Cost-benefit Analysis and Its Application to River Water Quality and Infrastructure Improvements

Cost-benefit Analysis and Its Application to River Water Quality and Infrastructure Improvements

F.J. Hitzhusen 

Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics, The Ohio State University, USA

Page: 
147-160
|
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP-V3-N2-147-160
Received: 
N/A
| |
Accepted: 
N/A
| | Citation

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract: 

This paper draws on the author’s 30+ years of experience in teaching and applying cost-benefit analysis (CBA) methods and leading a large, 9-year research program at The Ohio State University to develop estimates of the benefits and costs of various water quality, infrastructure, scenic and historic river corridor impacts and improvements as a guide to investment planning and public policy on river and related watershed restoration. The first section of the paper summarizes the major pros, cons, definitions and tenets of CBA, and develops a set of responses to the major criticisms of CBA. The second section of the paper reports methods, analysis and results from one of the river corridor case studies. The OSU research is focused on evaluation of eight case rivers in the Great Lakes region of the United States and involves a team of environmental economists, an ecological engineer and an aquatic biologist. When the various corridor benefits or values broadly conceived are expressed in a common economic metric and compared to their full economic costs, one has a basis for assessing river corridors in an investment planning, economic development, welfare economic and public policy context.

Keywords: 

benefit capture, benefit transfer, contingent valuation, cost-benefit analysis, hedonic pricing, infrastructure improvements, investment planning, water quality, public policy

  References

[1] Randall, A., Why benefi ts and costs matter. Choices, 2nd Quarter, pp. 38–41, 1999.

[2] Hicks, N., Is there a tradeoff between growth and basic needs? Finance and Development, 17(2), pp. 17–20, 1980.

[3] Hitzhusen, F.J., Benefi t cost analysis reader, AEDE 631, The Ohio State University: Columbus, OH, USA, 2006.

[4] Vaughn, G.F., Siegfried Von Ciriacy Wantrup and his safe minimum standard of conservation. Choices, 4th Quarter, pp. 30–33, 1997.

[5] Prest, A. & Turney, R., Cost-benefi t analysis: a survey. Economic Journal, 75(300), pp. 683–735, 1965.

[6] Burkhead, J. & Jerry, M., Public Expenditure, Aldine, Atherton, Inc.: Chicago, 1971.

[7] Dasgupta, A.K. & Pearce, D.W., Cost-Benefi t Analysis, Theory and Practice, The MacMillan Press Ltd.: London, 1978.

[8] Hitzhusen, F.J., Cost-benefi t analysis: cornerstone or Achilles’ heel of social science? ESO 1230, AERS Department, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 1984.

[9] Gittinger, J.P., Economic Analysis of Agricultural Projects, John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, 1982.

[10] Hitzhusen, F.J. (ed.), Economic Valuation of River Systems, Edward Elgar Publishing: Northampton, MA, 2007.

[11] Hanley, N. & Spash, C.L., Cost Benefi t Analysis and the Environment, Edward Elgar Publishing: Brookfi eld, VT, 1995.

[12] Ayalasomayajula, R., Economic Valuation of River Corridor Attributes: A Hedonic and NIE Approach, Unpublished Master’s Thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA, 2000.

[13] Jud, D.G., Effects of zoning on single-family residential property values: Charlotte, North Carolina. Land Economics, 56(2), pp. 142–153, 1980.

[14] Hite, D., Welfare Measures for an Environmental Disamenity in the Residential Real Estate Market, Unpublished PhD Dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA, 1995.

[15] Epp, D.J. & Al-Ani, K.S., The effect of water quality on rural nonfarm residential property values. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61(3), pp. 529–534, 1979.

[16] Mitchell, R.C. & Carson, R.T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method, Resources for the Future: Washington, DC, 1989.

[17] Boyle, K.J. & Bergstrom, J.C., Benefi t transfer studies: myths, pragmatism and idealism. Water Resources Research, 28, pp. 657–663, 1992.

[18] Walsh, R.G., Johnson, D.M. & McKean, J.R., Benefi t transfer of outdoor recreation demand studies, 1968–88. Water Resources Research, 28, pp. 707–713, 1992.

[19] Pearce, D.W. & Turner, R.K., Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment, Harvester Wheatsheaf: Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, UK, 1990.

[20] French, D.D. & Hitzhusen, F.J., Status of benefi ts transfer in the United States and Canada: a comment. Canadian Journal of Agriculture and Economics, 49(2), pp. 259–261, 2001.

[21] Hitzhusen, F.J., Lowder, S. & Ayalasomayajula, R., Muskingum River economic valuation, AED Economics Department, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, Summer 2000.

[22] Hitzhusen, F.J., Ayalasomayajula, R. & Lowder, S., Some conceptual clarifi cation and empirical evidence on benefi t capture: a river corridor case, AEDE Working Paper, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, September 2002.