the economic valuation of the proposed ... - Nature Uganda

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 1: Map of Mabira CFR showing the Proposed sections for Degazettement B B Namulaba F/stn B Maligita F/stn Maligito Cpt 183 404.813Ha Wakisi Liga Cpt 171 cpt 182 613.464Ha Kyabana North Senda North cpt 181 Cpt 172 341.291Ha 320.394Ha Naluvule F/stn 262.390Ha Kyabana F/Stn Kyabana Central Cpt 180 447.251Ha Kyabana South Cpt 179 403.050Ha Malunge Cpt 184 579.919Ha 4 The Economic Valuation of the Proposed Degazettement of Mabira CFR | 2011 Senda cpt 173 499.419Ha Nagojje F/tsn Luwala Cpt 174 516.500Ha Kasota Cpt 185 694.248Ha Luwala South Cpt 175 357.846Ha Sango East Cpt 178 653.244Ha Sesibwa Cpt 234 563 Ha Buwoola F/Stn B Wanande F/stn Najjembe F/stn B Nandagi Cpt 235 442Ha Scale 1:140,000M 0 2, 050 4,100 8,200 Meters Lwankima F/stn Outlines of blocks Forest Station Blocks proposed for degazettement
1.3 SCOPE OF THE ASSIGNMENT The overall purpose of the study was to compare the economic merits of degazetting a section of Mabira CFR for sugar cane growing to those of maintaining it. This comparative study required the computation of the respective costs and benefits of the two alternative land uses with a view to determining the most preferable option. The benefits decision framework is summarised as follows: T T If∑ Bs∂t � ∑ Bc∂t , T T grow sugarcane; and if t = oB ∂t � t = oB ∂t , conserve ∑ t = o c Where: ∑ t = o s ∑B s ∂t – sum of present value of net benefit of sugarcane growing ∑B c ∂t – sum of present value of net benefit of conservation The conceptual scope of the study limited it to the most direct costs and benefits of land use change to sugar cane farming or the converse. Hence the primary analysis in this study dealt with sugar cane farming vis a vis forest conservation and applied farm gate or forest gate prices to all transactions. The estimates of all costs and benefits therefore related to sugar cane production and excluded the associated production of sugar, sugar by-products and the respective inputs. The study assessed a number of questions on the two components of the study viz? the sugar estate and the forest estate. The key questions on the first component included: » What is the value of sugarcane estate of SCOUL? » Is it possible for SCOUL (and the sugar industry as a whole) to achieve increased output through options, such as increasing productivity, and increasing the number of out-growers, other than using Mabira CFR? » Are the other sugar companies in Uganda, other than SCOUL, able to meet the demand sought without having to convert part of Mabira CFR into permanent agriculture? » Are there alternative pieces of land, to Mabira CFR, that could be used and the implications of using these alternative lands for SCOUL? The key questions on the second component (the forest estate) included: » What annual benefit flows are associated with the Central Forest Reserve; » What are the potential consequences of the proposed ecosystem degradation; » How will the annual flow of benefits change following the proposed degazettement? » What is the opportunity cost of maintaining the forest estate? The Economic Valuation of the Proposed Degazettement of Mabira CFR | 2011 5
Page 1: THE ECONOMIC VALUATION OF THE PROPO
Page 4 and 5: THE ECONOMIC VALUATION OF THE PROPO
Page 6 and 7: ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS SCOUL Su
Page 8 and 9: for in the National Forestry and Tr
Page 10 and 11: 5.0. THE CONSERVATION OPTION 31 5.1
Page 12 and 13: List of Boxes Box 1: Out-growers pr
Page 14 and 15: The pro-conservation groups who are
Page 18 and 19: The Economic Valuation of the Propo
Page 20 and 21: which include schist’s, phyllites
Page 22 and 23: Wattled Starling(Creatophora cinere
Page 24 and 25: Restricted-range butterflies record
Page 26 and 27: The demand for sugar has also been
Page 28 and 29: Table 7: Projected sugarcane produc
Page 32 and 33: 4.2. THE VALUE OF THE SUGAR SECTOR
Page 34 and 35: 4.3. COST OF PRODUCTION AND THE DET
Page 36 and 37: additional sugarcane they need from
Page 38 and 39: Table 11: Estimate sugar estate lan
Page 40 and 41: ) Opportunity of SCOUL leasing land
Page 42 and 43: then the government goes ahead and
Page 44 and 45: expected from the environment (Lett
Page 46 and 47: Table 15: Example of links between
Page 48 and 49: PVB = PVC = Where: 36 ∑ = t n t =
Page 50 and 51: Table 16: Value of Growing Stock Cl
Page 52 and 53: ased on household livelihoods. Bush
Page 54 and 55: 12,078 per annum by the number of h
Page 56 and 57: part of the area proposed for degaz
Page 60 and 61: to mature. Subsequently, conservati
Page 62 and 63: REFERENCES Adger, N., Brown, K., Ca
Page 64 and 65: Multinational enterprises in the pl
Page 66 and 67:
Primates of Africa. The IUCN Red Da
Page 68 and 69:
Edinburgh University, Scotland. Sim
Page 70 and 71:
ANNEXES ANNEX 1 BIODIVERSITY DATA T
Page 72 and 73:
Family Species Family Species Rutac
Page 74 and 75:
Family Species Family Species Morac
Page 76 and 77:
Table A2: Species list of birds rec
Page 78 and 79:
Britton No. Species Common Name 467
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Table A3: Species list of Mammals (
Page 86 and 87:
Table A4: Amphibians of Mabira Fore
Page 88 and 89:
Tirumala petiverana African Blue Ti
Page 90 and 91:
ANNEX 2 INVENTORY DATA Table III Ma
Page 92 and 93:
Fig AI Icut id nonsimu sperurbitiac
Page 96:
About NatureUganda NatureUganda, th
show all

the economic valuation of the proposed ... - Nature Uganda

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

Delete template?

Save as template?