Public preferences for timeliness and quality of mine site rehabilitation. The case of bauxite mining in Western Australia
AbstractGovernment departments that regulate environmental management for mining have a range of choices about the timing and quality of rehabilitation. Economic theory suggests that the cost incurred by firms should relate to the social cost of the environmental damage, however, there has been little work done on non-market values for mine rehabilitation. This study uses choice modelling to assess these issues for bauxite mining in state owned native forest in south-west Australia. The results show that the public place a relatively high value on the re-creation of vertebrate habitat and would prefer in situ mine rehabilitation over environmental offsets. Alcoa's current rehabilitation practices appear to be supported by the preferences revealed in this study.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Resources Policy.
Volume (Year): 37 (2012)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467
Choice modelling; Bauxite; Mine rehabilitation; Environmental policy; Non-market valuation;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
- Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Carson, Richard T & Groves, Theodore, 2010.
"Incentive and Information Properties of Preference Questions,"
University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series
qt88d8644g, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
- Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.
- Stephen K. Swallow & Michael P. McGonagle, 2006. "Public Funding of Environmental Amenities: Contingent Choices Using New Taxes or Existing Revenues for Coastal Land Conservation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 56-67.
- Paulo Nunes & Chiara Travisi, 2009. "Comparing Tax and Tax Reallocation Payments in Financing Rail Noise Abatement Programmes: Results from a Stated Choice Valuation Study in Italy," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(4), pages 503-517, August.
- John M. Rose & Riccardo Scarpa, 2007.
"Designs Efficiency for Non-market Valuation with Choice Modelling: How to Measure It, What to Report and Why,"
Working Papers in Economics
07/21, University of Waikato, Department of Economics.
- Scarpa, Riccardo & Rose, John M., 2008. "Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(3), September.
- John Bergstrom & Kevin Boyle & Mitsuyasu Yabe, 2004. "Trading Taxes vs. Paying Taxes to Value and Finance Public Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(4), pages 533-549, August.
- Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1991. "Three Methods for Calculating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities: A Comparison," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 199-209.
- Alan Randall & Orlen Grunewald & Sue Johnson & Richard Ausness & Angelos Pagoulatos, 1978. "Reclaiming Coal Surface Mines in Central Appalachia: A Case Study of the Benefits and Costs," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(4), pages 472-489.
- Allen, Christopher & Gooday, Peter, 1998. "Incorporating biological regeneration into economic assessments of mining in forest regions," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(1), March.
- Mark Morrison & Darla Hatton MacDonald, 2011. "A comparison of compensating surplus and budget reallocation with opportunity costs specified," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(30), pages 4677-4688.
- Ben White & Graeme J. Doole & David J. Pannell & Veronique Florec, 2012. "Optimal environmental policy design for mine rehabilitation and pollution with a risk of non‐compliance owing to firm insolvency," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(2), pages 280-301, 04.
- Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2014. "Valuation framing and attribute scope variation in a choice experiment to asses the impacts of changing land use from agriculture to mining," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Maquarie, Australia 165888, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.