IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rapaxx/v37y2015i3p207-215.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Monetising social and environmental costs in infrastructure evaluation: the case of Hong Kong's third international airport runway

Author

Listed:
  • Rikkie L. K. Yeung
  • Anthony H. F. Li
  • Samuel K. Hung

Abstract

Traditionally, governments have been inclined to make economic progress at the expense of social and environmental well-being. Since the 1980s, there have been calls for governments to pursue development in a sustainable way by considering the social and environmental impacts of any infrastructure projects in addition to their concern about economic benefits. In 2010, the construction of the third runway at the Hong Kong International Airport was proposed at an infrastructure cost unprecedented in Hong Kong's history. This research note uses this development as a case to demonstrate how social and environmental impacts can be monetised by the innovative application of social return on investment (SROI) as weighed against economic benefits in the same currency. It identifies climate change, aviation noise, and damage to the habitat of Chinese white dolphins as impacts from the proposed runway. These impacts are converted into monetary costs under the SROI approach with particular attention to the use of proxies, stakeholder engagement, and the development of various scenarios. Limitations of the analysis and future research directions are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Rikkie L. K. Yeung & Anthony H. F. Li & Samuel K. Hung, 2015. "Monetising social and environmental costs in infrastructure evaluation: the case of Hong Kong's third international airport runway," Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(3), pages 207-215, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rapaxx:v:37:y:2015:i:3:p:207-215
    DOI: 10.1080/23276665.2015.1075530
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/23276665.2015.1075530
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/23276665.2015.1075530?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hadker, Nandini & Sharma, Sudhir & David, Ashish & Muraleedharan, T. R., 1997. "Willingness-to-pay for Borivli National Park: evidence from a Contingent Valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 105-122, May.
    2. Whittington, Dale & Lauria, Donald T. & Mu, Xinming, 1991. "A study of water vending and willingness to pay for water in Onitsha, Nigeria," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 179-198.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ojeda, Monica Ilija & Mayer, Alex S. & Solomon, Barry D., 2008. "Economic valuation of environmental services sustained by water flows in the Yaqui River Delta," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 155-166, March.
    2. Basu, Amita & Srinivasan, Narayanan, 2021. "A Modified Contingent Valuation Method Shrinks Gain-Loss Asymmetry," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    3. Verbic, Miroslav & Slabe-Erker, Renata, 2009. "An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1316-1328, March.
    4. Kevin Boyle & Sapna Kaul & Ali Hashemi & Xiaoshu Li, 2015. "Applicability of benefit transfers for evaluation of homeland security counterterrorism measures," Chapters, in: Carol Mansfield & V. K. Smith (ed.), Benefit–Cost Analyses for Security Policies, chapter 10, pages 225-253, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Van Houtven, George L. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Yang, Jui-Chen, 2017. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 126-135.
    6. Simon Meunier & Dale T. Manning & Loic Queval & Judith A. Cherni & Philippe Dessante & Daniel Zimmerle, 2019. "Determinants of the marginal willingness to pay for improved domestic water and irrigation in partially electrified Rwandan villages," Post-Print hal-02179229, HAL.
    7. Kamuanga, Mulumba & Swallow, Brent M. & Sigue, Hamade & Bauer, Burkhard, 2001. "Evaluating contingent and actual contributions to a local public good: Tsetse control in the Yale agro-pastoral zone, Burkina Faso," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 115-130, October.
    8. John P. Hoehn & Douglas J. Krieger, 2000. "An Economic Analysis of Water and Wastewater Investments in Cairo, Egypt," Evaluation Review, , vol. 24(6), pages 579-608, December.
    9. Anand Asthana, 1997. "Where the Water is Free but the Buckets are Empty: Demand Analysis of Drinking Water in Rural India," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 137-149, April.
    10. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    11. Amirnejad, Hamid & Khalilian, Sadegh & Assareh, Mohammad H. & Ahmadian, Majid, 2006. "Estimating the existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 665-675, July.
    12. R. M. Wasantha Rathnayake, "undated". "Estimating Demand for Turtle Conservation at the Rekawa Sanctuary in Sri Lanka," Working papers 92, The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics.
    13. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2002. "Willingness to Pay for Conservation of the Asian Elephant in Sri Lanka: A Contingent Valuation Study," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48738, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    14. Gupta, Monika, 2016. "Willingness to pay for carbon tax: A study of Indian road passenger transport," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 46-54.
    15. Georg Meran & Markus Siehlow & Christian von Hirschhausen, 2021. "Pipes, Taps, and Vendors: An Integrated Water Management Approach," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(04), pages 1-29, October.
    16. Teixeira, Lucas de Vasconcelos & Dâmaso, Ligianne Carvalho da Silva & Maluf de Lima, Lilian & Spers, Eduardo Eugênio & Fouto, Nuno Manoel Martins Dias, 2024. "Visual attention and attribute choice for specialty coffee labels," Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural (RESR), Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural, vol. 62(2), January.
    17. Andrej Srakar & Marilena Vecco, 2017. "Ex-ante versus ex-post: comparison of the effects of the European Capital of Culture Maribor 2012 on tourism and employment," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 41(2), pages 197-214, May.
    18. Baral, Nabin & Stern, Marc J. & Bhattarai, Ranju, 2008. "Contingent valuation of ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: Implications for sustainable park finance and local development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 218-227, June.
    19. Ahuja, Vinod & McConnell, Kenneth E. & Umali-Deininger, Dina & de Haan, Cornelis, 2003. "Are the Poor Willing to Pay for Livestock Services? Evidence from Rural India," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 58(1), March.
    20. Artem Korzhenevych & Charles Kofi Owusu, 2021. "Renewable Minigrid Electrification in Off-Grid Rural Ghana: Exploring Households Willingness to Pay," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rapaxx:v:37:y:2015:i:3:p:207-215. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAPA20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.