that Iraqi wheat farmers witnessed a 55 percent reduction in production during 2008 due to the severe drought conditions. Accordingly, dependence upon imports is estimated to have risen in 2008 to reach as high as 74 percent for wheat.

With more than 69 percent of Iraqis living in poverty, with the majority in rural areas, the agriculture sector is an important vector of their livelihood and the prospects of droughts and less water flow in the 2 basins is increasing the vulnerability of the rural population. As a result, the agricultural sector is not only impacted by increased soil salinity but the blocked rangeland access for tending due to unexploded ordnance (UXO) all over the rural areas is exacerbating their livelihood. Accurate data are not available for each of these sources but orders of magnitudes, however, will be estimated to provide perspective on the economic impact of degradation and a small share of the forgone benefits of not cleaning up UXO. Hence, soil degradation due to salinity and rangeland blocked access have been retained for further analysis as well as the toll accruing to the

population as more than 1.6 million rural people in Northern, Central-East and Southern Iraq are at risk of being hit with UXO. The Center and Center West part of the country was not surveyed in 2004-2006 due to the unsettling security situation in these provinces

6.1.1 Soil Salinity

In 2008, 3.6 million ha of land are under cereal production in Iraq. The most severe agricultural soil salinity problems in Iraq are found in irrigated areas at the confluence of the Euphrates and Tigris basins with salinity reaching high levels in some areas in the South that is affecting the cultivation on tens of thousands of hectares.

Areas under cereal cultivation have shown that 20 percent is slightly affected by salinity (about 4 dS/m), 50 percent moderately affected by salinity (about 8 dS/m) and 4 percent severely affected by salinity (about 16 dS/m)1 as mentioned in the FAO agriculture report on the web, <www.fao.org>) (Annex 2).

These high salinity levels in the Euphrates and Tigris basins are expected to have serious implications for agricultural production. Table 5-1 provides an overview of salinity tolerance and yield effects for the main crops cultivated in the Euphrates and Tigris basin in Iraq. The ECe threshold value is the root zone salinity level below which no yield effect is expected. Wheat is relatively saline-tolerant and is grown in these basins. However, yields of these crops are generally found to decline by 5-6 percent for each dS/m of salinity above the threshold value. Thus, at 16 dS/m, as observed in some parts of the basin, yield losses of wheat are likely to be 40-50 percent below yields of soils with salinity below the threshold value.

In areas of the basins with soil salinity between 2-3 dS/m and 7-8 dS/m, the main crops (wheat) can be cultivated without any significant yield losses. However, yields of vegetables and tree fruit crops in Table 5-1 would suffer substantial yield losses even at 4-5 dS/m.

1 dS/m stands for deciSiemens per meter and measures conductivity.

17

Table 5-5. Crop Salinity Tolerance and Yield EffectsECe threshold

value% Yield loss per

1 dS/m exceeding ECe

Wheat* 7.0 5.0Sugar beet 7.0 5.9

Potatoes 1.7 12.0Tomatoes 2.5 10.0Watermelons 2.0 17.0

Oranges 1.7 16.0Apples 1.7 20.0Grapes 1.5 9.6Olives 2.7 8.5

Source: FAO (2003); and Kotuby-Amacher et al. (2000).* Represents an average for several wheat varieties in FAO (2003).

Table 5-2 provides estimates of hectares of irrigated land affected by salinity and reductions in yield associated with wheat cultivation (in this case, all cereal production is considered as wheat).

Table 5-6. Cost of Soil Salinity Slight

salinityModerate salinity

Severe salinity

Hectares in 2008 (000 ha)

717 1,792 143

Percent reduction in crop yields due to salinity

15% 40% 40%

Wheat yield (tons/ha)

3.2 2.3 2.3

Price of wheat (ID/ton) – world price

220,987 220,987 220,987

Cost of soil salinity (ID billion per year)

108.3 722.2 37.6

Source: Hectares affected: FAO agriculture report on the web, <www.fao.org>). Percent yield reduction provided in World Bank 2004. Prices provided by the FAO.

Based on an average cropping intensity of 1.2 in irrigated areas (World Bank, 2001), crop prices in Table 5-2, and yields in the absence of salinity, the cost of salinity is estimated at a total of ID 868.1 billion per year.

The estimated cost of salinity presented in Table 5-2 is likely to be a lower bound. If the soils were not suffering from salinity, higher value crops such as vegetables and some tree crops might be cultivated instead of wheat.

In summary, the cost of soil salinity for the approximately 2.7 million hectares of irrigated cereal land in the basins is estimated at ID 868.1 billion per year. An upper bound could have been calculated by considering the yield effects on higher value vegetables and tree crops that could be cultivated instead of wheat if there were no or minimal salinity.

6.2 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE

The limited access to agricultural lands imposed by UXOs is having a significant impact on agricultural production and farmer livelihoods in Iraq. A survey was conducted between 2004 and 2006 in the North, South and South-Center (13 out of 18 provinces) to determine the communities and areas at risk. From among 12,010 recorded locations, the survey identified 1,622 communities impacted by landmines, UXO or other Explosive Remnants of War. About 75 percent of the population (1,616,127) in this area is involved in farming and herding and is therefore affected by these risks (Land Mine Impact Survey, 2007). Hence, the contaminated sites comprise 1,730 square kilometers of land and affect the livelihoods and safety of more than 1.6 million persons. Impacted communities were largely rural, agricultural, and small. UXO blocked access are mainly pasture and cropland, as well as, in the North, scrubland used for firewood collection. In the South, irrigated farmland is an important asset type impacted by the contamination. Some communities have naturally developed coping mechanisms to deal with this unfortunate situation. However, not all communities are taking precautionary measures and victims have been reported in these areas, especially men who were tending, cropping and/or gathering natural products (fuel wood, etc.).

At any rate, the cost of lost pasture due to the inaccessibility stemming from the presence of UXO was calculated by using the replacement cost method hence substituting pasture natural fodder with the price of international barley.

18

Table 5-3. Cost of blocked rangeland due to UXOLand Blocked landInaccessible rangeland area (000 ha) 346Loss in feed units (kg/ha) 985Total feed unit loss (000 tons/year) 320Barley CIF price per tons (ID) 156,460

Total (ID billion per year) 50Percent of GDP 0.05%

Source: Hectares affected and losses in feed units were provided in World Bank 2004. Price provided by FAO.

Based on the methodology described above, the forgone benefit in Iraq associated with the inaccessibility to rangeland due to UXO are estimated at ID 50 billion per year, or about 0.05 percent of GDP (see Table 5-3, Figure 5-1).

Moreover, the burden of premature death and injuries was calculated based on the Land Mine Impact Survey (2007) with victim rate per 100,000 persons per year reaching 17.9 on average across the affected communities. The DALY lost metric is used with the GDP per capita per DALY lost as a lower bound and the VSL over 20 for a DALY lost as an upper bound. The results are presented in Table 5-4 with a total cost of ID 105.9 billion per year for premature mortality and morbidity equivalent to a range of 0.01-0.06 percent of GDP. However, the COI was not applied due to the difficulty in retrieving information or estimating the cost associated with the burden accruing on the victims who survived this ordeal (Table 5-4).

Figure 5-1. Unexploded Ordnance in Iraq

Source: MOE (2010).

Table 5-4. Land: Burden of UXO on rural communities - mean estimate

Land DALY lost

Value (ID

billion)

Percent of GDP

Quality of lifeMortality 7,452 75.3 0.02%Morbidity 3,291 30.6 0.01%Total 10,740 105.9 0.035%

19

7 Waste

7.1 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE

7.1.1 Municipal Waste Collection

Uncollected municipal waste accumulating in urban and rural areas is a risk to health and affects the quality of life. Waste attracts rodents, flies, and insects that may be vectors of infectious diseases and cause various allergies. Children in particular are vulnerable.

The solid waste sector was neglected by the central and local authorities alike since 2003 as other pressing and priority issues were tackled by decision makers. Nevertheless, a National Solid Waste Management Plan (NSWMP) was finally developed by USAID in 2007, to plan for the strategic development of all aspects of waste management in the country over the coming 20 years. In particular, the NSWMP focused on policy development and integrated planning regarding regulatory framework, economic aspects, institutional capacity, citizen and technical education, and technical and operational development. This paper summarizes the key objectives, challenges and subsequent recommendations contained in the NSWMP for Iraq. Moreover, a number of development partners are starting to move in this direction (UNEP Solid Waste Management in the Southern Governorates Survey, 2007; a Trust Fund housed at the World Bank and managed by the MOE has allocated some funds towards SWM, USAID is also involved in the sector, etc. and the World Bank is drawing solid and health waste management plans for Baghdad.

Still, waste generation, collection rates, transfer and disposal are difficult to determine in Iraq. Recouping a number of citations allowed the determination of a low and high in terms of waste generation per capita per day: a low of 0.33 kg per capita in Missan and a high of 0.7 kg per capita per day in Baghdad with an average of 0.5 kg per capita per day equivalent to about 6 million tons per year (UNEP Solid Waste

Management in the Southern Governorates Survey, 2007). During the survey, it was also possible to determine the waste content: The organics were the main component of household waste in the order of 46-71 percent, plastics were at 5-8 percent, and metal, glass, paper and textile were in the range of 3-5 percent each, and rubber was approximately 1 percent whereas miscellaneous combustibles were less than 2 percent. Yet, the collection rate remains hypothetical and the dumping is estimated to be unsanitary in 95 percent of the cases with a small recycling market run by scavengers.

7.1.2 Valuation

The damage cost, or cost to society of inadequate waste collection can be estimated as the WTP of individuals and communities for waste collection services. The WTP reflects the value of such services and therefore the cost of not having these services. The cost of environmental degradations related to waste management can be evaluated by withdrawing the measured WTP for sustainable waste management (defensive cost) to a commonly accepted reference cost for sustainable waste management (SWM) to cover collection and transfer costs.

The global costs were valued by averaging three defensive costs with a commonly accepted reference cost for sustainable waste management (SWM): 0.8, 1.2 and 1.5 percent of average household income.

Based on the methodology above, damage costs due to inadequate waste collection are estimated to be ID 253.7 billion per year, or 0.26 percent of GDP (Table 6-1).

Untreated industrial, hazardous, medical and untreated depleted uranium waste also pose a risk to health through water resources and land. Also, cancer prevalence is increasing in a number of areas in Iraq but causality between these pressures and health effects remain difficult to establish. No readily available study that has quantified the risk and damage was found although a number of hot spots have been identified and some cleanup work has already

20

started. Therefore, this report does not estimate damage cost. A detailed and integrated assessment of industrial, hazardous, medical and war remnant waste production, collection, and disposal still need to be done at the country level to evaluate the potential damages to the environment, public health, and quality of life as piece meal site specific assessments were conducted until now. A number of studies are ongoing to develop the waste chain and improve disposal practice by analyzing the environmental impacts of uncontrolled dump sites.

7.2 NATURAL RESOURCES

Improperly disposed and stored waste may contaminate soil and water resources, reducing their value to society. While in some cases it may be significant, no study exists for Iraq and given the complexity of the issue, the monetary value results of avoided disposed waste based on waste density (see Annex 2). The results are illustrated in Table 6-1 with a total cost of ID 381 billion per year.

Table 6-7. Waste: Annual damage cost - mean estimateWaste Percent of

GDPHealth/Quality of life Municipal household waste collection 0.26%Municipal household waste disposal 0.13%Risks associated with industrial, medical, hazardous and war remnant waste

N.A.

Total 0.39%

There are other environmental degradations linked to waste management for which this report does not estimate the costs, and for which supplementary surveys may be undertaken:

1. One particular aspect is the loss of cost savings, due to: (i) non-recovery of recyclable products and non-production of compost and energy; and (ii) non-reduction of the total amount of waste going to final disposal, which could extend the economic life of the landfills;

2. Visual disamenities, odors, and direct health risks can also occur caused by: (i)

uncontrolled dump sites; and (ii) improper collection and treatment of waste leachate;

3. (i) methane and CO2 emissions, which typically account for 64 percent and 34 percent in volume, respectively, of all gas generated from decomposing waste; and (ii) absence of generation of heat and/or electricity from waste instead of fossil fuels are responsible for Greenhouse Gases Emissions. Nevertheless, some remedial simulations are conducted in Chapter 8.

21

8 Coastal Zone

8.1 HEALTH AND QUALITY OF LIFE

The coastal zone is under much stress due notably that it is Iraq’s only maritime oil outlet. In an attempt to assess the loss of non-use values on the coastal zone of Iraq, a contingent valuation survey was conducted by METAP (2009) in Lebanon and is used to determine the direct and indirect use value of the coast in Iraq. The average WTP per capita was found to be equal to ID 3,985 per capita per year. This value was derived through a contingent valuation survey conducted in Northern Lebanon. When aggregated across only Basra’s population, it amounted to ID 10.2 billion per year or less than 0.01 percent of GDP in 2008.

8.2 NATURAL RESOURCES

Basra is an oil port and urban sprawl and oil facilities are artificializing the 104 km long coastline. Moreover, the marine environment is filled with sunken ships and some of them are time bombs that could release quantities of oil still trapped in them. Technically, the marshes that are being restored with a lot of constraints (drought, reduction of the flow of the Tigris and Euphrates) could be considered as part of the coastal zone (land extension could go as far as 100 km) but will not be considered in this context as these special ecosystems need in-depth analysis to derive the total economic value of these wetlands.

8.2.1 Sources of environmental degradation

The major environmental problems on the coastal zone are:

- Lack of proper municipal and industrial treatment with the effluents being dumped directly into the sea.

- Pollution from ports due to mishandling of excess import leftovers and lack of separate seaport for polluting cargoes.

- Bad infrastructure in the domain of the distribution of potable water.

- Agricultural drainage, threatening surface, ground and sea water.

- Concentration of an oil industrial complex on the coastline, therefore greatly affecting its environment aesthetically and through releases in air, water and soil.

- Sunken ship dump.

8.2.2 Consequences of environmental degradation

The major manifestations of environmental degradation on the Iraqi coastal strip are:

1. Physical alterations of the coastline because of urban and economic pressures. This includes but is not limited to leveling, dredging, manmade constructions (ports, oil terminals, industrial facilities, etc.), etc.

2. Pollution with solid waste and coastal litters: this problem is very serious because of the lack of an adequate integrated solid waste management framework. Dumps are either authorized but poorly protected or illegal. Garbage and plastic bags are scattered on cultivated land and beaches.

3. Water pollution: is mainly due to the lack of adequate sewage networks and treatment facilities. Water pollution sources are urban, industrial, agricultural (fertilizers) and transboundary (from far coasts and high sea). Water pollution impacts are: pollution of river basins and estuaries, aesthetics impact, impact on air quality, impact on shoreline biodiversity, eutrophication, impact on sea utilization especially for swimming and recreation, destruction of marine biodiversity.

4. Adverse effects on marine ecological resources and biodiversity: these effects

22

result from the above mentioned problems (damage to habitats and nursery places, death of some species) and from the overexploitation of marine ecological resources through heavy fishing that is depleting the fish stock.

