Abstract
India’s leather industry occupies a prominent place in the export market, generating scope for foreign exchange earning as well as large-scale employment. The export potential of this industry was recognized by the Government of India in the mid-1970s when it evolved a policy package consisting of a ban on export of raw hides and skins and providing fiscal and other incentives to stimulate the export of finished leather and leather products. Much of the economic benefits derived from leather production and trade; however, have come at a considerable cost to the environment and human health, which should be attended simultaneously to enjoy sustainable benefits from the industry. This poses a serious challenge before the sector and a number of strategies have been contemplated since early the 1990s to give the industry a cleaner shape.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Subsequently an area of 1100 acre was earmarked for the integrated complex and was developed as a joint venture project on a Built Operate and Transfer (BOT) arrangement with M/s M.L Dalmiya & Co. Ltd as the private partner.
- 2.
Generally 90% of water inflow is expected to be discharged as effluent (Shanmugasundaram and Murthy 2000).
- 3.
As the number of players increases the core shrinks.
- 4.
For detailed derivation of the solutions see Appendix A.
- 5.
This information was made available by CLCTA and WBPCB officials in March 2012. Volume of effluent entering the CETP is 18.83MLD.
- 6.
This apportionment rule has been suggested by the officials of the WBPCB.
- 7.
Using the GDP deflator parity has been brought between the two price levels.
- 8.
Anuradha (2005).
- 9.
This information was obtained from WBPCB and CLCTA in 2010–2011.
- 10.
This information regarding the total length of pipeline and its distribution over different EPS has been provided by the CLCTA.
- 11.
See Appendix B for detailed cost allocation.
References
Anuradha V (2005) Institutions of collective action for pollution abatement: the common effluent treatment plant. In: Mythili G and Hema R (eds) Topics in applied economics: tools issues and institutions: a festschrift volume for Prof. Sankar U, Academic Foundation New Delhi
Bagchi (Majumdar) S, Banerjee S (2012) Calcutta leather complex and tanning of leather in Kolkata: a blueprint. Artha Beekshan 21(1):68–81
Dalmiya ML & Co Ltd (1998) Calcutta leather complex project revised final version of DPR. (abridged)
Shanmugasundaram S, Murthy DVS (2000) Performance evaluation for common effluent treatment plants for tanneries at Pammal–Pallavaram Tamil Nadu (India). Bioprocess Eng 23:431–434
Shubik M (1984) Game theory in the social sciences: concepts and solutions. MIT Press, London
Thorstensen TC (1969) Practical leather technology. Reinhold Book Corporation, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix A
1. The Nucleolus allocation for three players:
Solving LPP for Nucleolus
min\( \varepsilon \)
subject to \( x_{A} \ge - \varepsilon ,\;x_{B} \ge - \varepsilon ,x_{C} \; \ge - \varepsilon \)
The solution is \( \varepsilon = - 2. 7,\;x_{A} = 1 4. 9,x_{B} = 4. 6,\;x_{C} = 2.7 \)
The corresponding unique cost allocation, the Nucleolus allocation is (\( y_{A} = 6 6. 8,\;y_{B} = 4 1. 5,\;y_{C} = { 9}. 8 \));
2. The Shapley allocation for three players:
\( X_{i} = \sum\limits_{\begin{subarray}{l} S \subset N \\ i \in N \end{subarray} } {\frac{{\left| {S - i} \right|!\left| {N - S} \right|!}}{N!}} C^{i} (S), \) where i = 1, 2, …,n and \( C^{i} (S) = C(S) - C(S - \{ i\} ) \)
Using the above equation, the Shapley allocation for the game is calculated as follows
Which gives
Also \( \sum\limits_{i} {X_{i} } = { 118}. 1 \)
where X1 = cost allocation of 1st player
X2 = cost allocation of 2nd player
X3 = cost allocation of 3rd player
The Shapley allocation satisfies the individual rationality, group rationality and Pareto optimality conditions.
Appendix B
Comparison of costs under different allocation schemes at CETP in CLC
Player | Volume of effluent (KLD) | Present cost (Rs. Lakhs)/day | Shapley cost allocation (Rs. Lakhs)/day | Cost saving (%) | Nucleolus cost allocation (Rs. Lakhs)/day | Cost saving (%) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total (Ci) | Unit | Total (Xi) | Unit | Total (Yi) | Unit | ||||
EPS-1 | 6108 | 3.509 | 0.00057 | 2.913 | 0.00048 | 17.007 | 2.889 | 0.00047 | 17.671 |
EPS-2 | 5046 | 3.023 | 0.00060 | 2.462 | 0.00049 | 18.581 | 2.562 | 0.00051 | 15.266 |
EPS-3 | 2822 | 1.868 | 0.00066 | 1.416 | 0.00050 | 24.174 | 1.406 | 0.00050 | 24.713 |
EPS-4 | 2394 | 1.681 | 0.00070 | 1.264 | 0.00053 | 24.819 | 1.220 | 0.00051 | 27.448 |
EPS-5 | 2144 | 1.460 | 0.00068 | 1.070 | 0.00050 | 26.694 | 0.999 | 0.00047 | 31.606 |
EPS-6 | 319 | 0.412 | 0.00129 | 0.275 | 0.00086 | 33.199 | 0.324 | 0.00102 | 21.270 |
Total | 18833 | 11.954 | 0.00063 | 9.400 | 0.00050 | 21.365 | 9.400 | 0.00050 | 21.365 |
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer India
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bagchi, S., Banerjee, S. (2013). Efficient Pollution Management Through CETP: The Case of Calcutta Leather Complex. In: Banerjee, S., Chakrabarti, A. (eds) Development and Sustainability. Springer, India. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1124-2_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1124-2_22
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, India
Print ISBN: 978-81-322-1123-5
Online ISBN: 978-81-322-1124-2
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)