The Influence of Interests and Beliefs on the Use of Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis in Water Policy: The case of German policy-makers

2014 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 391-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Dehnhardt
Keyword(s):  
Water Policy ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Environmental Cost ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Policy Makers

scholarly journals Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis

2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 317-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giles Atkinson ◽  
Susana Mourato
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Environmental Cost ◽  
Benefit Analysis

The Use of Cost-Benefit Analysis to Decide Environmental Policy – a Dead End?

1997 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-208
Author(s):  
Hege Westskog
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Policy ◽  
Decision Maker ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Environmental Cost ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Ethical Foundation ◽  
Ethical Beliefs ◽  
Individual Preferences ◽  
Dead End

In this paper I discuss two questions which the decision maker has to consider before she makes use of the method of cost benefit analysis. First, she has to ask herself if she shares the ethical foundation of environmental cost benefit analysis. If not, could environmental cost benefit analysis be adjusted such that her ethical beliefs are incorporated? Second, if the decision maker shares the ethical foundation of environmental cost-benefit analysis, is this method appropriate when there are individuals in a society that hold other ethical beliefs than those implicitly assumed in an environmental cost-benefit analysis? When discussing these questions I focus on two different perspectives – the deontological and the agency aspect of individual preferences. I argue that the answer to both questions is «no», though the answer to the second question is not as clear as the answer to the first.

Cost–benefit and water resources policy: a survey

Water Policy ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank A. Ward
Keyword(s):  
Water Policy ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Policy Cost ◽  
The Right

This paper reviews recent developments in cost–benefit analysis for water policy researchers who wish to understand the applications of economic principles to inform emerging water policy debates. The cost–benefit framework can provide a comparison of total economic gains and losses resulting from a proposed water policy. Cost–benefit analysis can provide decision-makers with a comparison of the impacts of two or more water policy options using methods that are grounded in time-tested economic principles. Economic efficiency, measured as the difference between added benefits and added costs, can inform water managers and the public of the economic impacts of water programs to address peace, development, health, the environment, climate and poverty. Faced by limited resources, cost–benefit analysis can inform policy choices by summarizing trade-offs involved in designing, applying, or reviewing a wide range of water programs. The data required to conduct a cost–benefit analysis are often poor but the steps needed to carry out that analysis require posing the right questions.

Environmental cost–benefit analysis of decentralised wastewater treatment and re-use: a case study of rural Jordan

Water Policy ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nele Lienhoop ◽  
Emad K. Al-Karablieh ◽  
Amer Z. Salman ◽  
Jaime A. Cardona
Keyword(s):  
Wastewater Treatment ◽  
Rural Communities ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Environmental Cost ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Urban Settlements ◽  
Flexible Adaptation ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Market Benefits

Decentralised wastewater treatment systems offer an opportunity to introduce wastewater treatment and generate irrigation water in places that are not connected to centralised treatment plants. The advantages of decentralised technologies include their capability to provide wastewater treatment infrastructure in remote and hilly rural communities and their flexible adaptation to fast-growing semi-urban settlements. In this study we investigate the costs and benefits of introducing decentralised wastewater treatment and re-use to two locations in Jordan. The cost–benefit analysis (CBA) used here differs from traditional CBA in that it includes non-market benefits for which monetary values are not readily available, in addition to market benefits. We elaborate on three valuation methods to monetise benefits associated with the environment, health and irrigation in agriculture. Our findings suggest that it is principally worthwhile to establish decentralised treatment technologies in remote areas.

scholarly journals A Non-Market Valuation Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis for Sanitary Landfill Project Appraisal

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (14) ◽  
pp. 7718
Author(s):  
Nik Nor Rahimah Nik Ab Rahim ◽  
Jamal Othman ◽  
Norlida Hanim Mohd Salleh ◽  
Norshamliza Chamhuri
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Environmental Values ◽  
Market Valuation ◽  
Environmental Cost ◽  
Sanitary Landfill ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Project Appraisal ◽  
Implicit Prices ◽  
Non Market Valuation

Extensive non-engineered landfilling practice in developing countries has raised environmental concerns, but operating a sanitary landfill appears infeasible due to financial incapability. This study aims to determine the feasibility of a sanitary landfill project by including its environmental values into the project appraisal while simultaneously applying three policy-relevant methods—non-market valuation, benefits transfer, and cost-benefit analysis—in two study areas in Peninsular Malaysia. The non-market valuation study used choice modeling, a questionnaire-based technique, to elicit willingness to pay among 624 households toward the environmental attributes of the sanitary landfill. Their responses resulted in the monetary values of the environmental attributes by referring to implicit prices of leachate discharge, bad odor, disease vector and view. The implicit prices of bad odor (RM2.29 per month) and view (RM3.59 per month) in the two study areas were transferable and used as a proxy of additional solid waste disposal payment in environmental cost-benefit analysis. Positive net present value offers empirical evidence of the feasibility of the sanitary landfill project. The findings show that the inclusion of environmental values in project appraisals increases the chances of implementing sanitary landfills, providing a new approach to address the environmental concerns in developing countries. Future research should consider the external costs along with the external benefits to allow for a comprehensive comparison between environmental values in environmental cost-benefit analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document