8.2.3 International Tourism

It is difficult to consider international tourism given the current circumstances in Iraq. However, Iraq has a tremendous potential in term of archeological (cradle of civilization) and religious assets although the latter are already attracting a number of pilgrims from neighboring countries.

8.2.4 Domestic Tourism

Domestic tourism is important as the degradation of the coastline reduces the enjoyment of Iraqi tourists. However, there is no data available to assess the coastal degradation on local coastal tourism.

8.2.5 Fisheries

Changes in fish species composition to commercially less valuable species have been observed in recent decades along the Iraqi coast. It is suspected that these changes have been induced by pollution, including human-made changes in freshwater inflows as well as the sea acidification and temperature elevation due climate change effects. However, time series do not exist and the last total commercial value of coastal fisheries dates from 2001 and was estimated at US$ 11.9 million with a catch amounting to 22,800 tons live weight (FAO website: www.fao.org). Thus even large changes due to manmade factors will not represent a large percentage of GDP. There are, however, no quantitative studies on the effects, and a 10-15 percent reduction has been applied here to illustrate a possible order of magnitude of the value of fishery losses due to pollution and manmade factors (World Bank 2004). The value of fishery losses due to pollution is estimated to be ID 5 billion per year or 0.01 percent of GDP (see Annex 1).

23

9 Global Environment

9.1 NATURAL RESOURCES

9.1.1 Biodiversity

The ecology of Iraq is diverse – with dry inland areas with desert life, a rich ecosystem of the Euphrates and Tigris with the Mesopotamian marshlands in the south that were dried up but are being slowly restored (Figure 8-1), and a 104 km coastline including the Shatt el Arab that is unfortunately highly polluted with sunken ships, municipal discharges from the main port city, Basra and seepage from the oil industry.

Figure 8-1- Reduction of the Mesopotamian Marshlands from 1973-2000

Source: www.Haysvillelibrary.files.wordpress.com/2009/04 /iraqi-marshes-1976-landsat.jpg

Iraq has 9 eco-regions of which 5 are in a vulnerable or critical state:1

1 MOE (2010).

• Tigris/Euphrates alluvial salt marsh: 35,600 km2 – Critical/Endangered• Arabian Desert and East Sahero/Arabian Xeric Shrublands: 1,851,300 km2 –Critical/Endangered• Mesopotamian Shrub Desert: 211,000 km2 – Vulnerable• Middle East Steppe: 132,300 km2 – Vulnerable• Zagros Mountains Forest Steppe: 397,800 km2 – Critical/Endangered• Eastern Mediterranean conifer/sclerophyllous/ broadleaf forest: 143,800 km2

• Red Sea Nubo/Sindian Tropical Desert and Semi/Desert: 651,300 km2 • South Iran Nubo/Sindian Desert and Semi/Desert: 351,500 km2

• Gulf Desert and Semi/Desert: 72,600 km2.

Although some protected areas have been designated, few protection measures are applied as Iraq has 14 Protected Areas/Reserves established by the Ministry of Agriculture (31.8 km2), 3 UNESCO World Heritage cultural sites (470 km2), 1 informal Barzan Tribal Protected (area unknown), 1 established but not implemented RAMSAR site in Hawzieh (1,377 km2), I, II, V, and V IUCN category Mesopotamian Marshlands National Park (1,416 km2 – Figure 8-1) and 9 proposed ones (Figure 8-2).2

Figure 8-2. Proposed Protected Areas

Source: MOE (2010).

Iraq is also home to several species: 4,500 species of higher plants, 74 species of mammals

2 MOE (2010).

24

with 11 threatened species, 417 species of breeding birds of which 182 are considered passage migrants to Iraq and an additional 27 are vagrant species with 18 considered threatened species, 97 species of reptiles with 2 threatened species, 11 species of amphibians, and 106 species of fish with 2 threatened species.1

However, much of the forest areas that are mainly located in northern Iraq have been lost (1.9 percent of the entire territory), the steppe land and badia degraded. Other land has been subject to desertification and loss of vegetation and animal life.

Iraq ratified the Convention for Biological Diversity in 2009 and produced a report to the Convention on Biological Diversity (MOE, 2010) but has not developed a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan as yet. Irrespective, biodiversity losses are difficult to evaluate in monetary terms, as it is difficult to monetize services provided by biodiversity. Indeed, many of these services are outside conventional markets, thus their actual value is difficult to approach. Moreover, estimation methodologies differ greatly between studies. For example, the benefits that people gain from marshlands include the production of food, freshwater and building materials, but also services such as the protection from flooding and coastal erosion, carbon storage and sequestration, and opportunities for tourism. Marshlands could have significant cultural significance for people.

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB, 2009, 2010 and 2011) launched in 2007 by the European Commission in cooperation with the German Federal Ministry for the Environment will work, throughout its second phase, on valuation methodologies appropriate for use under different conditions. It will focus on the strengths and weaknesses of different techniques, assessing their degree of applicability and their data requirements.

Because of the data limitations and difficulty to reach a meaningful estimate, no estimate for the

1 Biodiversity and Protected areas, Iraq, Country Profile 2003, Earth Trends; and MOE (2010).

cost of biodiversity degradation in Iraq has been considered in this study.

9.1.2 Climate Change

The international community is now convinced of the emergency to limit emissions of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, as they accelerate potential global warming and associated climate change impacts which are manifested through various indicators such as sea-level rise, increased temperatures, variability in weather and precipitation patterns, extreme events (heat waves and flooding), as well as uncertain effects on forest and agricultural systems. This has serious consequences for exacerbating water stress, increasing the transmission of vector-borne diseases, reducing food security and increasing the impacts from natural disasters. The projected changes in climate, water stress and the frequency and magnitudes of droughts are likely to be exacerbated in many semi-arid countries in Africa and the Middle-East (IPCC, 2007).

Iraq ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol (KP) on 28 July 2009. Iraq has a fragile environment and is considered one of the most vulnerable countries in the Arab region to climate change: anticipating and managing climate change issues in the country and to effectively engage in the global climate policy setting are critical at this initial stage.

Yet, the economic development and reconstruction of Iraq following the 2003 Gulf War led to uneven annual GDP growth with 46 percent in 2004 to 4.2 percent in 2009 with large variations between the two dates (World Bank, 2010), led to a stagnation of energy demand due to energy supply constrains with an energy production of 117,711 kilo tons of oil equivalent (TOE) in 2008.

In the case of Iraq, impacts due to greenhouse gases emissions and climate change may include coastal zone damage due to sea-level rise, adverse effects on agriculture and most importantly serious concerns regarding the Euphrates and Tigris water availability.

25

In terms of consumption, Iraq accounted for 109 million ton of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalent in 2008 or an average of 3.42 tons of CO2 per capita (average over the 2005-07 (www.iea.org). These emission levels are however below those of the Arab Gulf States.

As a result of past emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases (GHG), the world is now on course for future climate change. The World Resource Institute identifies 2 tons of CO2 per year per capita as the threshold not to be exceeded to limit the temperature growth to 2°C, above which irreversible and dangerous climate change will become unavoidable. So, the carbon that will be considered as damage cost will be the marginal carbon emissions that exceed 2 tons of CO2 per year per capita, which is 1.42 tons of CO2 per year per capita to be multiplied by the population and the price of carbon.

The social cost of CO2 is the present and future (2000-2099) damage from a ton of current emissions in terms of: floods, droughts, sea-level rise, declining food production, species extinction, etc. Several estimations are available for the social cost of CO2 emissions ranging from US$ 3 to US$ 95 (Nordhaus, 2001; Stern, 2007; and IPPC, 2007). Recently, the European Commission (EC 2008 and DECC 2009) has reported US$ 6 per ton as a lower bound value of CO2 and the French study (Centre d’analyse stratégique, 2009) as an upper bound value of CO2 with US$ 11 per ton in 2009. A range of US$ 11-15 per ton of CO2 in 2008 prices was considered as lower bound and higher bound based on Nordhaus, 2011, which estimated the social cost of carbon for the current time (2015) including uncertainty, equity weighting, and risk aversion at US$ 12 per ton CO2 (US$ 44 per ton of carbon) in 2005 US$ and international prices.

However, it should be noted that the impacts of climate change are still uncertain and hotly debated. In addition, the impacts will vary from country to country. Therefore, although the study is based on the best available scientific evidence available at the time, it cannot provide anything better than a rough order of magnitude assessment. Bearing in mind these uncertainties, it is estimated that the damage from CO2

emissions are ID 685.1 billion equivalent to 0.7 percent of GDP per year (see Table 8-1) when based on Nordhaus (2011). The cost is not supported directly by Iraq. The cost induced by the Iraqi emissions will be supported at a worldwide level. The cost Iraq will have to support is the cost of GHG mitigation and the cost of adaptation to climate change.

Table 8-8. Global Environment: Annual damage cost-mean estimate

Global Environment Percent of GDP

Natural ResourcesBiodiversity losses N.A.Climate change 0.7%Total 0.7%

26

10 Cost of remediation

10.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents elements for the cost evaluation of a limited number of remedial actions. The extent to which these remedial actions would restore environmental quality, however, remains uncertain. The following clarifications are warranted regarding the possible remedial actions suggested and cost estimates presented in this chapter: (i) the cost estimates are not necessarily based on the most cost-effective or least-cost remedial actions or technologies; (ii) they represent overall cost estimates of actions that are likely to be necessary to reduce environmental degradation; (iii) the remedial action and cost estimates only partially correspond to environmental damage categories and further analysis is needed for a more accurate assessment of optimal remedial action; and (iv) the cost estimates of remedial actions are annualized.

10.2 POLICY CONTEXT

While the focus of this chapter is on the cost of remediation, mainly on investments and programs, a discussion of policy context is warranted. Reducing degradation and protecting the environment should be viewed in the context of economic and sector policies, socioeconomic development and in the broader framework of environmental management. Much can be gained from preventing degradation by valuing the environmental impacts of policies and development plans. Eliminating price, tax and economic regulatory distortions can also benefit the environment. Reducing degradation and protecting the environment also require strict enforcement of environmental legislation, public/private partnerships, environmental awareness raising and local participation. Sound environmental management also requires that the roles of the public and the private sectors be clarified. The remedial actions discussed in this

report should not only be undertaken by the public sector but the private sector should also be invited to lead or leverage delivery of environmental service investments and/or management operations.

10.3 AIR

Curbing urban air pollution requires a comprehensive inventory of emissions and a careful assessment of mitigation options and costs. This study focuses on particulate matter air pollutants; however other pollutants are likely to induce significant health impacts and welfare (sulfur and nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, etc.). Accurate estimation of pollutants concentrations and impacts would require a comprehensive network for continuously monitoring urban air pollutants in the capital and in the main cities.

Concerning the specific pollution induced by particulate matters, remedial and mitigation measures should take into account the main PM emitters and the relative harmful impacts of each pollutant. A large number of studies attempted to value the health impacts of PM concentrations in industrial regions, leading to an estimation of 0.1 to 4.6 percent decrease in mortality for 10 μg/m3

reduction in PM10 (El-Fadel and Massoud, 2000). Nevertheless, the coarse (PM10) and finest particulates (PM2.5) have the most harmful effects on public health and are considered in the analysis.

The main sources of pollution by suspended solids are the combustion of fossil fuel and to a lesser extent wood, therefore remedial or mitigation actions should target a large field of economic sectors: transportation, heating, energy production from fossil fuels (coal, diesel/gasoline) and industry. PM2.5 in urban areas are mainly emitted by vehicles, energy production and industrial processes. In some cases, the impacts on health are aggravated by the aggregation of carcinogenic compounds, such as metals (e.g., lead from gasoline) or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from

27

industrial processes. In this particular case, the remedial cost is difficult to assess as the emission loads are non-existent. However, the averted cost is based on 3 scenarios in 2008 prices (based on the same methodology used in Annex 2):

Scenario 1: reducing PM10 and PM2.5 to 50 and 25 μ/m3 respectively;

Scenario 2: reducing PM10 and PM2.5 to 40 and 20 μ/m3 respectively; and

Scenario 3: reducing PM10 and PM2.5 to 30 and 15 μ/m3 respectively.

Table 9-1. Reduction of PMx in 10 citiesAir management Value ID

billion

Scenario 1 1,042

Scenario 2 1,092

Scenario 3 1,142

The results are illustrated in Table 9-1 with an averted cost in the 10 major cities amounting to: ID 1,042 billion for scenario 1 as compared to the 2008 baseline degradation; ID 1,092 billion for scenario 2; and ID 1,142 billion for scenario 3.

10.3.1 Transportation

Remedial actions to reduce urban air pollution from vehicles include the reduction or fine tuning of old motorbikes, cars, buses and trucks that emit significant PM and that have the highest negative impacts on health.

Other remedial actions include the introduction of lead-free gasoline and cleaner diesel (0.05 percent sulfur) to reduce suspended solids from diesel vehicles and facilitate the effectiveness of emission control technology that is available on newer vehicles.

Table 9-2. Cost-benefits analysis0 for low-sulfur gasoline in the U.S.

Valuation Passenger vehicles

Heavy-duty

Total

Cost (US$ billion) 5.3 4.3 9.6

Benefit (US$ billion) 25.2 70.4 95.6

Net (US$ billion) 19.9 66.1 86.0

B/C ratio 9.96

Source: Blumberg et al. (2003).

According to the U.S. EPA, stricter emissions standards can lead to benefits roughly ten times higher than the increased refining costs required. In general, cost-benefit analyses carried out in the U.S. and Europe have found that the benefits of using a low sulfur fuel far outweigh the costs, regardless of the different assumptions used. As a matter of order of magnitude associated with improved ambient air, Table 9-2 illustrates the cost/benefit analysis for low-sulfur gasoline in the U.S. as implementation for both passenger vehicles and the heavy-duty engine and vehicle projected to 2030.

10.3.2 Heating

The indoor and outdoor air pollution induced by particulate matters emitted by the use of biomass (wood mainly) for domestic heating and cooking is limited in Iraq (5 percent of the population relies on biomass) by the switch to commercial energy, through distribution networks extension in rural areas and promotion of the use of commercial energy.

10.3.3 Energy production and industry

Estimates of the overall cost of industrial air pollution control to comply with Iraqi standards are not readily available. Such actions are particularly important for industrial plants in the proximity of population centers.

Reducing energy consumption by 10 percent in the industrial sector would require investments

0 The health and air quality benefits were taken into account and actually, reduction in premature mortality due to reduced PM levels was the dominant benefit. Reductions in health impacts, such as chronic bronchitis, visibility impairments or crop damage were also included.

28

that would encompass: (i) studying the situation of the electrical engines and equipment in the Iraqi industries; (ii) programming to renew, replace, and rehabilitate the electrical engines; (iii) setting up the basis for periodical maintenance; and (iv) setting up obligatory standards for controlling efficiency and effectiveness. Further investigation would be required to update the figure, and estimate the cost for boilers and furnaces energetic enhancement.

