Cost benefit analysis of peri-urban land use policy - Plurel
Cost benefit analysis of peri-urban land use policy - Plurel
Cost benefit analysis of peri-urban land use policy - Plurel
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Results<br />
Taking the figures for the quantified costs and <strong>benefit</strong>s shown above, we input them into a<br />
cost-<strong>benefit</strong> <strong>analysis</strong> framework to estimate the net present value <strong>of</strong> the proposed scheme. The<br />
results are shown in Table 8. There is some sensitivity to the assumptions shown here, but<br />
overall the project has a negative net present value whatever the cost/<strong>benefit</strong> assumption<br />
taken. This suggests that in the form presented the golf course would need to yield significant<br />
<strong>benefit</strong>s beyond those analysed – either in the form <strong>of</strong> tourism revenues or in terms <strong>of</strong><br />
ancillary property development.<br />
The <strong>analysis</strong> would be further complicated by the potential for development in alternative<br />
sites – this may reduce the potential <strong>benefit</strong> in terms <strong>of</strong> tourism and golf course revenues.<br />
This is <strong>of</strong>ten the case with this type <strong>of</strong> development – with multiple plans for golf courses and<br />
other developments on the <strong>peri</strong>-<strong>urban</strong> fringe at the same time.<br />
Table 8: Net Present Value <strong>of</strong> Golf Project (3.5% discount rate)<br />
<strong>Cost</strong>/Benefit<br />
Assumptions NPV (Euro)<br />
Low Benefit, Low<br />
<strong>Cost</strong> -38,101,855<br />
Low Benefit, High<br />
<strong>Cost</strong> -49,786,851<br />
High Benefit, Low<br />
<strong>Cost</strong> -36,784,439<br />
High Benefit, High<br />
<strong>Cost</strong> -48,469,436<br />
Page 23 • PLUREL report No 4.4.3 • December 2010
Change language