Centralized versus Decentralized Cleanup of River Water Pollution: An Application to the Ganges
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Preliminaries
1.2. Objective
2. The Theoretical Framework
3. Efficient Pollution Cleanup Amounts
4. Decentralized Provision of Pollution Cleanup
5. Centralized Provision of Pollution Cleanup
6. Identical Preferences for Pollution Cleanup
7. Dissimilar Preferences for Pollution Cleanup
8. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
1 | See Markandya and Murty (2004) [1] for a more detailed corroboration of this claim. |
2 | Go to https://mahileather.com/blogs/news/the-world-s-most-famous-leather-markets for a more detailed discussion of this point. Accessed on 20 September 2023. |
3 | In general, the term centralization refers to the concentration of authority at the top level of an organization. It is the systematic and consistent reservation of authority at the central points in an organization. In a centralized organization, managers at lower levels have a very limited role in decision-making. In other words, their job is to execute the decisions made at the top level of the organization. In contrast, the term decentralization refers to the dispersal of authority within an organization. It refers to a systematic effort to delegate to the lowest levels of the organization, all decisions except those which can be made more effectively at the central points. Put differently, decentralization is the distribution of authority throughout an organization. Therefore, in a decentralized organization, the authority to make major decisions is vested with the top management and the remaining authority is delegated to the middle and to the lower levels of this same organization. See Aiyar and Kapur (2019) [12] and Varma et al. (2022) [13] for more details on this dichotomy. |
4 | See Sheehan and Kogiku (1981) [23] for a general discussion of the role of game-theoretic modeling in the context of water resource problems. |
5 | We note that even though our paper, which is an economics paper, does not explicitly follow the “IMRaD structure” in which many scientific papers are written, the paper does implicitly follow this structure. To see this, observe that our Section 1 corresponds to the “Introduction” part in the IMRaD structure, our Section 2 corresponds to the “Methods” part in the IMRaD structure, and Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, Section 6 and Section 7 correspond to the “Results” and “Discussion” parts in the IMRaD structure. |
6 | Go to https://resources.environment.yale.edu/kotchen/pubs/pgchap.pdf and to https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/public-goods/ for a more detailed corroboration of this claim. Accessed on 20 September 2023. See Hindriks and Myles (2013, pp. 147–190) [25], for a textbook discussion of public goods. |
7 | It is important to comprehend that even though we are thinking of Ganges water pollution cleanup in Kanpur and Varanasi as public goods, strictly speaking, they are local public goods which means that in order to enjoy the benefits of water pollution cleanup in, say, Kanpur, one must be resident in the Kanpur area. Therefore, the model we construct and analyze in this paper is not a “standard public goods model” as this term is understood in well-known public economics textbooks such as Hindriks and Myles (2013, chapter 6) [25]. Finally, our model is better thought of as a “fiscal federalism” model where fiscal federalism, speaking broadly, “is the division of revenue collection and expenditure responsibilities among different levels of government” (Hindriks and Myles, 2013, p. 635) [25]. Finally, we stress that consistent with our observation in Section 1.2, this paper is the first to study the merits of centralized versus decentralized approaches to water pollution control in the Ganges. |
8 | We assume that the mean is equal to the median in both cities under study. This means that the preference type distribution functions are symmetrical in nature. |
9 | We assume that the resulting solution is an interior solution. |
10 | See Theorem 5.2 in Rudin (1976, p. 104) [27] for additional details. |
11 | See Rudin (1976, pp. 107–108) [27] for a textbook exposition of the mean value theorem. |
References
- Markandya, A.; Murty, M.N. Cost-benefit analysis of cleaning the Ganges: Some emerging environment and development issues. Environ. Dev. Econ. 2004, 9, 61–81. [Google Scholar]
- Black, G. Purifying the goddess. New Yorker 2016, 92, 46–53. [Google Scholar]
- Gallagher, S. India: The Toxic Price of Leather. Pulitzer Center. 4 February 2014. Available online: https://pulitzercenter.org/reporting/india-toxic-price-leather-0 (accessed on 20 September 2023).
- Jain, C.K.; Singh, S. Impact of climate change on the hydrological dynamics of river Ganga, India. J. Water Clim. Chang. 2020, 11, 274–290. [Google Scholar]
- Dhillon, A. Ganga Management. South China Morning Post. 14 September 2014. Available online: http://www.scmp.com/magazines/post-magazine/article/1589301/ganga-management (accessed on 20 September 2023).