Table 9-9. Air abatement suggested interventionsAirHealth and quality of lifeTransportation- Increasing mass transit- Switch to lead-free gasoline- Switch to low sulfur diesel- Switch to compressed natural gas- Use of catalytic converters- Vehicles inspection/maintenance- Applying asphalt on sandy roads

Heating- Substitution of biomass to commercial energy

Energy production and industry- Industrial depollution and process improvement- Low sulfur heavy fuel oil- Promotion of renewable energyWaste- Waste collection and proper disposal to avoid waste

self-ignition and allow carbon captureConstruction- Introduction of dust reduction regulationsSand storm- Behavior change (use of masks and staying at home

for individuals at high risk of respiratory diseases) and creation of greenbelts around cities

On the energy production side, the introduction of renewable energy sources could reduce emissions from the combustion of fossil fuels, which represented a significant part of the national energy mix in 2008. The regional potential for solar energy (photovoltaic power generation) and wind power production are proven. For wind power mainly, resources assessment at a national scale could be undertaken in order to evaluate the physical potential of power production. Introducing renewable energies would require: (i) integrating renewable energy policies into national energy policies, including defined rules and responsibilities and contributions that could create green jobs, improve energy security and

drive down fossil energy prices – are unlikely to substantially alter the analysis (ii) strengthening relevant national institutions; (iii) supporting the private sector in producing and/or using renewable energies; and (iv) introducing specific financial mechanisms to support the development of renewable energy.

Domestic waste self-ignition is an increasing health hazard in cities or suburban dumps, and better waste management is needed in terms of waste collection and proper disposal. Moreover, agricultural burning waste around cities needs also to be controlled or banned. Construction boom is increasingly associated with air pollution and the introduction of dust reduction regulations is required especially in large cities.

Seasonal sand storms are an important source of pollution that could be reduced through soft and least cost solutions such as behavior change (use of masks and staying at home) or long term and more expensive solutions such as the creation of greenbelts around cities.

10.4 WATER

10.4.1 Health and quality of life

The damage cost to health (DALYs lost and treatment cost of illness) estimated in Chapter 5 is associated with inadequate clean water, sanitation, and hygiene. The situation is exacerbated by the use of ground and river water for irrigation purposes. To mitigate the impact of unsustainable water extraction, water pollution and of drought, long-term investments are required to ensure the supply of safe drinking water. Among others, remedial actions would encompass: (i) reducing water pollution due to wastewater discharge through improved agricultural and industrial processes (reduction of the use of phyto-sanitary products, sustainable industrial processes, water recycling); (ii) reducing uncontrolled discharge of household and industrial wastewater; (iii) enhancing wastewater treatment coverage and efficiency; (iv) improving access to potable water,

29

especially in rural areas, involving the construction of dams and reservoirs, the extension of water networks and irrigation canals, the creation of new groundwater supplies, and the reduction of water network losses; and (v) raising awareness on hygiene and sanitary issues amongst the population.

Iraq’s access to improved water and sanitation is 79 and 73 percent respectively in 2008. However, high costs, low efficiency and unreliability characterize the service delivery in Iraq with the quality of water having the highest impact on the diarrheal prevalence among children under 5 years old. The averted cost is based on 3 scenarios in 2008 prices (based on the same methodology used in Annex 2):

Scenario 1: reduction of diarrheal prevalence to 12.5 percent and 7.5 percent of premature death under 5 year old children attributable to diarrhea;

Scenario 2: reduction of diarrheal prevalence to 10 percent and 5 percent of premature death under 5 year old children attributable to diarrhea; and

Scenario 3: reduction of diarrheal prevalence to 7.5 percent and 2.5 percent of premature death under 5 year old children attributable to diarrhea.

Table 9-3. Reduction of diarrheal prevalence among children under 5

Water Value ID trillion

Scenario 1 0.4

Scenario 2 0.7

Scenario 3 1.1

The results are illustrated in Table 9-3 with a marginal averted cost amounting to: ID 1.2 trillion for scenario 1 as compared to the 2008 baseline degradation; ID 2.0 trillion for scenario 2; and ID 2.4 trillion for scenario 3.

A global estimation of the economic costs and benefits of a range of interventions to improve water and sanitation services was undertaken by the WHO in 2004. Five scenarios were considered, by the year 2015:

Scenario 1: Halving the proportion of people without access to improved water sources (requirement to meet the millennium development goals for water supply).

Scenario 2: Halving the proportion of people without access to improved water sources and sanitation.

Scenario 3: Everyone has access to improved water and improved sanitation services

Scenario 4: Intervention 3 plus everyone has a minimum of water disinfected at the point of use.

Scenario 5: Everyone has access to a regulated piped water supply and sewage connection in their houses.

Table 9-4. Cost benefit evaluation of five improved water and sanitation services scenarios0 in the EMR-B sub-region0 – baseline: 2000 in 2008 prices (WHO 2004b)

B/C analysisScenario

1 2 3 4 5

Population (million) receiving interventions

10 22 32 184 184

Total annual cost of interventions (US$ million)

27

27

201

1,858

30,271

Total economic benefits of interventions (US$ million)

775

948

8,523

114,108

438,680

Cost-benefit ratio

28. 7 35.1 42.4 61.4 14.5

0 For each intervention, the predicted reduction in the incidence of diarrheal disease was calculated so as the total cost, including full investment and running costs. The benefits were valued and included health sector and patients costs saved due to less treatment of diarrheal diseases, time savings associated with better access to water and sanitation facilities, the value of averted deaths or the school attendance days gained.0 The EMR-B sub-region (EMR stands for Eastern Mediterranean Region and B is the mortality stratum) includes the Syrian Arab Republic, and also Bahrain, Cyprus, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia and the United Arab Emirates.

30

As we cannot calculate the cost assessment to improve the water and sanitation in Iraq, scenarios 4 and 5 under WHO assumptions are the closest to the Iraqi water and sanitation state. Although the figures are in 2000 values, any improvement will produce very high cost/benefit ratio (ranging between 14.5 and 61.4). Yet, it is difficult to estimate the cost of actions required to mitigate the estimated negative impacts on health and provide potable water of a satisfactory quality. Investment cost for water supply for urban and rural population without access to improved water source and for sanitation networks improvement could be estimated by additional analysis on the cost per capita of providing access to potable water and improved sanitation. The estimation of the overall cost of water networks efficiency enhancement to reduce water losses would require a prior estimation of water losses over the Iraqi network.

10.4.2 Natural resources

The surface water improvement scenarios are based on the benefit transfer developed under Annex 3. Hence, the 3 scenarios include:

Scenario 1: 33 percent successive improvement by 2015, 2021 and 2027;

Scenario 2: 50 percent improvement by 2015, 30 percent in 2021 and 20 percent by 2027; and

Scenario 3: 100 percent improvement by 2015.

Table 9-5. Surface water improvementsWater management Value

ID trillion

Scenario 1 0.34

Scenario 2 1.03

Scenario 3 5.7

The results are illustrated in Table 9-5 with an annualized improvement cost over 20 years amounting to: ID 0.34 trillion for scenario 1; ID 1.03 trillion for scenario 2; and ID 5.7 trillion for scenario 3.

Surface water improvements will necessitate water investments as 13 treatments plants including 2 major ones in Baghdad running at 25 percent of their capacity of 800 million m3 per day. Hence, 600 million m3 need to be treated over the next 3 years and therefore, three scenarios are considered:

Scenario 1: 200 million m3 additionally treated;

Scenario 2: 400 million m3 additionally treated; and

Scenario 3: 600 million m3 additionally treated.

Table 9-6. Treatment costWastewater investments Value

ID trillion

Scenario 1 1.9

Scenario 2 3.8

Scenario 3 5.7

The cost of wastewater treatment that does not include the sewer network is based on a benchmark based on 234 public and private sector water and wastewater cost, which is suggested at US$ 0.37 per m3 that include investment and operations and maintenance costs over 25 years discounted at 5 percent.0 Wastewater investment and operation and maintenance costs exceed surface water improvement benefits under scenarios 1 and 2. Under scenario 3, the benefit/cost ratio is equal to 1, however, water resources are considered a public good and some direct and indirect benefits accrue under scenarios 1 and 2 as well, e.g., water treatment cost, contamination of crops and foods, etc.

10.5 LAND

Remedial actions to land degradations encompass erosion and desertification control, soil salinization control in cultivated areas (introduction of salt resistant seeds); clean up of UXO-prone areas. Should UXO cleanup cost per km2 is available, it would be easy to calculate the forgone rangeland benefits and the reduction of

0 Hassanein and Khalifa (2008).

31

premature death and injuries as 95 percent of the degradation value will be averted: rangeland blocked due to UXO equivalent to ID 47.6 billion; and victims of UXO equivalent to ID 29.1 billion. However, no estimate of these remedial costs is presently available. Remedial actions in contaminated areas should be selective as the cost for clearing of land could vary between ID 2.3 billion and ID 44.8 billion per km2 depending on the terrain. Agricultural yield and rangeland averted and remedial costs were not calculated.

Table 9-7. Land degradation mitigation suggested interventions

Land Averted cost ID billion

Natural resources- Erosion and desertification control- Soil salinization control- UXO clean up

N.A.N.A.76.7

10.6 WASTE

The remediation costs of waste management encompass improvements in municipal waste collection and disposal, control of illegal dumping including construction and demolition, industrial, hazardous, and medical wastes. However, only the domestic waste will be covered as no estimate of the quantities and costs are available for other types of waste.

The averted cost is based on 3 scenarios in 2008 prices over the next 3 years based on 1,627,000 households lacking collection coverage and 5,695,803 tons being dumped in 2008 (the same methodology used in Annex 2):

Scenario 1: increase of collection by 25 percent and decrease of dumping by 25 percent;

Scenario 2: increase of collection by 50 percent and decrease of dumping by 50 percent; and

Scenario 3: increase of collection by 75 percent and decrease of dumping by 75 percent.

Table 9-8. Waste: Annual remediation cost-mean estimate, ID billion

Waste Scenario1 2 3

Health and quality of life- Uncollected municipal waste- Illegal dumping reduction- Construction and demolition- Industrial waste- Hazardous waste- Medical waste

63.431.8N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.

126.963.7N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.

190.395.5N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.

Total 95.2 193.6 285.8

The results are illustrated in Table 9-8 with a marginal improvement as follows: scenario 1 with ID billion 95.2; scenario 2 with ID billion 193.6; and ID billion 285.8.

The benchmark cost for the collection and sanitary disposal in the Middle East and North Africa is US$ 50 per ton.0 The annualized cost over 20 years: 25 percent improvement is ID billion 2.9; 50 percent improvement is ID billion 5.8; and 50 percent improvement is ID billion 8.6. Remedial costs are lower than averted cost, which translate into a benefit to cost ratio greater than one.

10.7 COASTAL ZONES

Possible remedial actions include the increase of wastewater treatment capacity through the construction and extension of wastewater treatment plants, the extension of existing landfills or investments to lower particulate matters concentrations in air emissions of industrial facilities.

On the operation and maintenance side, SWM fees and wastewater tariffs are not sufficient to cover the cost of proper waste collection, transportation, segregation and disposal, as well as wastewater treatment respectively. Solutions to increase SWM fees and wastewater tariffs include the implementation of additional waste management fees for other utilities fees (e.g. electricity bill) and the regionalization of water tariffs (METAP 2009).

0 GTZ (2010).

32

10.8 GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT

Only energy consumption will be considered in terms of CO2 equivalent averted in 2020 if 10, 15 and 20 percent of the energy is generated through Renewable Energy Sources (RES) to determine the global gains in terms of the increased share of hydropower, wind and solar energy. The main drivers of energy consumption are climate change, economic growth and demographic growth. A 2020 baseline will be considered factoring in demographic and economic growth with fuel mix shares remaining the same as 2008. A 2020 target will be generated through RES to determine the averted cost in terms of global gains. The cumulative years are not considered and therefore discounted in this case as we are comparing two states at t0 and t1.

The business as usual scenario in 2020 generates 31,152 kilo TOE in 2020 (Figure 9-1). The 3 scenarios are a 10, 15 and 20 percent of the energy consumption attributable to RES in 2020. The net RES gains are based on 3 scenarios in 2008 prices (based on the same methodology used in Annex 2):

Scenario 1: 2,652 kilo TOE equivalent to 1,516 kilo TOE of CO2 equivalent;

Scenario 2: 3,978 kilo TOE equivalent to 2,274 kilo TOE of CO2 equivalent; and

Scenario 3: 5,304 kilo TOE equivalent to 3,032 kilo TOE of CO2 equivalent.

Figure 9-1. Iraq’s 20% renewable energy sources, 2020

1,535 1,758 1,441

24,156 27,665

22,680

30

726

6,030

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

2008 2020 BAU Target 2020

kTO

E

Scenario

Energy Consumption Mix kTOE

RES

Fuel

Gas

Source: data derived from IAE website: <www.iae.org>. The European Commission (EC 2008 and DECC 2009) lower bound a lower bound value of CO2

US$ 6.1 and the French study (Centre d’analyse stratégique, 2009) upper bound value of CO2 of

US$ 11.3 per ton in 2009 are used. The averted values in 2020 are illustrated in Table 9-9.

Table 9-9. Global externalities averted by 2020Global environment and RES ResultsCost per ton of CO2 (low- ID/TOE CO2) Cost per ton of CO2 (high- ID/TOE CO2)Scenario 1: 10% RES (ID million)Scenario 2: 15% RES (ID billion)Scenario 3: 20% RES (ID billion)

5,38710,022

11.717.523.4

33

11 Cost Assessment of Environmental Degradation

11.1 OVERALL ASSESSMENT

This report has provided estimates of the cost of environmental degradation in Iraq in the range of 4.9-8.3 percent of GDP with a mean estimate of 6.6 percent. This is a significant amount and about 2 times higher than the MENA region average.

The areas of the environment with the largest costs to society have been found to be: (i) significant health burden stemming from mainly water services especially in rural areas and air pollution although the latter is under-estimated because only 10 major cities were considered; (ii) tremendous stress on water resources in the entire country as the Tigris and Euphrates rivers are polluted (municipal discharge, industrial effluents, agricultural runoff and seepage from municipal, medical, hazardous and war remnants waste including depleted uranium) and their flows are already being affected by climate change effects; (iii) significant strains on land resources resulting in agricultural losses; (iv) unsustainable waste management and mitigation of war remnant sites; (v) insufficient coastal resources preservation; and (vi) climate change has recently been brought to the forefront as the effects have not been strategically addressed in terms of selective adaptation and mitigation measures (the National Communication for the UNFCCC was not prepared).

While the estimates presented in this report provide strong indications of the areas of the environment with the largest damage cost to society, the benefits of reducing environmental damage should be compared to the costs of remedial actions for improving the environment. Such a comparison of benefits and costs can be useful to point to actions for which benefits exceed the cost, and for ranking actions with the largest net benefits.

