An assessment of wetland management scenarios: the case of Zazari–Cheimaditida (Greece)

2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 115-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Psychoudakis ◽  
A. Ragkos ◽  
M. Seferlis
Keyword(s):  
Social Impact ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Wetland Management ◽  
Stakeholder Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Management Scenarios ◽  
Wetland Functions ◽  
Wetland Drainage

This study suggests an integrated framework for the assessment of wetland management scenarios, based on a holistic approach of wetland ecosystems. All costs and benefits of management scenarios are estimated in terms of the value of wetland functions, which are indirectly valuated with a Contingent Valuation of goods and services they provide. The social impact of introducing the scenarios is also investigated with a stakeholder analysis, based on a survey. Scenario plausibility and acceptability are examined based on the results of the stakeholder analysis; on the other hand, the assessment of the scenarios, using cost-benefit analysis and multi-criteria analysis, provides quantitative performance indicators adequate to incorporate uncertainties and mutable policy objectives. This framework is applied to assess three management scenarios for a Greek wetland. The results indicate that the continuation of existing management practices is the most efficient alternative unless interventions for the restoration of wetland functions are conservatively budgeted, while a wetland drainage scenario performs poorly both in terms of economic efficiency and social impact.

scholarly journals CHANGES IN THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FAMILY 2003–2014: IMPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERING ACHIEVEMENTS, GAPS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (01) ◽  
pp. 1550003 ◽  
Author(s):  
FRANK VANCLAY
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Impact Assessment ◽  
Social Impact ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Fold Increase ◽  
Social Risk ◽  
Proportional Change ◽  
The Impact

Over 150 forms of impact assessment can be identified using Google searches, with several new forms appearing since 2003. Since then, the popularity of the various members of the impact assessment family has changed, partly in response to legislative and regulatory changes, and general trends in society. The information explosion and expansion of the internet has resulted in a 32 fold increase in the number of hits for "impact assessment", now over 12 million. The conventional methods most frequently mentioned in 2003 had relatively low proportional change over the last 10 years but remain amongst the most frequently mentioned in 2014: risk assessment, public participation, cost-benefit analysis, public involvement, environmental monitoring, and project evaluation. The terms with highest proportional change (i.e. the super-hot topics) were primarily social concerns, including: equality impact assessment, welfare impact assessment, mental health impact assessment, disability impact assessment, human impact assessment, social impact assessment, and social risk assessment. Other terms that had high proportional change included life cycle impact assessment. Information about the relative popularity of the various forms of impact assessment is used in this paper to discuss issues and trends in the broad field of impact assessment.

Yamuna Action Plan-III: Impact on Water Quality of River Yamuna, India

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ankit Srivastava ◽  
Prathna T.C.
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Treatment Plant ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Holistic Approach ◽  
Pollutant Load ◽  
River Ganges ◽  
The World ◽  
River Yamuna ◽  
The Impact

Water is indispensable to sustain life and livelihood, and rivers serve as major reservoirs of water in manyparts of the world. River Yamuna is the major tributary of the River Ganges in India and is considered to be among the most polluted rivers of the world. The Yamuna Action Plan (YAP) is one of the largest river restoration projects in India and is initiated to clean the river. YAP is a bilateral arrangement between the governments of India and Japan, and consists of three Actions Plans-I, II and III. YAP-III is currently under execution with some of the major projects being the construction of the new Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) at Okhla, rehabilitation and upgrading of WWTPs at Kondli and Rithala in the Delhi region. The impact of YAP-III with regard to these major projects on the reduction of the pollutant load reaching the river and cost-benefit has been evaluated in the current study. Findings from the study indicated that major projects such as construction of a new WWTP at Okhla (124 MGD) can effectively reduce the pollutant load by 283 kg/MGD of wastewater at a cost of Rs. 1161 crores while the rehabilitation project at Rithala (Phase I) can reduce the pollutant load by 92.5 kg/MGD wastewater at a cost of Rs. 300 crores. The present study indicates the need to evaluate projects in terms of cost-benefit analysis in addition to the economic and environmental evaluation for effective action. A holistic approach towards treatment of pollutant load in the river and prevention of further pollutants from reaching the river is required in addition to community awareness and participation for sustainable river water management.

scholarly journals Farm practices as they affect NH3 emissions from beef cattle

2012 ◽  
Vol 92 (4) ◽  
pp. 525-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. C. Sheppard ◽  
S. Bittman
Keyword(s):  
Beef Cattle ◽  
Best Management Practices ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Total Biomass ◽  
The West ◽  
Finishing Cattle ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Using Data

