Cost benefit analysis of peri-urban land use policy - Plurel

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Following on from the figures above, details of the sizes of each of the four zones in each of the three visions are shown in Table 7 below. It can be seen that the areas for each “zone” varies significantly between the scenarios – with agriculture being largest under no intervention, the biodiversity zone being largest under maximum wetland and hydrological management and agriculture being jointly largest under the integrated vision. Table 7: Size of individual zone in various visions Zone Vision No Intervention Maximum wetland Integrated vision Biodiversity zone Hydrological management zone Agricultural zone Public Enjoyment and Access zone Total land size 776 ha (12%) 0 5254 ha (78%) 683 ha (10%) 6713 ha 2014 ha (30%) 1208 ha (18%) 1678ha (25%) 1813ha (27%) 6713 ha 1343 ha (20%) 1947 ha (29%) 1947 ha (29%) 1477 ha 6714 (22%) ha Method This study applies benefit transfer tools to measure the economic benefits associated with the land use patterns associated with each vision. Benefit transfer uses estimates from other studies and adjusts, where necessary, for context. It is widely used in the literature on economic valuation, because of the costs of conducting primary studies. There are, however, significant uncertainties in the use of this method – in part because some studies that have tested the reliability of benefit transfer against new primary studies show significant differences in the estimates obtained. Hence, in this study we present both a range and “best guess” estimates. The latter either stems from judgement as to the most likely value (e.g. in the case where there are UK or regional studies) or is based on the median value of existing studies. To proceed, we firstly identify the benefits associated with each land-use zones. Table 8 summarises the types of land cover and each zone, and its corresponding functions and benefits. The benefits listed in the table are not in any case exclusive. Page 30 • PLUREL report No 4.4.3 • December 2010
Table 8: Specifications of each zone Zone Land cover Functions Benefits Biodiversity zone Hydrological management zone Agricultural zone Public Enjoyment and Access zone Transiting from raised bog to lagged fen/wet woodland and reed beds Extensive grassland, rushpasture and mire habitats Arable cropping, salad/vegetable growing, biomass production Green spaces. For example, a linear access/leisure zone could be created along the Glaze Brook and the brook could be remodelled to create a more natural and responsive environment with seasonal water meadows, reedbeds and willow planting to increase its biodiversity and amenity value. Nature reserve, heritage and cultural legacy functions (peat extraction sites) Environmentally sensitive agriculture, nature conservations, passive recreation, hydrological services (water retention) Agriculture activities Reduce pressure of urban fringe, health care, bridge to the country, heritage and cultural legacy and nature reserve functions (e.g. a forest park) Educational, passive recreational, nature conservation, biodiversity, climate regulation (carbon sequestration) nitrogen sink (nitrogen abatement), but no exclusive Agriculture (diversifying effects), conservation, passive recreation, landscape, biodiversity (but not exclusive) Educational, leisure, tourism, agricultural benefit, landscape, environmental benefits (biomass), but not exclusive Recreational (tourism), amenity value, conservation (opportunity: the Wigan Greenheart Regional Park) Several methods are available to estimate the economic values of each of the benefits listed in the table, such as revealed preference methods, stated preference methods and benefit transfer methods. Whilst revealed preference methods and stated preferences methods are usually applied in primary studies, benefit transfer methods are widely adopted as an economical alternative when research resources are limited as these methods allow one to obtain, say, the value of biodiversity of site A from already estimated biodiversity values of other sites. Page 31 • PLUREL report No 4.4.3 • December 2010
Page 1 and 2: Sustainability Impact Assessment Mo
Page 3 and 4: Cost benefit analysis of transport
Page 5 and 6: Classification of results/outputs:
Page 7 and 8: Introduction The valuation of the p
Page 9 and 10: Golf Course Development in the Peri
Page 11 and 12: Costs and benefits A scoping of pot
Page 13 and 14: Compensation costs to the conversio
Page 15 and 16: We applied the marginal value estim
Page 17 and 18: Table 5: Development costs of golf
Page 19 and 20: The average house price in the poli
Page 21 and 22: Tourism Koper is located in the reg
Page 23 and 24: Results Taking the figures for the
Page 25 and 26: Navrud, S. and R. Ready(2002) Valui
Page 27 and 28: The Mosslands visioning project The
Page 29: Figure 2: Land Use Plan with Maximu
Page 33 and 34: ⎛ Pop ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ T1 GDPT 1 V =
Page 35 and 36: Table 10: Valuation data for wetlan
Page 37 and 38: Table 11:Values for Hydrological Zo
Page 39 and 40: Agricultural zone Land use within t
Page 41 and 42: Table 12: Current Data on Agricultu
Page 43 and 44: Table 14: Gross margin (in 2008£)
Page 45 and 46: details are exhibited in Page 45
Page 47 and 48: Table 16: Profitability of horticul
Page 49 and 50: Public enjoyment and access zone Th
Page 51 and 52: Results and discussion Table 19 exh
Page 53 and 54: Figure 3:Net Benefits of Maximum We
Page 55 and 56: The use of the combining of socioec
Page 57 and 58: Economics for the Environment Consu
Page 59 and 60: Cost Benefit Analysis of Transport
Page 61 and 62: In relation with differing sustaina
Page 63 and 64: The MOLAND Model The MOLAND Model i
Page 65 and 66: Figure 1. Growth Paths and Spatial
Page 67 and 68: Scenarios for the GDA Within the fr
Page 69 and 70: Figure 3. Transport 21 Network Used
Page 71 and 72: towns (see Figure 6). In other word
Page 73 and 74: operation costs, travel time, accid
Page 75 and 76: Capital Cost Estimation of Rapid Ra
Page 77 and 78: Valuation of Traffic Safety It can
Page 79 and 80: Railway costs can be analysed as fi
Page 81 and 82:
Table 6. Average Earnings-Wage, Sal
Page 83 and 84:
value and discounted at a standard
Page 86 and 87:
Table 9. Summary of Sensitivity Tes
Page 88 and 89:
Source: Lavalle et.al. (2009) The c
Page 90 and 91:
DKM Ltd. Economic Consultants. (199
Page 92 and 93:
Orsini, F. and Williams, B. (2009)
Page 94 and 95:
Applying Economic Valuation to Peri
Page 96 and 97:
Table 1: Marginal damage costs of C
Page 98 and 99:
Results GDP For the Leipzig-Halle c
Page 100 and 101:
Open space Open space in Leipzig wa
Page 102 and 103:
Discussion In this report, we have
Page 104:
Annex 1: Calculation of Amenity Los
show all

Cost benefit analysis of peri-urban land use policy - Plurel

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?