In making such benefit and cost comparisons, a note of caution is warranted:

i. Environmental damage is unlikely to be completely eliminated no matter how stringent and comprehensive the remedial actions are.

ii. Quantification of environmental damage and their monetary valuation can never be completely accurate.

iii. The principle of marginal analysis needs to be applied in order to arrive at remedial actions that are likely to provide the greatest benefits per unit of cost.

iv. The report also points to the need to further assess and quantify current and potential future damage cost of water resource scarcity and pollution. This is particularly important given the significance of agriculture in the rural economy and its high dependence on water for irrigation.

The estimates of the cost of environmental degradation are based on the methodologies outlined in Chapter 2 and the analyses in Chapters 3 to 8. Damage cost is presented for each of the following environmental categories:

i. Air;ii. Water;iii. Land (soil and wild life);iv. Waste;v. Coastal zones and cultural heritage; andvi. Global environment.

For each of these categories cost estimates are presented for:

i. Health and quality of life; andii. Natural resources.

It should be noted that these estimates are orders of magnitude and therefore only an indication of actual costs. The main reasons for the inability to provide precise estimates are that available data are often aggregates that do not reflect important geographic variations across Iraq that precise

34

data and estimates on the consequences of environmental degradation are unavailable or incomplete, and the valuation of these consequences is very rough estimates. In addition, the methodologies themselves are associated with significant inherent uncertainties particularly related to the WTP approach or dose-response relationships.

11.2 COST OF DEGRADATION

With the above limitations in mind, the cost of environmental degradation in Iraq is estimated at 4.9-8.0 percent of GDP annually, based on 2008 figures, with a mean estimate of around ID 6.3 trillion or US$ 5.5 billion per year, equivalent to 6.4 percent of GDP. In addition the cost to the global environment is estimated at 0.7 percent of GDP per year. Mean estimates of these costs are presented in Table 10-1 and Figure 10-1 (exclusive of the global environment) for each environmental category.

By economic category, the cost to health and quality of life is almost 3.5 percent of GDP and 2.9 percent for natural resources as seen in Figure 10-2.

Table 10-10. Annual cost of environmental degradation -mean estimate

ID billion per year

US$ billion per year

Percent of GDP

Air 1,452 1.3 1.5%Water 3,518 3.1 3.5%Land 949 0.8 1.0%Waste 381 0.3 0.4%Coastal zones 15 0.0 0.0%

Sub-Total 6,316 5.6 6.4%Global Env. 685 0.6 0.7%

Total 7,091 6.2 7.1%

Figure 10-1. Annual cost of environmental degradation by environmental category (mean estimate as a percentage of GDP)

1.6%

3.5%

1.0%

0.4%

0.02%

0.7%

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

Air Water Land Waste Coasts Global

% o

f GD

P

Category

Iraq Cost of Environmental Degradation, 2008(% of GDP)

Figure 10-2. Annual cost of environmental degradation broken down between human and natural resource impact (mean estimate as a percentage of GDP)

56%

44 %

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

Health and quality of life Natural resources

% o

f GD

P

Iraq Cost of Environmental Degradation, 2008(% of GDP)

While the estimates presented in this report provide indications of the areas of the environment with the largest damage cost to society, the benefits of reducing environmental damage should be compared to the costs of remedial actions for improving the environment. Such a comparison of benefits and costs can be useful to identify actions for which benefits exceed costs, and for ranking actions with the largest net benefits. In making such comparisons, a note of caution is warranted:

Environmental damage is unlikely to be completely eliminated no matter how stringent and comprehensive the remedial actions.

Quantification of environmental damage and its monetary valuation can never be completely accurate.

The principle of marginal analysis needs to be applied to identify remedial actions that are likely to provide the greatest benefits per unit of cost.

35

Elements for the evaluation of possible investments to reduce or prevent environmental degradations are provided but there is a need to further assess and quantify current and potential future damage costs of water resources pollution. Table 10-2 and Table 10-3 recap the averted and remedial (when available) costs by category.

Table 10-2. Averted cost, ID billionCategory Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

Air 1,042 1,092 1,142

Water Services Surface

713373340

1,762732

1,030

6,7941,0945,700

Land 77 77 77

Waste 95 197 286

Coasts N.A. N.A. N.A.

Sub-Total 1,927 3,128 8,299

Global 0.01 0.02 0.02

Total 1,927 3,128 8,299

Table 10-3. Remedial cost, ID billionCategory Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3

Air N.A. N.A. N.A.

Water Services Surface

N.A.1,900

N.A.3,800

N.A.5,700

Land N.A. N.A. N.A.

Waste 2.9 5.8 8.6

Coasts N.A. N.A. N.A.

Sub-Total - - -

Global N.A. N.A. N.A.

Total N.A. N.A. N.A.

Calculations of each damage averted and remedial cost estimates as percentages of GDP in 2008 and as total Iraqi Dinar can be found in Annexes 1, 2 and 3.

Policy responsibilities for the COED categories are tabulated in Annex 4.

36

Bibliography

Baker, B., Metcalfe, P. Butler, S., Gueron, Y., Sheldon, R., and J,. East. 2007. The benefits of the Water Framework Directive Programme of Measures in England and Wales. Sponsored by Defra, Welsh Assembly Government, Scottish Executive, Department of Environment Northern Ireland, Environment Agency, Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, Scotland and Northern Ireland Forum for Environmental Research, UK Water Industry Research, the Joint Environmental Programme, UK Major Ports Group, British Ports Association, CC Water, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, National Farmers’ Union and Country Land and Business Association (the “Collaborative Partners”).

Bassi, S. (IEEP), P. ten Brink (IEEP), A. Farmer (IEEP), G. Tucker (IEEP), S. Gardner (IEEP), L. Mazza (IEEP), W. Van Breusegem (Arcadis), A. Hunt (Metroeconomica), M. Lago (Ecologic), J. Spurgeon (ERM), M. Van Acoleyen (Arcadis), B. Larsen and, F. Doumani. 2011. Benefit Assessment Manual for Policy Makers: Assessment of Social and Economic Benefits of Enhanced Environmental Protection in the ENPI countries. A guiding document for the project ‘Analysis for European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) Countries and the Russian Federation on social and economic benefits of enhanced environmental protection.’ Brussels.

Belhaj, M. 2003. Estimating the Benefits of Clean Air: Contingent Valuation and Hedonic Price Methods. International Journal of Global Environment Issues. Vol 3(1).

Blumberg K., Walsh M., Pera C. 2003. Low Sulphur Gasoline & Diesel: The Key to Lower Vehicle Emissions. Commissioned by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation for the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT).

Busby, Chris, Malak Hamdan and Entesar Ariabi. 2010. “Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009.” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2010, 7, 1-x; doi:10.3390/ijerph707000x

Central Organization of Statistics (COS). 2010. Environment Report. Republic of Iraq. Baghdad.

Centre d’analyse stratégique. 2009. Rapports et documents N.16/2009 - La valeur tutélaire du carbone. Rapport de la commission présidée par Alain Quinet. Paris

Centre for Development and Environment (CDE). 2009. Benefits of sustainable land management. University of Bern. UNCCD, WOCAD, and others. Bern.

Cropper, M. and Oates, W. 1992. Environmental Economics: A Survey. Journal of Economic Literature, pp. 675-740.

Earth Trends. 2003. Biodiversity and Protected areas, Republic of Iraq, Country Profile.

El-Fadel M. and Massoud M. 2000. “Particulate matter in urban areas: Health based economic assessment.” The Science of Total Environment, 257, (2-3) pp. 133-146, 2000.

El-Fadel M., R. Kobrossi R. and M. Metni. 2003 “Economic benefits of reducing SO2

emissions from the cement industry.” Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 5,1, 99-120, 2003.

Esty, Daniel and Marc Levy. 2010. Environmental Performance Index. Yale University (Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy), Columbia University (Center for International Earth Science Information Network) in collaboration with the World Economic Forum and the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission.

Esrey, J., B. Potash, L. Roberts and C. Schiff. 1991. Effects of Improved Water Supply and Sanitation on Ascariasi, Diarrhea, Dracunculaisis, Hookworm Infection,

37

Schistosomiasis, and Trachoma. Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

FAO. 2003. FAOSTAT Agriculture data. FAO United Nations. Rome.

FAO. 2008. AQUASTAT - FAO's Information System on Water and Agriculture. Rome.

FAO. 2009. www.fao.org. Food and Agriculture Organisation. Rome.

Fewtrell, L., Kaufmann, R., Kay, D., Enanoria, W., Haller, L., and Colford, JM. 2005. “Water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions to reduce diarrhoea in less developed countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.” Lancet Infectious Diseases, vol 5:42-52.

GTZ. 2010. The Solid Waste Management Situation in the Mashreq and Maghreb Countries: Challenges and Opportunities. Sweepnet. Tunis.

Hassanein, Amr and Reham Khalifa. 2008. “Financial and Operational Performance Assessment Water/Wastewater Utilities: Comparative Study.” Journal of Infrastructure Systems Vol. 14 Number 4.

Haysvillelibrary: <www.Haysvillelibrary.files.wordpress.com>.

International Energy Agency: <www.iea.org>.

International Monetary Fund (IMF). 2010. Iraq, Article IV. Washington, D.C. <www.imf.org>.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Working Group I Report "The Physical Science Basis"; Working Group II Report "Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability"; and Working Group III Report "Mitigation of Climate Change." Geneva. All are available on the IPCC website: <www.ipcc.org>.

Kotuby-Amacher, Janice, Boyd Kitchen and Rich Koenig. 2000. Salinity and Plant Tolerance. Utah State University. Utah.

Larsen, B. 2004. Colombia: Cost of Environmental Damage: A socio-economic Study and Environmental Health Risk

Assessment. Prepared for the Ministry of the Environment of Colombia.

Levy J., Hammitt J., Spengler J. 2000. Estimating the Mortality Impacts of Particulate Matter: What Can Be Learned from Between-Study Variability?

Lopez, A., C. Mathers, M. Ezzati, D. Jamison and C. Murray. 2006. Global Burden of Disease and Risk Factors. A co-publication of the Oxford University Press and the World Bank.

Lvovsky, K., G. Hughes, D. Maddison, B. Ostro and D. Pearce. 2000. Environmental Costs of fossil fuels. Environment Department Working Paper No. 78. October 2000. The World Bank. Washington, D.C.

Mediterranean Environmental Technical Assistance Program (METAP). 2009. Legal and Institutional Assessment in Lebanon Coastal Zone and Environmental Degradation, Averted and Remedial Costs in Northern Lebanon Coastal Zone. In collaboration with the World Bank, EC SMAP III, Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Lebanon. Washington, D.C.

Ministry of Environment. 2010. Iraqi Fourth National Report on to the Convention on Biodiversity. Baghdad.

New Eden Group website: <www.newedengroup.org>.

Nordhaus, William. 2001. “Global Warming Economics.” Science. 294(5545): 1283-1284.

Nordhaus, William. 2011. “Estimates of the Social Cost of Carbon: Background and Results from the RICE-2011 Model.” NBER Working Paper No. 17540, Oct 2011.

Neuberger, Carmen Iñiguez, Nino Künzli and on behalf of the Apheis network Ferran Ballester, Sylvia Medina, Elena Boldo, Pat Goodman, Manfred. 2008. “Reducing ambient levels of fine particulates could substantially improve health: a mortality impact assessment for 26 European cities.” J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2008; 62; 98-105.

38

New Eden Group. <www.newedengroup.org>.

OPEC. 2007. Annual Statistical Bulletin. 2007.

Ostro, B. 1994. Estimating the Health Effects of Air Pollution: A Method with an Application to Jakarta. Policy research working paper. The World Bank. Washington, D.C.

Ostro, B. 2004. Outdoor air pollution: Assessing the environmental burden of disease at national and local levels. WHO Environmental Burden of Disease Series, No. 5. Geneva.

Pope, C. A. III, R. T. Burnett, M. J. Thun, E. E. Calle, D. Krewski, K. Ito, and G. Thurston. 2002. “Lung Cancer, Cardiopulmonary Mortality and Long Term Exposure to Fine Particulate Air Pollution.” Journal of the American Medical Association 287(9): 1132-1141.

Pope, C. A. III, R. T. Burnett, D. Krewski, et al. 2009. “Cardiovascular mortality and exposure to airborne fine particulate matter and cigarette smoke: shape of the exposure-response relationship.” Circulation, 120 (11): 941-8.

Republic of Iraq. 2007. Land Mine Impact Survey: 2004-2006. With the support of the European Commission, the Italian Government, UNDP, Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement, and Information Management & Mine Action Program. Baghdad.

Schulman, Ronca and Bucuvalas, Inc. 2001. Confronting COPD in North America and Europe: A Survey of Patients and Doctors in Eight Countries.

Stern, Nicholas. 2007. The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). 2009. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity for national and international policy makers - summary: responding to the value of nature. European Commission, Brussels.

TEEB. 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic

Foundations. Edited by Pushpam Kumar, Earthscan, London.

TEEB. 2011. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity in National and International Policy Making. Edited by Patrick ten Brink. Earthscan, London.

UNDP, UNESCO. 1995. National Strategy for the Protection of the Environment and for the Sustainable Development. Ministry of the Environment, Kingdom of Morocco.

UNDP. 2007. Fighting Climate Change: Human solidarity in a divide world. Human Development Report 2007/2008.

UNICEF. 2008. Final Report on the Multiple Indicators Cluster Survey III in the Republic of Iraq.

University of Alaska: <www. sciencenews.org>.

World Health Organization (WHO). 1994. World Health Statistics Annual, 1993. Geneva.

WHO. 2004a. Global Burden of Disease 2004 update. Geneva.

WHO. 2004b. Evaluation of the Costs and Benefits of Water and Sanitation Improvements at the Global Level. Geneva.

WHO. 2004c. Comparative Quantification of Risk Air Pollution. Geneva.

WHO, Regional Office of the Eastern Mediterranean. 2008. Iraq Country Profile. Geneva.

WHO. 2009. Global Health DALY Estimates 2004. Department of Measurement and Health Information. Geneva. <www.who.it>

WHO/UNICEF. 2008. Progress on drinking water and sanitation. Special focus on sanitation. Geneva.

WHO/UNICEF. 2010. Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation: Iraq. Geneva.

World Bank. 2001. Making Sustainable Commitments, An Environment Strategy for the World Bank. Washington, D.C.

39

World Bank. 2005. Islamic Republic of Iran: Cost Assessment of Environmental Degradation. Washington, D.C.

World Bank. 2008. State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2008. Washington, D.C.

World Bank. 2010. World Development Indicators. Washington, D.C.

