You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Table 3.<br />
Costs and Benefits <strong>of</strong> <strong>Coral</strong> Mining Per Square Kilometre in NPV terms<br />
’LOW’ Scenario (thousand US$)<br />
’HIGH’ Scenario (thousand US$)<br />
Costs Benefits Costs Benefits<br />
Direct Costs Direct Benefits Direct Costs Direct Benefits<br />
labour 0 sales <strong>of</strong> lime 302 labour 0 sales <strong>of</strong> lime 302<br />
wood 67 wood 67<br />
side-payments 54 side-payments 54<br />
other costs 13 other costs 13<br />
side-payments 54 side-payments 54<br />
Indirect Costs Indirect Benefits Indirect Costs Indirect Benefits<br />
coastal erosion 12 coastal erosion 260<br />
incr. wood prices 67 incr. wood prices 67<br />
Other functions n/a other functions n/a<br />
Opportunity Costs<br />
Opportunity Costs<br />
foregone tourism 3 foregone tourism 482<br />
net fishery loss 75 net fishery loss 75<br />
labour costs 101 labour costs 101<br />
Total Costs 389 Total Benefits 355 Total Costs 1117 Total Benefits 355<br />
costs miners 235 benefits miners 302 costs miners 235 benefits miners 302<br />
Net Present Value (economic) –33 Net Present Value (economic) –762<br />
Net Present Value (financial) 67 Net Present Value (financial) 67<br />
fuel wood were assumed to be larger than the price paid<br />
by the families, because <strong>of</strong> the unsustainable way in<br />
which the logging was carried out. The economic costs<br />
were assumed to be double the price. Thirdly, the side<br />
payment paid by the mining family for protection is a<br />
100<br />
0<br />
–100<br />
–200<br />
–300<br />
–400<br />
–500<br />
–600<br />
benefits<br />
to miners<br />
sidepayments<br />
foregone<br />
tourism<br />
coastal<br />
erosion<br />
net fishery<br />
loss<br />
incr. wood<br />
prices<br />
Figure 2. Costs and Benefits <strong>of</strong> <strong>Coral</strong> Mining in ’High’<br />
Scenario Case.<br />
true cost to that family. However, from an economic<br />
point <strong>of</strong> view, it is merely a transfer <strong>of</strong> resources from<br />
one group in society (the miner) to another (the protector).<br />
These costs therefore were not incorporated into<br />
the economic analysis.<br />
Combining the net pr<strong>of</strong>its from mining with the<br />
societal costs, table 3 shows that the economic loss <strong>of</strong><br />
mining to society is US$ 33,000 per km 2 for a ‘LOW’<br />
value scenario (costs are US$ 389,000 in NPV terms<br />
and benefits are US$ 355,000). For the ‘HIGH’ scenario,<br />
the contrast between costs and benefits is even<br />
more pronounced: US$ 1,117,000 versus US$ 355,000.<br />
This means that the net present value <strong>of</strong> mining is<br />
US$ –762,000 in the ‘HIGH’ scenario. For both scenarios,<br />
therefore, coral mining constitutes a significant,<br />
long-term loss to society.<br />
COSTS AND BENEFITS OF CORAL MINING<br />
89