- Madhulekha; Arya, S. Assessment of water pollution of river Ganga by tannery effluent using fish as a bio-indicator in Kanpur, India. Biochem. Cell. Arch. 2016, 16, 120–123. [Google Scholar]
- Madhulekha; Arya, S. Evaluation of Water Quality in River Ganga Due To Contaminant of Heavy Metals, Kanpur, India. Int. J. Innov. Trends Eng. 2016, 20, 97–100. [Google Scholar]
- Nazir, A.; Khan, M.A.; Ghosh, P. Assessment of variations in metal concentrations of the Ganges river by using multivariate statistical techniques. Limnologica 2022, 95, 125989. [Google Scholar]
- Batabyal, A.A. Tanneries in Kanpur and pollution in the Ganges: A theoretical analysis. Reg. Sci. Policy Pract. 2023, 15, 1114–1123. [Google Scholar]
- Shah, T.; Ray, C.; Lele, U. How to clean up the Ganges? Science 2018, 362, 503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Das, P.; Tamminga, K.R. The Ganges and the GAP: An assessment of efforts to clean a sacred river. Sustainability 2012, 4, 1647–1668. [Google Scholar]
- Aiyar, Y.; Kapur, A. The centralization vs decentralization tug of war and the emerging narrative of fiscal federalism for social policy in India. Reg. Fed. Stud. 2019, 29, 187–217. [Google Scholar]
- Varma, V.G.; Jha, S.; Raju, L.H.K.; Kishore, R.L.; Ranjith, V. A review on decentralized wastewater treatment systems in India. Chemosphere 2022, 300, 134462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alley, K.D. Urban institutions at the crossroads: Judicial activism and pollution prevention in Kanpur. Urban Anthropol. Stud. Cult. Syst. World Econ. Dev. 1996, 25, 351–383. [Google Scholar]
- Sigdel, R.; Carlton, G.; Gautam, B. Resolving the Ganges pollution paradox: A policy-centric systematic review. River 2023, 2, 126–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Metzger, E.S.; Lendvay, J.M. Seeking environmental justice through public participation: A community-based water quality assessment in Bayview Hunters Point. Environ. Pract. 2006, 8, 104–114. [Google Scholar]
- Cronin, V.; Guthrie, P. Community-led resettlement: From a flood-affected slum to a new society in Pune, India. Environ. Hazards 2011, 10, 310–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peplow, D.; Augustine, S. Community-led assessment of risk from exposure to mercury by native Amerindian Wayana in Southeast Suriname. J. Environ. Public Health 2012, 2012, 674596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chakraborti, D.; Singh, S.; Rahman, M.; Dutta, R.; Mukherjee, S.; Pati, S.; Kar, P. Groundwater arsenic contamination in the Ganga river basin: A future health danger. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 180. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, L.J.; Milligan, R.; Stauber, C.E.; Jelks, N.T.O.; Casanova, L.; Ledford, S.H. Environmental injustice and Escherichia coli in urban streams: Potential for community-led response. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. 2022, 9, e1583. [Google Scholar]
- Singh, A.; Gundimeda, H. Measuring technical efficiency and shadow price of water pollutants for the leather industry in India: A directional distance function approach. J. Regul. Econ. 2021, 59, 71–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Batabyal, A.A.; Beladi, H. The optimal provision of information and communication technologies in smart cities. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2019, 147, 216–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sheehan, M.; Kogiku, K.C. Game theory analyses applied to water resource problems. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 1981, 15, 109–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oates, W.E. Fiscal Federalism; Harcourt Brace Jovanovich: New York, NY, USA, 1972. [Google Scholar]
- Hindriks, J.; Myles, G.D. Intermediate Public Economics, 2nd ed.; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Taylor, H.M.; Karlin, S. An Introduction to Stochastic Modeling, 3rd ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Rudin, W. Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 3rd ed.; McGraw Hill, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1976. [Google Scholar]
Spillover | Identical Preferences for Pollution Cleanup | Dissimilar Preferences for Pollution Cleanup |
---|---|---|
Any spillover | Centralized cleanup leads to higher welfare | |
Strong spillover | Centralized cleanup leads to higher welfare | |
No spillover | Centralized and decentralized cleanup lead to same welfare | Centralized cleanup leads to lower welfare |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Batabyal, A.A.; Beladi, H. Centralized versus Decentralized Cleanup of River Water Pollution: An Application to the Ganges. Games 2023, 14, 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/g14050066
Batabyal AA, Beladi H. Centralized versus Decentralized Cleanup of River Water Pollution: An Application to the Ganges. Games. 2023; 14(5):66. https://doi.org/10.3390/g14050066
Chicago/Turabian StyleBatabyal, Amitrajeet A., and Hamid Beladi. 2023. "Centralized versus Decentralized Cleanup of River Water Pollution: An Application to the Ganges" Games 14, no. 5: 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/g14050066