World Bank: <www.worldbank.org>

40

Annexes

Annex 1. Summary of costs

a. AggregateTheme Perimeter

Summary of costs LandWasteWaterAirClimate ChangeCoasts

Item Min cost 2008 (ID) Max cost 2008 (ID) Mean estimate 2008 (ID)

Land

Land salinity 868,106,647,666 868,106,647,666 868,106,647,666

Rangeland blocked due to UXO 50,075,130,316 50,075,130,316 50,075,130,316

Victims of UXO 5,323,101,377 55,874,250,847 30,598,676,112

Total cost 923,504,879,359 974,056,028,829 948,780,454,094

Waste

Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection

231,742,258,632 275,725,124,580 253,733,691,606

Land contaminated by dumps 127,253,744,626 127,253,744,626 127,253,744,626

Total cost 358,996,003,259 402,978,869,207 380,987,436,233

Water

Inadequate water, sanitation, hygiene 590,399,796,770 2,566,456,465,555 1,578,428,131,163

Unsustainable groundwater extraction 0 0 0Surface water pollution due to human activities

1,733,529,150,419 2,146,432,326,093 1,939,980,738,256

Total cost 2,323,928,947,189 4,712,888,791,648 3,518,408,869,419

Air

Health impacts of urban air pollution 1,200,415,642,677 1,861,285,582,102 1,530,850,612,390

Discomfort from Urban Air Pollution 9,997,171,786 12,235,344,573 11,116,258,180

Total cost 1,210,412,814,463 1,873,520,926,675 1,541,966,870,569

Climate Change

Total CO2 emissions damage cost 570,894,776,459 799,252,687,042 685,073,731,751

Total cost 570,894,776,459 799,252,687,042 685,073,731,751

Coasts

Fisheries losses 4,626,720,000 5,715,360,000 5,171,040,000

Ecological / non-use value of coastal areas

10,192,582,342 10,192,582,342 10,192,582,342

Total cost 14,819,302,342 15,907,942,342 15,363,622,342

TOTAL (except Climate Change) 4,831,661,946,611 7,979,352,558,701 6,405,507,252,656

% GDP 4.9% 8.0% 6.4%

41

b. AirTheme Perimeter

Health impacts of urban air pollution

Discomfort from Urban Air Pollution

Productivity losses of natural resources

Infrastructure and Real estate decay

Cost reference Item Impacts on Valuation method Total min (ID) Total max (ID)

Health impacts of urban air pollution

AP-1.1 Mortality - respiratory diseases due to air pollution

Health and quality of life

DALYs mortality

AP-1.1 min AP-1.1 max

155,561,773,420 816,431,712,845

AP-1.2 Morbidity - respiratory diseases due to air pollution

Health and quality of life

DALYs morbidity

AP-1.2 min AP-1.2 max

363,770,003,388 363,770,003,388

AP-1.3 Treatment cost chronic bronchitis due to air pollution

Health and quality of life

Cost of illness

AP-1.3 min AP-1.3 max

681,083,865,869 681,083,865,869

AP-1 Health impacts of urban air pollutionAP-1 min AP-1 max

1,200,415,642,677 1,861,285,582,102

Discomfort from Urban Air Pollution

AP-2.1 WTP for improved air quality

Health and quality of life

Willingness to payAP-2.1 min AP-2.1 max

9,997,171,786 12,235,344,573

AP-2 Discomfort from Urban Air Pollution AP-2 min AP-2 max

9,997,171,786 12,235,344,573

Air pollution Total cost (ID)1,210,412,814,463 1,873,520,926,675

Air pollution

AP

42

c. WaterTheme Perimeter

Inadequate water, sanitation, hygiene

Surface water pollution due to human activities

Cost reference Item Impacts on Valuation method Total min (ID) Total max (ID)

Inadequate water, sanitation, hygiene

WA-1.1 Diarrheal child mortality Health and quality of life

DALYs mortality

WA-1.1 min WA-1.1 max

464,148,429,760 2,435,980,827,368

WA-1.2 Morbidity Health and quality of life

DALYs morbidity

WA-1.2 min WA-1.2 max

4,224,271,177 8,448,542,354

WA-1.3 Treatment cost of diarrhea Health and quality of life

Cost of illness

WA-1.3 min WA-1.3 max

122,027,095,833 122,027,095,833

WA-1 Inadequate water, sanitation, hygiene WA-1 min WA-1 max

590,399,796,770 2,566,456,465,555

Surface water pollution due to human activities

WA-3.1 Water pollution due to human activities

Natural resources

Willingness to pay

WA-3.1 min WA-3.1 max

WA-3 Surface water pollution due to human activitiesWA-3 min WA-3 max

1,733,529,150,419 2,146,432,326,093

Water Total cost (ID) 2,323,928,947,189 4,712,888,791,648

Water

WA

43

d. LandTheme Perimeter

Land salinityRangeland blocked due to UXOVictims of UXO

[Cost 4]

Cost reference Item Impacts on Valuation method Total min (ID) Total max (ID)

Land salinity

LD-1.1 Loss due to land salinity

Natural resources

Loss of productivity

LD-1.1 min LD-1.1 max

868,106,647,666 868,106,647,666

LD-1 Land salinity LD-1 min LD-1 max

868,106,647,666 868,106,647,666

Rangeland blocked due to UXO

LD-2.1 Loss due to rangeland inaccessibility

Natural resources

Replacement cost

LD-2.1 min LD-2.1 max

50,075,130,316 50,075,130,316

LD-2 Rangeland blocked due to UXOLD-2 min LD-2 max

50,075,130,316 50,075,130,316

Victims of UXO

LD-1.1 Mortality - Cases of population being killed by UXO

Health and quality of life

DALYs mortality

LD-1.1 min LD-1.1 max

24,111,953,677 126,546,279,382

LD-1.2 Morbidity - Cases of population being hit by UXO

Health and quality of life

DALYs morbidity

LD-1.2 min LD-1.2 max

5,323,101,377 55,874,250,847

Land degradation

Total cost (ID)947,616,833,036 1,100,602,308,211

Land degradation

LD

44

e. WasteTheme Perimeter

Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection

Land contaminated by dumps

Cost reference Item Impacts on Valuation method Total min (ID) Total max (ID)

Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection

SW-1.1 Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection in urban areas (defensive cost)

Health and quality of life

Willingness to pay

SW-1.1 min SW-1.1 max

100,641,725,184 150,962,587,776

SW-1.2 Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection in rural areas (defensive cost)

Health and quality of life

Willingness to pay

SW-1.2 min SW-1.2 max

62,741,448,840 100,386,318,144

SW-1.3 Reference WTP for appropriate SWM

Health and quality of life

Willingness to pay

SW-1.3 min SW-1.3 max

300,101,343,241 300,101,343,241

SW-1 Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collectionSW-1 min SW-1 max

231,742,258,632 275,725,124,580

SW-1.3 Land contaminated by dumps

Natural resources

Increased costSW-1.3 min SW-1.3 max

127,253,744,626 127,253,744,626

Waste Total cost (ID) 358,996,003,259 402,978,869,207

Waste

SW

45

f. Coastal ZoneTheme Perimeter

Fishery Losses

Ecological / non-use value of coastal areas

[Cost 4]

Cost reference

Item Impacts on Valuation method Total min (SP) Total max (SP)

Fisheries losses

CZ-2.1 Fishery Losses Natural resources

Loss of productivityCZ-2.1 min CZ-2.1 max

4,626,720,000 5,715,360,000

CZ-2 Fisheries losses CZ-2 min CZ-2 max

4,626,720,000 5,715,360,000

Ecological / non-use value of coastal areas

CZ-3.1 WTP for coastal zone environment protection

Natural resources

Willingness to pay

CZ-3.1 min CZ-3.1 max

10,192,582,342 10,192,582,342

CZ-3 Ecological / non-use value of coastal areas CZ-3 minCZ-3 max

10,192,582,342 10,192,582,342

Coastal zones environment

Total cost (ID) 14,819,302,342 15,907,942,342

Coastal zones environment

CZ

46

g. Global Environment Theme Perimeter

[Cost 1] Total CO2 emissions damage cost

[Cost 2] -

[Cost 3] -

[Cost 4] -

Cost reference Item Impacts on Valuation method Total min (ID) Total max (ID)

[Cost 1]

CC-1.1 Total CO2 emissions damage cost Marginal costCC-1.1 min CC-1.1 max

570,894,776,459 799,252,687,042

CC-1 Total CO2 emissions damage cost CC-1 minCC-1 max

570,894,776,459 799,252,687,042

Climate change

Total cost (ID) 570,894,776,459 799,252,687,042

Climate change

CC

47

Annex 2. Detailed costs

a. General country indicatorsGeneral country data

Values

Value Unit Year Source

PopulationPopulation 31,895,634 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)

Population growth 2.5% % 2008 World Bank (2010)

Ninevah 1,837,204 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Kirkuk 826,719 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Diala 545,395 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Al Anbar 747,043 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Baghdad 6,188,098 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Babil 804,520 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Kerbala 651,536 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Wasit 601,250 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Salahudin 572,722 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Al Najaf 833,462 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Al Qadisiya 578,819 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Al Muthanna 312,976 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Thi Qar 1,062,168 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Missa 661,273 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Basrah 2,001,288 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Duhouk 720,388 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)Erbil 1,159,097 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)As Sulaimaniya 1,183,020 Nb 2008 MOE (2010)

Economy figuresGDP current 99,364 ID (billions) 2008 World Bank (2010)GDP current 87 GDP (US$ billions) 2008 World Bank (2010)

Real GDP annual growth 9.5% % 2008 World Bank (2010)Real GDP annual growth 4.2% % 2009 World Bank (2010)GDP/capita 2,817 US$ 2008 World Bank (2010)

Monetary figuresID/US$ Exchange Rate 1,148.4 ID / US$ 2008 World Bank (2010)Inflation rates (period) see dedicated

spreadsheet% - -

Health figuresDALY (Low) monetization, Human Capital Approach

3,235,429 ID/DALY Valuation (price) per DALY is GDP per capita (Human Capital approach)

DALY (High) monetization VSL Approach

16,980,438 ID/DALY Based on US/Europe estimates of Value of Statistical Life (VSL) at US$3.5 million for an average loss of 20 DALYs. This figure is adjusted to Iraq by PPP GDP per capita differentials, then deflated with the Consumer Price Index, and divided by 20 DALYs for valuation per DALY.

Crude death rate 5.9 /1000 2008 World Bank (2010)US$ GDP/capita current 47,209 $PPP 2008 World Bank (2010)Iraq GDP/capiat current 3,460 $PPP 2008 World Bank (2010)

48

b. AirData sheet

From national surveys / databases

From international bibliography

Calculated

From on-purpose survey

Item Item description Value Unit Source Year Comments

Crude death rate Total number of deaths per 1000 people in Iraq.

5.87 /1000 WHO 2010 MOE

DALYs per 10 000 cases of premature mortality

Number of DALYs per 10 000 cases of premature mortality.

100,000 DALYs Ostro 1994, Lvovsky et al 2000

- For morbidity, DALYs and their valuation allow to capture the cost of pain and suffering resulting from illness )air pollution diseases(. In addition, the cost-of-illness approach )COI( is used to assess the cost of treating illness and lost work days or time provided by caregivers which is not included in the DALY approach.The cost of premature mortality is assessed through the DALY approach )YLL(.

% change in crude mortality rate per 1 μg/m3

Impact of a PM 10 concentration of 1 extra μg/m3 on the crude mortality rate.

0.08 ±% / 1μg/m3 World Health Organization, Outdoor Air Pollution, Assessing the environmental burden of disease at national and local levels

2004 This is a central estimate of % change in crude moratility rate per 1 μg/m3 of PM10 recommended by WHO )0.8%/10 μg/m3 - Outdoor Air Pollution, Assessing the environmental burden of disease at national and local levels, 2004 ( for quantifying mortality of air pollution following a benchmark of key studies from literature.Other studies advocate to take a % change in crude mortality rate per 1μg/m³ of PM2.5. Then annual average PM10 concentration has to be converted in PM2.5 concentration using a ratio given by local studies or literature )WHO gives a PM2.5/PM10 ratio of 0.5(.

Annual average PM10 (ug/m3) in urban areas

Concentration of PM10 in urban areas.

120.0 μg/m3 MOE 2010 2008 As per Cohen et al. )2005( and WHO )2005(, a cap is set for the annual mean 120 μg/m3 for PM 10 and )0.4 *PM10( 41 μg/m3 for PM2.5 respectively for the cities without data.

Exposed total population For every areas where concentration of PM10 have been measured, the exposed population has to be assessed.

11.5 millions MOE 2010 2008

Number of premature mortality cases Number of premature mortality cases for each city.

4,220 nb - - -

Total number of DALYs due to premature mortality (all cities)

Total DALYs due to premature mortality cases )all cities(.

42,199 DALYs - - -

Cost of DALY mortality (Low) 3,235,429 ID/DALY - - -

Cost of DALY mortality (High) 16,980,438 ID/DALY - - -

Cost of total DALYs due to premature mortality. Low

Cost of DALY due to premature mortality cases for the total urban areas.

136,533 ID million - - -

Cost of total DALYs due to premature mortality. High

Cost of DALY due to premature mortality cases for the total urban areas.

716,564 ID million - - -

Number of cases of Hospital admissions (all cities)

Number of cases of Hospital admissions )all cities(

35,087 Nb World Bank COED 2001, figure from the Ministry of Health

- Updated using the population growth rate by main cities and country level proportion of each age cohort )> 15 y.o.(

Number of cases of Emergency room visits (all cities)

Number of cases of Emergency room visits )all cities(

688,296 Nb id. - Updated using the population growth rate by main cities

Number of cases of Restricted activity days (RADs) (all cities)

Number of cases of Restricted activity days )RADs( )all cities(

100,850,373 Nb id. - Updated using the population growth rate by main cities

Number of cases of chronic bronchitis (all cities)

Number of cases of chronic bronchitis )all cities(

15,259 Nb id. - Updated using the population growth rate by main cities

AIR

49

Number of cases of Lower respiratory illness in children (all cities)

Total number of DALYs due to Lower respiratory illness in children )all cities(

1,977,341 Nb id. - Updated using the population growth rate by main cities

Number of cases of Respiratory symptoms (all cities)

Total number of DALYs due to Respiratory symptoms )all cities(

320,967,273 Nb id. - Updated using the population growth rate by main cities

DALYs per 10000 cases for Hospital admissions (all cities)

DALYs per 10000 cases for Hospital admissions )all cities(

160 Nb B. Larsen, 2004 2004 "Colombia: Cost ofEnvironmental Damage: A socio-economic Study and Environmental Health Risk Assessment”.

DALYs per 10000 cases for Emergency room visits (all cities)

DALYs per 10000 cases for Emergency room visits )all cities(

45 Nb B. Larsen, 2004 2004 id.

DALYs per 10000 cases for Restricted activity days (RADs) (all cities)

DALYs per 10000 cases for Restricted activity days )RADs( )all cities(

3 Nb B. Larsen, 2004 2004 id.

DALYs per 10000 cases for chronic bronchitis (all cities)

DALYs per 10000 cases for chronic bronchitis )all cities(

22,000 Nb B. Larsen, 2004 2004 id.

