Regional economic impact assessment: Evaluating remedial alternatives for the Portland Harbor Superfund Site, Portland, Oregon, USA

Abstract

The present paper describes a methodology for evaluating impacts of Superfund remedial alternatives on the regional economy in the context of a broader sustainability evaluation. Although economic impact methodology is well established, some applications to Superfund remedial evaluation have created confusion because of seemingly contradictory results. This confusion arises from failure to be explicit about 2 opposing impacts of remediation expenditures: 1) positive regional impacts of spending additional money in the region and 2) negative regional impacts of the need to pay for the expenditures (and thus forgo other expenditures in the region). The present paper provides a template for economic impact assessment that takes both positive and negative impacts into account, thus providing comprehensive estimates of net impacts. The paper also provides a strategy for identifying and estimating major uncertainties in the net impacts. The recommended methodology was applied at the Portland Harbor Superfund Site, located along the Lower Willamette River in Portland, Oregon, USA. The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) developed remedial alternatives that it estimated would cost up to several billion dollars, with construction durations possibly lasting decades. The economic study estimated regional economic impacts—measured in terms of gross regional product (GRP), personal income, population, and employment—for 5 of the USEPA alternatives relative to the “no further action” alternative. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:32–42. © 2017 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC).