IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hae/wpaper/2016-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Disaster Mitigation Infrastructure: The Case of Seawalls in Otsuchi, Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Kimberly Burnett

    (University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa)

  • Christopher Wada

    (University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa)

  • Aiko Endo

    (Research Department, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature)

  • Makoto Taniguchi

    (Research Department, Research Institute for Humanity and Nature)

Abstract

Disaster management problems often pose the same types of challenges that environmental governance problems do; they involve decision-makers at various levels and can transcend political boundaries. We conduct a benefit-cost analysis of a disaster adaptation strategy in Otsuchi, which was undertaken shortly after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami devastated the region. Results indicate that present value net benefits from the planned seawall are positive, even if expected damages are low, provided that the wall is capable of reducing damage by at least 50%. A hybrid method of governance may, however, be effective at increasing the benefit-cost ratio.

Suggested Citation

  • Kimberly Burnett & Christopher Wada & Aiko Endo & Makoto Taniguchi, 2016. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of Disaster Mitigation Infrastructure: The Case of Seawalls in Otsuchi, Japan," Working Papers 2016-5, University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
    • Handle: RePEc:hae:wpaper:2016-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://uhero.hawaii.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/WP_2016-5.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2016
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John, 2009. "The total economic value of threatened, endangered and rare species: An updated meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1535-1548, March.
    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. Wesley R. Brooks & Stephen C. Newbold, 2013. "Ecosystem damages in integrated assessment models of climate change," NCEE Working Paper Series 201302, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Mar 2013.
    2. Abbie A. Rogers & Fiona L. Dempster & Jacob I. Hawkins & Robert J. Johnston & Peter C. Boxall & John Rolfe & Marit E. Kragt & Michael P. Burton & David J. Pannell, 2019. "Valuing non-market economic impacts from natural hazards," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 99(2), pages 1131-1161, November.
    3. Christopher Ambrey & Christopher Fleming, 2014. "Valuing Ecosystem Diversity in South East Queensland: A Life Satisfaction Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 45-65, January.
    4. repec:dav:journl:y:2016:v:7:i:11:p:1272-1289 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Hanley, Nick & Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Hanley-Nickolls, Rose & Redpath, Steve, 2010. "Economic values of species management options in human-wildlife conflicts: Hen Harriers in Scotland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 107-113, November.
    6. Leslie Richardson & Lynne Lewis, 2022. "Getting to know you: individual animals, wildlife webcams, and willingness to pay for brown bear preservation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 104(2), pages 673-692, March.
    7. Richardson, Leslie, 2022. "The Economic Benefits of Wildlife: The Case of Brown Bears in Alaska," Western Economics Forum, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 20(1), May.
    8. Haefele, Michelle A. & Loomis, John B. & Lien, Aaron M. & Dubovsky, James A. & Merideth, Robert W. & Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Huang, Ta-Ken & Mattsson, Brady J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Thogmartin, Wayne E, 2019. "Multi-country Willingness to Pay for Transborder Migratory Species Conservation: A Case Study of Northern Pintails," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 321-331.
    9. Guimarães, Maria Helena & Nunes, Luís Catela & Madureira, Lívia & Santos, José Lima & Boski, Tomasz & Dentinho, Tomaz, 2015. "Measuring birdwatchers preferences: A case for using online networks and mixed-mode surveys," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 102-113.
    10. Wakamatsu, Mihoko & Shin, Kong Joo & Wilson, Clevo & Managi, Shunsuke, 2018. "Exploring a Gap between Australia and Japan in the Economic Valuation of Whale Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 397-407.
    11. Pettinotti, Laetitia & de Ayala, Amaia & Ojea, Elena, 2018. "Benefits From Water Related Ecosystem Services in Africa and Climate Change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 294-305.
    12. Naald, Brian Vander & Cameron, Trudy Ann, 2011. "Willingness to pay for other species' well-being," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1325-1335, May.
    13. Chen, Haojie, 2020. "Complementing conventional environmental impact assessments of tourism with ecosystem service valuation: A case study of the Wulingyuan Scenic Area, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    14. Melstrom, Richard T. & Horan, Richard D., 2012. "Managing Excessive Predation in a Predator-Prey Setting: The Case of Piping Plovers," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 123350, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Jerrod Penn & Wuyang Hu & Hannah J. Penn, 2019. "Support for Solitary Bee Conservation among the Public versus Beekeepers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 101(5), pages 1386-1400, October.
    16. Kaushal, Kevin R. & Navrud, Ståle, 2018. "Global Biodiversity Costs of Climate Change. Improving the damage assessment of species loss in Integrated Assessment Models," Working Paper Series 4-2018, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, School of Economics and Business.
    17. Timothy C. Haab & Matthew G. Interis & Daniel R. Petrolia & John C. Whitehead, 2013. "From Hopeless to Curious? Thoughts on Hausman's 'Dubious to Hopeless' Critique of Contingent Valuation," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 593-612.
    18. Branger, Frédéric & Quirion, Philippe, 2014. "Would border carbon adjustments prevent carbon leakage and heavy industry competitiveness losses? Insights from a meta-analysis of recent economic studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 29-39.
    19. Yao, Richard T. & Scarpa, Riccardo & Harrison, Duncan R. & Burns, Rhys J., 2019. "Does the economic benefit of biodiversity enhancement exceed the cost of conservation in planted forests?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    20. Ressurreição, Adriana & Gibbons, James & Dentinho, Tomaz Ponce & Kaiser, Michel & Santos, Ricardo S. & Edwards-Jones, Gareth, 2011. "Economic valuation of species loss in the open sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 729-739, February.
    21. Whitehead, John C., 2016. "Plausible responsiveness to scope in contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 17-22.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    tsunami; benefit-cost analysis; Otsuchi; seawall; Tohoku; governance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hae:wpaper:2016-5. 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: UHERO (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/heuhius.html .

    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.