DALYs per 10000 cases for Lower respiratory illness in children (all cities)

DALYs per 10000 cases for Lower respiratory illness in children )all cities(

65 Nb B. Larsen, 2004 2004 id.

DALYs per 10000 cases for Respiratory symptoms (all cities)

DALYs per 10000 cases for Respiratory symptoms )all cities(

1 Nb B. Larsen, 2004 2004 id.

Total number of DALYs due to Hospital admissions (all cities)

Total number of DALYs due to Hospital admissions )all cities(

561 DALYs - - -

Total number of DALYs due to Emergency room visits (all cities)

Total number of DALYs due to Emergency room visits )all cities(

3,097 DALYs - - -

Total number of DALYs due to Restricted activity days (RADs) (all cities)

Total number of DALYs due to Restricted activity days )RADs( )all cities(

30,255 DALYs - - -

Total number of DALYs due to Lower respiratory illness in children (all cities)

Total number of DALYs due to Lower respiratory illness in children )all cities(

12,853 DALYs - - -

Total number of DALYs due to Respiratory symptoms (all cities)

Total number of DALYs due to Respiratory symptoms )all cities(

24,073 DALYs - - -

Total number of DALYs due to chronic bronchitis (all cities)

Total DALYs due to chronic bronchitis cases )all cities(.

33,570 DALYs - - -

Total DALYs due to morbidity (all cities) Cost of DALY due to chronic bronchitis cases for the total urban areas.

104,409 DALYs - - -

Cost of total DALYs due to morbidity Cost of DALY due to morbidity cases for the total urban areas.

337,808 ID million - - -

Cost of one hospitalization day Cost of one day of hospitalization for chronic bronchitis.

300,000 ID / day COED benchmarking

2008 Derived from benchmarking other COED

Cost of one doctor visit Cost of one doctor visit for a case of chronic bronchitis.

60,000 ID / visit COED benchmarking

2008 id.

Cost of one emergency visit Cost of one emergency visit for a case of chronic bronchitis.

170,000 ID / visit COED benchmarking

2008 id.

Cost of lost work day Cost of one lost work day. 43,124 ID / day COED benchmarking

2008 value of GDP per capita divided by 240 working day and multiplied by half the household number of 6.4.

50

Cost discount Costs can be discounted at a certain rate % and for a certain period to reflect the chronic nature of the illness.

10% % Schulman, Ronca, and Bucuvalas, Inc 2001Niederman et al 1999

1999, 2001

No more recent/relevant bibliography was found.

Period for cost discount Period to consider for the cost discount

15 years id. 1999, 2001

id.

% of chronic bronchitis cases benefiting from a monthly doctor visit

Part of the people suffering from chronic bronchitis which will benefit from a doctor visit every month.

25% % id. 1999, 2001

id.

% of chronic bronchitis cases benefiting from a doctor visit twice a year

Part of the people suffering from chronic bronchitis which will benefit from a doctor visit twice a year.

65% % id. 1999, 2001

id.

% of chronic bronchitis cases which will need an emergency doctor visit once year

Part of the people suffering from chronic bronchitis which will need a doctor visit once a year.

30% % id. 1999, 2001

id.

% of chronic bronchitis benefiting of an hospitalisation

% of chronic bronchitis benefiting of an hospitalisation

3% % id. 1999, 2001

id.

Number of hospitalization days due to a chronic bronchitis

Average number of hospitalization days for a person admitted at the hospital because of chronic bronchitis

6.0 Nb id. 1999, 2001

id.

Number of hospitalization days for an "hospital admission"

Average Number of hospitalization days for an "hospital admission"

2.3 Nb COED benchmarking

2008 Health indicators 2008, "Average length of stay per patient" based on professional judgment: 2.36 in 2008

Number of lost work days due to a chronic bronchitis

Number of lost work days due to a chronic bronchitis

5.0 Nb Schulman, Ronca, and Bucuvalas, Inc 2001Niederman et al 1999

1999, 2001

id.

% of chronic bronchitis leading to lost work days

% of chronic bronchitis leading to lost work days

35% % id. 1999, 2001

id.

Number of lost work days due to a hospitalization

Number of lost work days due to a hospitalization

2.0 Nb COED benchmarking

2001 No more recent/relevant bibliographical source was found.It was assumed that this item has not changed significantly since 2001.

Number of lost work days due to an emergency visit

Number of lost work days due to a emergency visit

0.5 Nb COED benchmarking

2008 id.

Number of lost work days per restricted activity days

Number of lost work days per restricted activity days

0.1 Nb COED benchmarking

2008 id.

Total cost of chronic bronchitis Total cost of all CB cases. 309,361,332,039 ID million - - -

Total cost of Hospital admissions Total cost of Hospital admissions 64,094,042,329 ID million - - -

Total cost of Emergency room visits Total cost of all CB cases. 139,374,134,346 ID million - - -

Total cost of Restricted activity days (RADs)

Total cost of all CB cases. 659,826,709,719 ID million - - -

Total cost of illness Total cost of illness 1,172,656,218,433 ID million

Total cases of illness Total cases of illness 101,589,015 Nb

Cost per case Cost per case 11,543,139,928 ID

Total population in 10 cities Total population in the main cities of Iraq

11.5 million MOE 2010 2008

Average household size (urban areas) 6.4 Nb 2007 HH Survey 2008

2008

Number of households in Iraq's main cities

1,802,325 Nb MOE 2008 - -

Willingness-to-pay / household for improved air quality (min)

Evaluation of the price urban areas households are willing to pay for improved air quality.

5,547 ID Belhaj, 2003 1995 The WTP for improved air quality was evaluated in 2007 at 22 to 26 ID per month, adapted from the Belahj survey in Morocco, 2003 using the Purchasing Power Parity between the 2 countries )See Air Annex 5(.

Willingness-to-pay / household for improved air quality (max)

See above 6,789 ID Belhaj, 2003 1995 See above.

Willingness-to-pay for improved air quality (min)

Total willingess-to-pay for improved air quality in Iraq's urban areas )min(

9,997 ID million

51

c. WaterFrom national surveys / databases

From international bibliography

Calculated

From on-purpose survey

Item Item description Value Unit Source Year Comments

Child mortality rate Under-5 mortality rate is the number of newborn babies that dies before reaching age five.

44 /1000 live births World Health Organization )WHO(Iraq MICS III - UNICEF

2009

Child mortality rate (urban areas) Under-5 mortality rate is the number of newborn babies that dies before reaching age five in urban areas.

44 /1000 live births World Health Organization )WHO(Iraq MICS III - UNICEF

2009 Figure kept as total

Child mortality rate (rural areas) Under-5 mortality rate is the number of newborn babies that dies before reaching age five in rural areas.

44 /1000 live births World Health Organization )WHO(Iraq MICS III - UNICEF

2009 Figure kept as total

Live births per year Number of live births per year. 978221 nb MOE 2008

Live births per year (urban areas) Number of live births per year in urban areas.

606,497 nb MOE 2008 Nb of children < 1 years in urban areas

Live births per year (rural areas) Number of live births per year in rural areas.

371,724 nb Central Bureau of Statistics

2004 Nb of children < 1 years in rural areas

Live births per year (urban areas) Number of live births per year in urban areas.

606,497 nb Calculation 2008

Live births per year (rural areas) Number of live births per year in rural areas.

371,724 nb Calculation 2008

Annual child <5 deaths (all causes) Number of children < 5 dying per year.

43,042 nb Calculation 2008 Infant death 31421

Annual child <5 deaths (all causes, urban areas)

Number of children < 5 dying per year.

26,686 nb Calculation 2008

Annual child <5 deaths (all causes, rural areas)

Number of children < 5 dying per year.

16,356 nb Calculation 2008

% of all deaths in children < 5 attribuable to diarrhea

Percentage of all deaths in children < 5 which are attribuable to diarrhea.

10% % World Health Organization )WHO(

2006 The figure does not take into account diarrhea during neonatal period.

Annual child <5 deaths (diarrhea) Number of children < 5 dying per year because of diarrhea.

4,347 nb Calculation 2008

Annual child <5 deaths (diarrhea, urban areas)

Number of children < 5 dying per year because of diarrhea.

2,695 nb Calculation 2008

Annual child <5 deaths (diarrhea, rural areas)

Number of children < 5 dying per year because of diarrhea.

1,652 nb Calculation 2008

DALYs per child death Number of disability adjusted life years )DALYs( for a child death.

33 nb World Health Organization )WHO(, Global Burden of Disease

2004

Mortality DALYs due to diarrhea (children < 5, urban areas)

Mortality DALYs due to diarrhea in urban areas

88,944 nb Calculation 2008

Mortality DALYs due to diarrhea (children < 5, rural areas)

Mortality DALYs due to diarrhea in rural areas

54,514 nb Calculation 2008

WATER

52

Mortality DALYs due to diarrhea (children < 5, rural areas)

Mortality DALYs due to diarrhea in rural areas

54,514 nb Calculation 2008

Mortality DALYs due to diarrhea (children < 5)

Total DALYs due to diarrhea 143,458 nb Calculation The mortality DALYs due to diarrhea )children under 5( are the years of life lost due to premature mortality of children under 5 because of diarrhea. It results from the annual deaths of children under 5 due to diarrhea muliplied by the DALYs per child death. The figure of 33 DALYs per child death is an internation reference figure. DALYs per child death is a function of the standard life expectancy for children under 5 )see above(. An additionnal time discounting rate )a fixed percentage of 3%( is used to decrease annually the value of a year of life. It reflects the social preference of a year of life now rather than in the future.

ID / DALY (MIN) Cost of a DALY in Iraq. 3,235,429 ID Calculation The minimum value for the price of a DALY in ID is evaluated by 50% of GDP per capita )Human Capital approach(.

ID / DALY (MAX) Cost of a DALY in Iraq. 16,980,438 ID Calculation The maximum value for the price of a DALY in ID is evaluated by the GDP per capita )Human Capital approach(.

Total cost of diarrheal mortality (MIN) Cost of diarrheal mortality for all children in Iraq.

464,148,429,760 ID Calculation

Total cost of diarrheal mortality (MAX) Cost of diarrheal mortality for all children in Iraq.

2,435,980,827,368 ID Calculation

Diarrheal new cases per year per child Diarrheal prevalence was based on professional judgment

15% % East Mediterr Health J. 2010 May;16(5):546-52

2008 A cross-sectional hospital-based study of 259 children aged < 5 years was carried out in Tikrit, Iraq, to identify the prevalence of nosocomial diarrhoea and sources of contamination in the ward environment. Nosocomial diarrhoea was diagnosed in 84 children (32.4%).

Children population (0-4 yrs of age) Number of children under 5. 5,339,548 nb MOE 2008 -

Total diarrhea cases per year Total number of diarrhea days in a year in Iraq.

9,077,232 nb

DALY (disability severity weight) The severity rate has to be assumed given a scale of 0 being perfect health and 1 being death.

0.105 DALY Mathers, Lopez & Murray

2006 Global Burden of Disease and Risk Factors , 2006The disability weight of 0.105 reflects the severity of the diarrhea illness on a scale of 0 )perfect health( to 1 )death(.

Morbidity DALYs due to diarrhea (children < 5)

Total DALYs due to diarrhea 2,611 nb Calculation 2007 The morbidity DALYs due to diarrhea )children under 5( are the total years lived with a disability )discomfort, restricted activity( due to non fatal diarrhea. It results from the DALYs lost from one day of diarrhea )disability weight / 365( per the total diarrhea days per year. Total cost of diarrheal morbidity (MIN) Cost of diarrheal morbidity for

all children in Iraq.4,224,271,177 ID Calculation 2007 -

Total cost of diarrheal morbidity (MAX) Cost of diarrheal morbidity for all children in Iraq.

8,448,542,354 ID Calculation 2007 -

Average length of diarrheal episode (number of days)

Average number of days a child is suffering from diarrhea for one episode.

4 nb World Bank COED 2001, figure from the Ministry of Health

2001 No more recent/relevant bibliography found.The average length of diarrheal episode is 4 days

Diarrhea Severe DiarrheaIraq Prevalence 2week )%( 15 7 Incidence 2w = Prevalence 2w * )14/14+average duration of diarrhea episode( )%( 12 5 Seasonality adjustment factor is estimated at 0.068 based on WHO )%( 7 8 Yearly incidence = Incidence 2w/Seasonality adjustment factor = case of diarrhea per U5 1.7 0.7

53

Number of diarrhea cases per year in children 0-4 yrs

Number of diarrhea cases in a year for children 0-4 yrs.

9,077,232 nb Calculation 2007 -

Percent of cases treated with oral rehydratation therapy (ORT)

Percentage of cases which are treated by Oral Rehydration Therapy.

63.8% % Iraq MICS III - UNICEF 2008 -

Cases treated with oral rehydratation therapy (ORT)

Total number of diarrhea cases treated with ORT.

5,791,274 nb Calculation 2008 -

Cost of oral rehydratation therapy (ORT) treatment per case

Average cost of one ORT treatment case.

2297 ID World Bank COED benchmarking

2001 About US$ 2

Cost of treatment, oral rehydratation therapy (ORT)

Total cost of ORT treatments for all cases.

13,301,398,219 ID Calculation -

Reported cases of diarhhea in public clinics

Number of reported cases of diarrhea in public clinics.

1,815,446 nb Estimates 2008 20%

Reported cases of severe diarrhea in public and possibly private clinics

Number of reported cases of severe diarrhea in clinics.

1,270,812 nb Estimates 2008 70%

Total cases of severe diarrhea (public and private clinics)

Total number of cases of diarrhea in Iraqi clinics.

1,270,812 nb Calculation Severe cases is calculated above and is 0.7

Cost of medication for severe diarrhea Medication cost for severe diarrhea.

17,226 ID World Bank COED 2001 2001 prices are deflated by the Consumer Price Index to produce the 2008 prices.

Cost per treatment for cases of severe diarrhea

Cost of one treatment for a severe diarrhea.

77,226 ID Calculation - -

Cost of treatment, severe cases of diarrhea

Total cost of treatment of severe cases of diarrhea in Iraq.

98,139,765,015 ID Calculation - The number of severe diarrhea cases in public clinics added to the number of severe diarrhea cases in private clinics result in a total of 520,000 cases of severe diarrhea. The cost of treatment of severe diarrhea includes the cost of a doctor visit and the cost of medication for a severe diarrhea case.

Value of one day lost to caregivers Based on wage rate. 8,330 ID / day MOE 2008 ID 833 median per hour and 10 hours per day

Number of caregivers days used for a case of severe diarrhea

Number of days used by a caregiver to treat a case of severe diarrhea.

1 nb World Bank COED benchmarking

2008

Cost per treatment for non-severe cases of diarrhea (doctor and medication)

Cost of one treatment for a non-severe diarrhea.

64,594 ID Calculation - -

Cost of treatment, non-severe cases of diarrhea

Total cost of treatment of non-severe cases diarrhea in Iraq.

64,594 ID Calculation -

Cost of lost time due to caregiving Cost of days lost by caregivers to treat the severe diarrhea cases.

10,585,868,005 ID Calculation - Total cases of reported diarrhea )public and private clinics(] x [Value of one day lost to caregivers]. Thus, the assumption was made that a diarrhea case consumes an average of one day of caregivers.