Sheppard, S. C. and Bittman, S. 2012. Farm practices as they affect NH 3 emissions from beef cattle. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 92: 525–543. Beef cattle farms in Canada are very diverse, both in size and management. Because the total biomass of beef cattle in Canada is larger than any other livestock sector, beef also has the potential for the largest environmental impact. In this study we estimate NH3 emissions associated with beef cattle production across Canada using data on farm practices obtained from a detailed survey answered by 1380 beef farmers in 11 Ecoregions. The farms were various combinations of cow/calf, backgrounding and finishing operations. The proportion of animals on pasture varied markedly among Ecoregions, especially for cows and calves, and this markedly affected the estimated NH3 emissions. The crop components of feed also varied among Ecoregions, but the resulting crude protein concentrations were quite consistent for both backgrounding and finishing cattle. Manure was stored longer in the west than in the east, and fall spreading of manure was notably more common in the west, especially when spread on tilled land. The estimated NH3 emissions per animal were relatively consistent across Ecoregions for confinement production, but because the proportion of animals on pasture varied with Ecoregion, so did the overall estimated NH3 emissions per animal. Temperature is a key factor causing Ecoregion differences, although husbandry and manure management practices are also important. Hypothetical best management practices had little ability to reduce overall emission estimates, and could not be implemented without detailed cost/benefit analysis.

scholarly journals The Losses in the Rice Harvest Process: A Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (17) ◽  
pp. 9627
Author(s):  
Xue Qu ◽  
Daizo Kojima ◽  
Laping Wu ◽  
Mitsuyoshi Ando
Keyword(s):  
Rural Women ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Estimation Methods ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Harvest Management ◽  
Key Stakeholders ◽  
Harvesting Techniques ◽  
Poor Infrastructure

We review existing studies on rice harvest loss from the aspects of estimation methods, magnitudes, causes, effects, and interventions. The harvest losses examined occurred from the field reaping to storage processes, including threshing, winnowing, and field transportation. We find that existing studies on rice harvest losses have focused on quantitative losses in Asia and Africa. Lack of knowledge, inadequate harvesting techniques, poor infrastructure, and inefficient harvest management practices are considered critical contributors to the losses. The magnitudes and causes of rice harvest losses are now better understood than interventions, which have simply been presented but lack an assessment of the effects and a cost–benefit analysis. Interestingly, reduction in harvest losses may threaten some farmers’ profits, such as rural women who make their living from post-production manual operations. Considering the current status of the literature, future researchers should examine how to balance social and individual welfare since farmers are key stakeholders in intervention implementation. A good understanding of the existing researches can help clarify future efforts for loss reduction, thereby reducing the burden of increasing agricultural production and promoting sustainable development of resources and the environment.

Combining water engineering and landscape architecture practices for multifunctional and robust design of Nature-Based Solutions

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lei Zhong ◽  
Zoran Vojinovic Zoran Vojinovic ◽  
Mário Francac
Keyword(s):  
Robust Design ◽  
Landscape Architecture ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Hydrodynamic Models ◽  
Topology Analysis ◽  
Gis Tools ◽  
First Results ◽  
Novel Design

<p>Hydro-meteorological disasters have shown the fastest rate among all natural disasters. This is due to several factors: i) climate change, ii) population growth and land use change, and iii) poor water management practices. Traditional engineering solutions have shown to be ineffective in responding to such challenges and hydro-meteorological risks in general. In this respect, Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) offer the means to respond to such increasing challenges by providing a range of benefits (i.e., hydro-meteorological risk reduction) and co-benefits (i.e., ecosystems restoration and increase socio-economic values). The need to incorporate numerous benefits and co-benefits into the design of NBS calls for a combination of knowledges and practices from water engineering and landscape architecture. These would be necessary to design an NBS site that have multiple functions that can incorporate multiple benefits and co-benefits. At the same time, NBS should be designed in such way to withstand possible changes and pressures. This in turn calls for novel design practices of NBS to support planning and implementation that can achieve multifunctional and robust results. In this work, a framework for multifunctional and robust design of NBS is addressed. This framework will combine the use of hydrodynamic models, GIS tools, topology analysis, adaptive options analysis, adaptive pathway design, multi-criteria analysis, cost-benefit analysis, and robustness evaluation. The framework will be applied to one of the RECONECT cases and the first results will be presented.</p>

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Wetland Drainage

1983 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
J K Bowers
Keyword(s):  
Cost Benefit Analysis ◽  
Cost Benefit ◽  
Benefit Analysis ◽  
Agricultural Improvement ◽  
Wetland Drainage ◽  
Project Appraisal ◽  
Land Drainage ◽  
Imminent Threat ◽  
Agricultural Yields ◽  
Second Use

The wetland areas of England are under imminent threat of drainage for agricultural improvement. The immediate cause is the local drainage surveys produced under the Water Act 1973. Problems identified in these surveys are subjected to cost-benefit appraisal. Examination of a selection shows that these appraisals are technically defective and result in an overstatement of the benefits and in an overinvestment in land drainage. The main defects are: first, a failure to assess amenity and conservation losses; second, use of prices that contain a substantial element of income transfer which is not netted out; third, a failure to properly calculate the rate of land conversion—a crucial variable; fourth, the project appraisal period is arbitrarily chosen or treated as a variable; fifth, the use of theoretical rather than expected agricultural yields; sixth, the level of flood protection aimed at is too high for the stated objective; and, last, anticipated flood losses are not deducted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document