Treatment cost of diarrhea Total cost of diarrhea treatment 122,027,095,833 ID Calculation - -

54

d. Land

From national surveys / databases

From international bibliography

Calculated

From on-purpose survey

Item Item description Value Unit Source Year Comments

Economic value of wheat (world price) Price of one ton of wheat at the world price.

192 US$ / ton Food & Agriculture Organization )FAO(

2007

Economic value of wheat (world price) Price of one ton of wheat at the world price.

220,987 ID / ton Calculation 2008

Wheat yield (irrigated) if land not degraded

Productivity of one hectare of irrigated land producing wheat.

3.8 tons/ha FAO 2008

Cropping intensity Number of crops per year. 1.2 nb FAO 2008

Share of irrigated wheat area in Euphrates basin

The same for any type of land )slight, moderate, severe salinity(

65% % FAO 2001

Surface of agricultural land slightly affected by salinity

Surface of land which is slightly affected by salinity.

716.7 000 ha FAO 2009 3,583,500 ha of land under cereal production of which 20% is slightly affected by salinity.

Surface of agricultural land moderately affected by salinity

Surface of land which is moderately affected by salinity.

1791.75 000 ha FAO 2009 3,583,500 ha of land under cereal production of which 50% is moderately affected by salinity.

Surface of agricultural land severely affected by salinity

Surface of land which is severely affected by salinity.

143.34 000 ha FAO 2009 3,583,500 ha of land under cereal production of which 4% is severely affected by salinity.

Reduction in productivity because of slight salinity

Loss of production of agricultural land because of slight salinity.

15% % yield reduction

FAO 2009

Reduction in productivity because of moderate salinity

Loss of production of agricultural land because of moderate salinity.

40% % yield reduction

FAO 2009

Reduction in productivity because of severe salinity

Loss of production of agricultural land because of moderate salinity.

40% % yield reduction

FAO 2009 id.

Wheat yield (irrigated) of land slightly affected by salinity

Wheat productivity of one hectare of irrigated land slightly affected by salinity.

3.2 tons/ha Calculation

Total economic cost of slight salinity (loss of wheat productivity)

Total economic cost of slight salinity of agricultural land. The loss of productivity has to be balanced by import of wheat.

108,332,776,331 ID / year Calculation - -

Total economic cost of slight salinity (wheat)

Total economic cost of slight salinity of agricultural land. The loss of productivity has to be balanced by import of coton and wheat.

108,332,776,331 ID / year Calculation - -

Wheat yield (irrigated) of land moderately affected by salinity

Wheat productivity of one hectare of irrigated land moderately affected by salinity.

2.3 tons/ha Calculation

Total economic cost of moderate salinity (loss of wheat productivity)

Total economic cost of moderate salinity of agricultural land. The loss of productivity has to be balanced by import of wheat.

722,218,508,874 ID / year Calculation

Total economic cost of moderate salinity (wheat)

Total economic cost of moderate salinity of agricultural land. The loss of productivity has to be balanced by import of coton and wheat.

722,218,508,874 ID / year Calculation

Wheat yield (irrigated) of land severely affected by salinity

Wheat productivity of one hectare of irrigated land severely affected by salinity.

2.3 tons/ha Calculation

Total economic cost of severe salinity (loss of wheat productivity)

Total economic cost of severe salinity of agricultural land. The loss of productivity has to be balanced by import of wheat.

37,555,362,461 ID / year Calculation

Total economic cost of severe salinity (wheat and coton)

Total economic cost of severe salinity of agricultural land. The loss of productivity has to be balanced by import of coton and wheat.

37,555,362,461 ID / year Calculation

Total surface of agricultural land affected by salinity

Surface of land which is affected by salinity )slight, moderate, severe(.

2,652 000 ha Calculation

LAND

55

Total economic cost of salinity (MIN) The lower bound of the total economic cost of salinity.

868,106,647,666 ID / year Calculation

Total economic cost of salinity (MAX) The upper bound of the total economic cost of salinity.

868,106,647,666 ID / year Calculation

Total economic cost of salinity (MAX) (ID/ha/year)

The upper bound of the total economic cost of salinity.

327,366,288 ID / ha / year

Calculation

Barley world price CIF price per ton Iraq imports Barley for livestock feed.

136 US$ / ton Food & Agriculture Organization )FAO(

2006 Average 2002-2006 yearly values, updated to 2007 with USD inflation.

Barley world price CIF price per ton Iraq imports Barley for livestock feed.

156,460 ID/ton Calculation

Surface of rangeland blocked due to UXO Surface of rangeland which is inaccessible

346 000 ha Land Mine Impact Survey

2006

Loss in feed units due to blocked access (kg/ha)

See description of "Loss in feed units due to slight degradation )kg/ha(".

925 kg/ha FAO 2008 id.

Total feed loss due to blocked rangeland (tons/year)

UXO prevention 320,050 tons/year Calculation

Total economic loss due to blocked access

UXO prevention 50,075,130,316 ID / year Calculation

Total feed loss due to rangeland degradation (tons/year)

UXO prevention 320,050 tons / year

Calculation

Total economic loss due to blocked rangeland

UXO prevention 50,075,130,316 ID / year Calculation

56

e. Waste

57

From national surveys / databases

From international bibliography

Calculated

From on-purpose survey

Item Item description Value Unit Source Year Comments

Municipal solid waste production Tons of municipal waste produced yearly in Iraq

5,995,582 tons / year

UNEP 2008 Solid waste generation with a high of 0.7kg/capita in Baghdad anda low of 0.33kg percapita in Missan. A mid point is usedWaste generated by municipalities and other kind of waste including construction debris from the war are not included.

Household solid waste generation Tons of waste produced yearly by households in Iraq

5,995,582 tons / year

See above 2008 rate and their characteristics is ongoing for Basrah, Missan and Thiqar governorates

Measured willingness-to-pay / household in urban areas for improved waste collection (MIN)

117298 ID/year World Bank 2008 a 0.8% of household income is suggested to determine the cost of degradation; the Gross National Income per capita is used and is multiplied by the number of household of 6.2

Measured willingness-to-pay / household in urban areas for improved waste collection (MAX)

See above 175947 ID/year World Bank 2008 a 1.2% of household income is suggested to determine the cost of degradation; the Gross National Income per capita is used and is multiplied by the number of household of 6.2

Measured willingness-to-pay / household in rural areas for improved waste collection (MIN)

Price rural areas households are willing to pay for improved waste collection.

81588 ID/year World Bank 2008 a 0.5% of household income is suggested to determine the cost of degradation; the Gross National Income per capita is used and is multiplied by the number of household of 6.9

Measured willingness-to-pay / household in rural areas for improved waste collection (MAX)

Price rural areas households are willing to pay for improved waste collection.

130541 ID/year World Bank 2008 a 0.8% of household income is suggested to determine the cost of degradation; the Gross National Income per capita is used and is multiplied by the number of household of 6.9

Waste collection rates in urban areas Ratio between the volume of waste collected and the total volume of waste produced in urban areas.

75% % Author 2008 Based on several citations: could be adjusted if data is available

Waste collection rates in rural areas Ratio between the volume of waste collected and the total volume of waste produced in rural areas.

50% % Author 2008 Based on several citations: could be adjusted if data is available

Urban population Percentage of people living in urban areas.

67% % MOE 2008 Population and Demographic Indicators 2008

Urban population Number of people living in urban areas.

21,286,978 Nb MOE 2008 Population and Demographic Indicators 2008

Rural population Percentage of people living in rural areas.

33% % MOE 2008 Population and Demographic Indicators 2008

Rural population Number of people living in rural areas.

10,608,656 Nb MOE 2008 Population and Demographic Indicators 2008

Average household size in urban areas Average number of people in a household.

6.2 Nb WHO Iraq Family Health Survey 2006/7

2007

Average household size in rural areas Average number of people in a household.

6.9 Nb WHO Iraq Family Health Survey 2006/7

2007

Number of urban households Number of households in rural areas.

3,433,000 Nb -

Number of rural households Number of households in rural areas.

1,537,000 Nb -

Urban households not covered by waste collection

Overall urban population who suffers from the lack of waste collection

858,000 nb

Rural households not covered by waste collection

Overall urban population who suffers from the lack of waste collection

769,000 nb

Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection in urban areas (defensive cost) (MIN)

Total WTP of urban households for improved waste collection in urban areas.

100,642 million ID / year

-

Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection in urban areas (defensive cost) (MAX)

Total WTP of urban households for improved waste collection in urban areas.

150,963 million ID / year

-

Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection in rural areas (defensive cost) (MIN)

Total WTP of rural households for improved waste collection in rural areas.

62,741 million ID / year

-

Lack of comfort due to inappropriate waste collection in rural areas (defensive cost) (MAX)

Total WTP of rural households for improved waste collection in rural areas.

100,386 million ID / year

-

Household final consumption expenditure (% of GDP)

Household final consumption expenditure, as a % of GDP

67% % COED benchmark 2008 Approximation of yearly household income

Average household income (whole country) Average yearly household income in the whole country

13,395,115 ID/year - 2008

Average household income (urban areas) Average yearly household income in urban areas

15,394,172 ID/year - 2008

Average household income (rural areas) Average yearly household income in the rural country

8,840,776 ID/year - 2008

Reference willingness to pay for sustainable waste management (% of income)

Reference proportion of household income for sustainable waste management

1.5% % - - Commonly admitted reference percentage of household income for sustainable waste management

Reference WTP for appropriate SWM (urban areas)

Reference willingness to pay for sustainable waste management in urban areas

198,123 million ID/year

-

Reference WTP for appropriate SWM (rural areas)

Reference willingness to pay for sustainable waste management in rural areas

101,978 million ID/year

-

Amount of waste in dumps 95% % USAID 2008

Amount of waste in dumps 5,695,803 Ton EC 2008

Size of avoided uncontrolled dumpsites in m³ EC 2008 ENP Benefit Assessment Manual, 2011

Average dumpsite level 1.0 m EC 2008 ib

Average density of dumped waste 340.0 kg/m³ EC 2008 ib

Average reduction in size and weight 0.7 ratio EC 2008 ib

Avoided uncontrolled dumpsites rough 5.4 km² EC 2008 ib

Avoided uncontrolled dumpsites detailed 0.1 km² EC 2008 ib

Average cleanup cost )dig and dump( for 1 m3 22,960 ID Estimate

Rough value 124,477,089,517 ID

Detailed value 2,776,655,109 ID

Total value 127,253,744,626 ID

Waste

58

f. CoastsFrom national surveys / databases

From international bibliography

Calculated

From on-purpose survey

Item Item description Value Unit Source Year Comments

Percent losses in fisheries [LOW] Yearly percent losses in fish stocks

17% % FAO 2008

Percent losses in fisheries [HIGH] Yearly percent losses in fish stocks

21% % FAO 2008

Total commercial value of coastal fisheries

Total commercial value of coastal fisheries

27,216,000,000 ID/year FAOSTAT 2008

Fishery Losses [LOW] Total loss due to fishery losses 4,626,720,000 ID/year

Fishery Losses [HIGH] Total loss due to fishery losses 5,715,360,000 ID/year

WTP / inhabitant for the restoration of the coastal zone environment

Results of the coastal zone contingent valuation survey

3,985 ID/year METAP 2009 CVM survey 2007 WTP US$ 12 per capita to restore the direct and indirect use value of the coast in Lebanon and the GDP differential is applied.

Number of coastal areas inhabitants Results of the coastal zone survey

2,557,839 nb

WTP for coastal zone environment protection

10,192,582,342 ID/year METAP 2009 2008 WTP US$ 12 per capita to restore the direct and indirect use value of the coast in Lebanon

Coasts

59

g. Global environment

Data sheet

From national surveys / databases

From international bibliography

Calculated

From on-purpose survey

Item Item description Value Unit Source Year Comments

Total equivalent CO2 emissions in 2007

Greenhouse gases )GhG( cause climate change which has adverse effects on the environment )increase of sea level, decrease of agricultural yields, etc.(. This indicator corresponds to the total GhG emissions of the country.

100.0

million teqCO2 / year

World Bank 2010 2007

GDP growth in 2008 GDP growth projection in percentage. 9.0% % IMF

Total equivalent CO2 emissions in 2007

Estimated CO2 emissions in 2008 divided by the 2008 population

109 million teqCO2 / year

International Energy Agency www.iea.org

2008 The GHG emissions growth can be assumed as equal to the GDP growth

Population 2008 Population in 2008 31,895,634 Nb World Bank 2010 2008 -

CO2 emissions in 2008 per capita Estimated CO2 emissions in 2008 divided by the 2008 population

3.42 teqCO2 per capita

World Bank 2010 - Average of the the three last years: 3.40 in 2005; 3.55 in 2006; and 3.341 in 2007.

Emissions per capita threashold for sustainable living

Maximum emissions per capita in order to keep the increased of global earth surface temperature below 2 °C

2.00 teqCO2 per capita

World Ressource Institute

As a result of past emissions of carbon dioxide )CO2( and other greenhouse gases )GHGs(, the world is now on course for future climate change. The World Ressource Institute identifies 2 tCO2/year/capita as the threshold no to be exceeded to limit the temperature growth to 2°C. The 2007/2008 Human Development Report identifies 2ºC as the threshold above which irreversible and dangerous climate change will become unavoidable.

Cost of one marginal CO2 emission [MIN]

Damage caused by the emission of one ton of eqCO2 - low estimate

12,605 ID / teqCO2 Nordaus 2011 2005 adjusted to 2008

The social cost of the emission of 1 ton of CO2 was estimated in the Stern report to be US$10-14/tCO2 over the until 2015. It represents the net economic cost of damages caused by climate change for thecurrent time .

Cost of one marginal CO2 emission [MAX]

Damage caused by the emission of one ton of eqCO2 - high estimate

17,647 ID / teqCO2 Nordaus 2011 2005 adjusted to 2008

see above

Excessive CO2 emissions per capita Excessive emissions per capita above the maximum emissions per capita threashold )A6(

1.42 teqCO2 per capita

- - As 2 tCO2/capita/year is the limit not to exceed to avoid irreversible and dangerous climate change, only the emissions above 2tCO2/capita have to be taken into account in the monetarization of climate change impacts.

Total CO2 emissions damage cost [LOW]

Damage due to climate change addresses potential adverse effects of climate change like sea-level rise, changes in weather patterns, and impacts on agriculture. - low estimate

570,894,776,459 ID - - The cost induced by the Iraqi emissions is not supported directly by Iraq. It will be supported at a worldwide level. The cost that Iraq will have to support is the cost of GHG mitigation and the cost of adaptation to climate change.

Total CO2 emissions damage cost [MAX]

Damage due to climate change addresses potential adverse effects of climate change like sea-level rise, changes in weather patterns, and impacts on agriculture. - high estimate

799,252,687,042 ID - - id.

CLIMATE CHANGE

60

Annex 3. Surface Water Quality Methodology

Background

Unlike unadjusted benefit transfers where mean willingness to pay (WTP) at the policy site it is assumed to be equal to mean WTP values at the original site (WTPS = WTPP), benefit transfers attempt to adjust values by accounting for any possible differences (e.g. socio-economic and environmental quality variables included in the aggregated benefits function) between both sites. Equation 1 offers a conceptual representation of the benefits function transfer approach:

Survey site: WTPS = αs + βs1Xs1 + βs2Xs2

Policy site: WTPP = αs + βs1Xp1 + βs2Xp2

Where s denotes the survey site, p the policy site and X1, X2 vectors of specific good characteristics and population characteristics for each site (e.g., income and education levels, baseline water quality levels, etc.). Benefit transfer (BT) is regarded as a suitable tool for the adjusted transfer of WTP estimates between different locations when the vector of attributes and socio-economic characteristics (X 1, X2) that determine the similarities and differences between the policy and the survey site can be established. Where these differences exist and their magnitudes are known, it is possible to substitute those known variables into the survey site's original aggregated benefits function to provide valid BT estimates. This exercise involves the choice about which factors are included and which are omitted in the analysis, which is usually limited by data availability.

Baker et al. (2007) has recently estimated the economic value placed by English and Welsh households for water quality improvements at local and national level as a result of implementing the Directive. It is one of few studies that employed a standard WFD ecological-based water quality metrics for description of baseline levels and improvements. The results of this research are being used by Defra (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) and the Environment Agency in England and Wales to inform policy decisions necessary to comply with the Directive.

The DEFRA study (Confidence interval of 2.5 percent and 95 percent confidence level) offers detailed results for three different WTP elicitation methods in the same survey instruments: Contingent Valuation (CV) using both payment card (PC) and dichotomous choice (DC) as payment mechanisms and Choice Experiments (CE). Several variables including education, gender, children, etc. were fixed or discarded (belonging to a nature club) in the benefit transfer.

Table A3-1 Annual WTP values for Water Environment 100 percent Improvements by 2015Elicitation method / Model for 100 percent improvement by 2015

England Wales England and WalesMean WTP

£/hh/year

Median WTP

£/hh/year

Mean WTP

£/hh/year

Median WTP

£/hh/year

Mean WTP

£/hh/year

Median WTP

£/hh/yearPCCV Sample statistics 49.2 30.0 62.6 50.0 50.4 30.0PCCV OLS Model 44.8 25.3 40.1 22.7 44.5 25.1DCCV Logit model 167.0 167.0 181.4 181.4 167.9 167.9CE Logit model 293.7 293.7 508.0 508.0 299.9 299.9

Note: hh stands for household.Source: Baker et al. (2007).

Three scenarios were considered in the study and were kept as is in the BT (Table A3-1): 1- 33 percent Successive Improvement by 2015, 2021 and 2027

61

2- 50 percent Improvement by 2015, 30 percent in 2021 and 20 percent by 2027 3- 100 percent Improvement by 2015

The Case of Iraq

Raw wastewater and industrial discharge as well as all the contaminants stemming from the war and unsafely processes (oil spill and seepage, hazardous waste, armament dump and sites contaminated with depleted uranium, etc.) in the Tigris and the Euphrates is considered to negatively affect water resources in general: water courses, underground water, lakes, swamps and the sea. Non-market economic value of a change in water quality that could accrue from different wastewater and waste policy options is calculated for surface water quality. The BT method mentioned above is used in this context. The proposed methodology covers non-market use and non use type of benefits derived from water resource quality improvements; the types of benefits covered are listed in Table A3-2. Table A3-2. Non-Use Value of Water Resource Improvements

Benefit Types of water uses Example

Potential Water Quality Benefits

Current use benefits

Direct use In Stream Recreational activities: Fishing, swimming, boating

Indirect use Near StreamRecreational activities: Hiking, trekkingRelaxation, enjoyment of peace and quietAesthetics, enjoyment of natural beauty

Non Use

Option Preferences for future personal use of the resourceExistence Maintaining a good environment for all to enjoy

BequestEnjoyment from knowledge that future generations will be able to make use of the resource in the future

Source: Adapted from Baker et al. (2007).

Non-market valuation is based on people’s preferences for an environmental improvement, and values are measured either by a direct elicitation procedure or indirectly by analyzing transactions in markets where preferences for an environmental good are assumed to influence the price of the marketed good. The value for the entire affected population is established by an exchange transaction reflected in the sum of each person's value for environmental improvements. The benefit transfer method cannot be regarded as a valuation method per se, but it is a quick and inexpensive alternative to transferring existing value data.

The scope of the study has considered the three same water resource quality improvement scenarios in the United Kingdom that were kept as is in the BT (Table A3-3):

Scenario 1: 33 percent Successive Improvement by 2015, 2021 and 2027; Scenario 2: 50 percent Improvement by 2015, 30 percent in 2021 and 20 percent by 2027; and Scenario 3: 100 percent Improvement by 2015.

Table A3-3. WTP per Household Based on Payment Card and Dichotomous Choice Benefit Transfer, 2008 WTP Population HH

numberScenario 1

33% Successive Improvement

by 2015, 2021 and 2027(CL: 95%; CI ±2.5%)

Scenario 250% Improvement by 2015, 30% in 2021 and

20% by 2027(CL: 95%; CI ±2.5%)

Scenario 3 100% Improvement

by 2015

(CL: 95%; CI ±2.5%)

(# million) (#) (US$/year) (US$/year) (US$/year)

2008 2008 2008 2008 2008

Low Mid High Low Mid High Low Mid HighTotal 31.89 6.4 11.5 29.4 47.3 12.3 31.5 50.6 14.2 36.4 58.6

Note: $PPP GDP per capita was used to adjust income differential between the UK and Iraq, and the income elasticity is conservatively considered at 1. Source: Baker et al. (2007); World Bank (2010); and Author.

62

The results of the benefit transfer per household were calculated for the three considered scenarios and rebased to 2010 with the payment card being the lower bound and the dichotomous choice being the higher bound. A midpoint was considered to derive the results (Table A3-3). In Iraq, the willingness to pay (WTP) for the 3 water quality improvement scenarios vary between an average of US$ 29.4 for scenario 1, US$ 31.5 for scenario 2 and US$ 36.4 for scenario 3 per household per year. Income differential by region was based on Gross National Income.1

The WTP Used for the Tigris and the Euphrates

The COED associated with the Tigris and Euphrates river water quality was derived from the WTP in Table A3.3 and is considered the total degradation in year 2010. A midpoint US$ 1.2 billion in 2008 in considered as the COED associated with surface water degradation in Iraq for the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (Table A3.4).

Table A3-4. COED Based on Payment Card and Dichotomous Choice Benefit Transfer, 2008 WTP Population HH

numberScenario 1

33% Successive Improvement

by 2015, 2021 and 2027(CL: 95%; CI ±2.5%)

Scenario 250% Improvement by 2015, 30% in 2021 and

20% by 2027(CL: 95%; CI ±2.5%)

Scenario 3 100% Improvement

by 2015

(CL: 95%; CI ±2.5%)

(# million) (#) (US$ billion/year) (US$ billion/year) (US$ billion/year)

2008 2008 2008 2008 2008

Low Mid High Low Mid High Low Mid HighTotal 31.89 6.4 0.34 0.9 1.5 0.39 1.0 1.6 0.5 1.2 1.9

Note: $PPP GDP per capita was used to adjust income differential between the UK and Iraq. Source: Baker et al. (2007); World Bank (2010); and Author. Table A3-5 illustrates the final water quality improvements by scenario after performing the benefit transfer. Also, lower bound (pay card) and higher bound (dichotomous choice) results were used for the marginal benefit transfer calculations and a mid value was retained. The annualized net present value over 20 years ranges between US$ billion 0.3 for scenario 1, US$ 0.9 billion for scenario 2 and US$ 1.2 billion for scenario 3 over 30 years discounted at 3.5 percent.

Table A3-5. Marginal Benefit Transfer for Water Quality Improvements by Scenario over 30 years, 2008Benefit Populatio

nHH

membersScenario 1

33% Successive Improvements

by 2015, 2021 and 2027

Scenario 250% Improvement by 2015,

30% in 2021 and 20% by 2027

Scenario 3

100% Improvement by 2015

(# million) (#) (US$ billion/year) (US$ billion/year) (US$ billion/year)

2008 2008 2008-2030 2008-2030 2008-2030Annualize

d NPV3.5% Annualized NPV3.5% Annualized NPV3.5%

Total 32.07 6.4 0.3 8.8 0.9 16.5 1.2 36.05 Source: Baker et al. (2007); World Bank (2010); and Author.

1 World Bank (2010).

63

Annex 4. Environmental Category and Policy Responsibilities

Table A4-1. Environmental Category and Policy Responsibility

CATEGORY SUB-CATEGORY ISSUE POLICY FORMULATION POLICY IMPLEMENTATIONPOLICY MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT

AIR Air Ambient air quality Ministry of Environment Ministry of Environment Ministry of Environment

WATER

Water-infrastructure and practice

Drinking water quality (treatment) and distribution

Ministry of HealthMinistry of Municipality and Public Work

Ministry of Health

Waste water (sewage) collection network Ministry of Municipality and Public Work Ministry of Municipality and Public Work Ministry of EnvironmentMinistry of Health

Waste water treatment Ministry of Environment Ministry of Municipality and Public Work Ministry of Environment

Water-natural resources

Surface water quality (rivers, lakes, reservoirs, transitional and coastal waters) Ministry of Environment

Ministry of IndustryMinistry of ElectricityMinistry of EnvironmentMinistry of AgricultureMinistry of Municipality and Public Work

Ministry of Environment

LAND

Biodiversity Biodiversity protection: protected areaMinistry of EnvironmentMinistry of Agriculture

Ministry of EnvironmentMinistry of Agriculture

Ministry of Environment

Sustainable land management

Forestry (deforestation/aforestation) Ministry of AgricultureMinistry of Agriculture Ministry of Agriculture

Ministry of Environment

Cropland management Ministry of Agriculture Ministry of AgricultureMinistry of AgricultureMinistry of Environment

Rangeland managementMinistry of PlanningMinistry of AgricultureMinistry of Municipality and Public Work

Ministry of AgricultureMinistry of Municipality and Public Work

Ministry of EnvironmentMinistry of Municipality and Public Work

WASTE

Waste Collection Municipal Solid Waste collection Ministry of Municipality and Public Work Ministry of Municipality and Public Work Ministry of Environment

Waste treatmentMunicipal Solid Waste treatment (landfill, incineration, composting, recycling)

Ministry of EnvironmentMinistry of Municipality and Public WorkMinistry of Health Ministry of Environment

COASTAL ZONE

Integrated coastal zone management

Coastal zoneRegional Organization for Protection marine EnvironmentMinistry of Environment

Ministry of EnvironmentMinistry of OilMinistry of Transport

Protection and promotion Cultural Heritage

Ministry of CultureMinistry of EnvironmentNational Committee from different Ministries

Ministry of Culture Ministry of Culture

GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT

Climate change responses

Uptake of renewable energy sourcesMinistry of EnvironmentMinistry of OilMinistry of Science and Technologies

Not defined ---

Climate change adaption measures (to lessen impacts such as sea level rise, sea temperature rise, desertification, etc.)

Ministry of EnvironmentMinistry of Oil Ministry of AgricultureIraqi Metrological Association

Ministry of EnvironmentMinistry of OilMinistry of ElectricityMinistry Agriculture

Ministry of EnvironmentMinistry of Agriculture

Source: provided by MOE (2011); and Author.

64

Annex 5. Cost of Environmental Degradation Workshop Agenda and Participants

Cost of Environmental Degradation in Iraq Workshop

ورشة العراق البيئيفي التدهور كلفة

Commodore Hotel Beirut بيروت

AgendaApril 12-13 2012

أعمال جدول12-13 2012نيسان

Day 1 يوم

April 12 أبريل 12

8:45-9:15 Registration تسجيل9:15-9:30 Introduction: Hikmat Jebraiel جبرائيل: حكمت مقدمة9:30-10:45 Basics of Environmental Economics: F. Doumani : فادي البيئي االقتصاد أساسيات

دوماني10:45-11:15 Coffee Break استراحة11:15-12:30 Valuation Techniques: F. Doumani : فادي البيئي االقتصاد أساسيات

دوماني12:30-1:45 Valuation Techniques: F. Doumani : فادي البيئي االقتصاد أساسيات

دوماني1:45-2:00 Coffee Break استراحة2:00-3:00 Iraq COED Results العراق ( في البيئي التدهور كلفة نتائج

COED(3:00 Lunch Break غداء استراحة

Day 2 يوم

April 13 أبريل 13

8:30-9:30 Recap of Day 1 and Iraq COED: F. Doumani يوم من دوماني: 1خالصة فادي9:30-10:45 5 Case Studies on COED 5 معالجة مجموعات الستخالص العمل

البيئة10:45-11:15 Coffee Break استراحة11:15-12:30 5 Case Study on COED معالجة مجموعات 5 الستخالص العمل

البيئة12:30-1:45 Presentation of the 5 Group Work عمل العمل مجموعات 5 عرض1:45-2:00 Coffee Break استراحة2:00-3:00 Q&A and Closing remarks: Hikmat Jebraiel : ختامية مالحظات وجواب سؤال

جبرائيل حكمت

65

3:00 Lunch Break غداء استراحة

Cost of Environmental Degradation in Iraq

Workshop ورشة العراق البيئيفي التدهور كلفة

April 12-13, 2012 نيسانCommodore Hotel

Beirut بيروت Name االسم Institution المؤسسة

1 Hikmat Jebraeil Ministry of Environment2 Faten Azez Ministry of Environment3 Abdul Jabbar Mohammed Aziz Ministry of Environment4 Fakhri Hamid Jaber Ministry of Planning5 Atif Abdul Khaleq Abdul Hussen Ministry of Finance6 Alaa Abdul Kareem Hadi Academic7 Munther Badri Hamoudi Association of Iraqi Engineers8 Mohammed Matook Abood Association of Iraqi Economists 9 Ali Abdul Razzaq Abdul Wahab Ministry of Environment

10 Qasim Mahmood Bahram Academic11 Lateef Bonny Hussein Ministry of Environment

12 Talal Hussein Hassan Ministry of Environment

13 Zinah Mustafa Murtadha Ministry of Environment14 Zainab Abdel Hussain Kutaif Ministry of Environment15 Kareem Wannas Ali Ministry of Environment16 Raghad A. Kadhim Ministry of Environment17 Ali Wahhab Ahmed Ministry of Environment18 Areej Ibrahim Ahmed Ministry of Environment19 Rehab Taher Ahmed Ministry of Environment20 Abd Al Jabar Gomaa Ahmed Ministry of Environment21 Mohemmed Adil Abdul Wahab Ministry of Environment22 Ali Khalaf Hameed Ministry of Environment23 Ragad Abdulsada Salih Ministry of Environment24 Ali Abdulsamad Hasan Ministry of Environment25 Kassem Suhail Hassan Ministry of Environment26 Hassanen Ahmed Abdelrazak Ministry of Environment

66

67