IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aareaj/260073.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the trade-offs of increased mining activity in the Surat Basin, Queensland: preferences of Brisbane residents using nonmarket valuation techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Windle, Jill
  • Rolfe, John

Abstract

The mining boom in Australia since 2003 has produced significant economic benefits for regional, State and National economies, creating new job opportunities and revenue flows. Despite the contribution of the resources sector to economic growth, questions are frequently raised about the concomitant negative social, economic and environmental impacts. The Surat Basin in southern Queensland is a traditional agricultural region with a small but growing coal mining sector and a rapidly developing liquefied natural gas industry (mainly associated with extracting coal seam gas). In this paper, the preferences of residents in Brisbane, the State capital, are explored in relation to the relative importance of social, economic and environmental impacts of the resource boom in the Surat Basin. A choice modelling experiment was conducted to assess the trade-offs Brisbane residents would make (in monetary terms) between the economic benefits and the associated costs of increased mining activity on local communities. The results identify the strength of concerns about community and environmental impacts and can potentially be used to help evaluate the net benefits of resource development.

Suggested Citation

  • Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2014. "Assessing the trade-offs of increased mining activity in the Surat Basin, Queensland: preferences of Brisbane residents using nonmarket valuation techniques," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(1), January.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:aareaj:260073
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.260073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/260073/files/ajar12025.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.260073?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guay C. Lim & Chew Lian Chua & Edda Claus & Sarantis Tsiaplias, 2009. "Review of the Australian Economy 2008–09: Recessions, Retrenchments and Risks," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 42(1), pages 1-11, March.
    2. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    3. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, September.
    4. W. Max Corden, 2012. "Dutch Disease in Australia: Policy Options for a Three-Speed Economy," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 45(3), pages 290-304, September.
    5. Penney, Kate & Melanie, Jane & Stark, Clare & Sheales, Terry, 2012. "Opportunities and challenges facing the Australian resources sector," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(2), pages 1-19.
    6. Gillespie, Rob & Kragt, Marit E., 2012. "Accounting for Nonmarket Impacts in a Benefit-Cost Analysis of Underground Coal Mining in New South Wales, Australia," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 1-29, May.
    7. Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley & Jordan Louviere, 2009. "Modeling preference heterogeneity in stated choice data: an analysis for public goods generated by agriculture," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 307-322, May.
    8. Bennett, Jeffrey W. & van Bueren, Martin & Whitten, Stuart M., 2004. "Estimating society's willingness to pay to maintain viable rural communities," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), pages 1-26.
    9. 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), pages 1-30.
    10. Ivanova, Galina & Rolfe, John, 2011. "Assessing development options in mining communities using stated preference techniques," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 255-264, September.
    11. Catherine Norman, 2009. "Rule of Law and the Resource Curse: Abundance Versus Intensity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 183-207, June.
    12. Hajkowicz, Stefan A. & Heyenga, Sonja & Moffat, Kieren, 2011. "The relationship between mining and socio-economic well being in Australia's regions," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 30-38, March.
    13. John Rolfe & Daniel Gregg & Galina Ivanova & Reuben Lawrence & David Rynne, 2011. "The Economic Contribution of the Resources Sector by Regional Areas in Queensland," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 15-36, March.
    14. Solomon, Fiona & Katz, Evie & Lovel, Roy, 2008. "Social dimensions of mining: Research, policy and practice challenges for the minerals industry in Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 142-149, September.
    15. Phil Garton, 2008. "The resources boom and the two-speed economy," Economic Roundup, The Treasury, Australian Government, issue 3, pages 17-29, October.
    16. Burton, Michael & Jasmine Zahedi, Shegufa & White, Ben, 2012. "Public preferences for timeliness and quality of mine site rehabilitation. The case of bauxite mining in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 1-9.
    17. Kate Penney & Jane Melanie & Clare Stark & Terry Sheales, 2012. "Opportunities and challenges facing the Australian resources sector," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 56(2), pages 152-170, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sandorf, Erlend Dancke & Crastes dit Sourd, Romain & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre, 2018. "The effect of attribute-alternative matrix displays on preferences and processing strategies," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 113-132.
    2. Lechner, Alex Mark & Kassulke, Owen & Unger, Corinne, 2016. "Spatial assessment of open cut coal mining progressive rehabilitation to support the monitoring of rehabilitation liabilities," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 234-243.

    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. 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 Macquarie, Australia 165888, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Rolfe, John, 2013. "Predicting the economic and demographic impacts of long distance commuting in the resources sector: A Surat basin case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 723-732.
    3. Liang Wang & Kwame Awuah-Offei & Sisi Que & Wei Yang, 2016. "Eliciting Drivers of Community Perceptions of Mining Projects through Effective Community Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-17, July.
    4. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    5. Valente José Matlaba & Maria Cristina Maneschy & Jorge Filipe dos Santos & José Aroudo Mota, 2019. "Socioeconomic dynamics of a mining town in Amazon: a case study from Canaã dos Carajás, Brazil," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 32(1), pages 75-90, April.
    6. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    7. Zein Kallas & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Manuel Arriaza, 2007. "Are citizens willing to pay for agricultural multifunctionality?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 36(3), pages 405-419, May.
    8. Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Nick Hanley & Sergio Colombo, 2011. "Incorrectly accounting for taste heterogeneity in choice experiments: Does it really matter for welfare measurement?," CRE Working Papers (Documents de treball del CRE) 2011/1, Centre de Recerca Econòmica (UIB ·"Sa Nostra").
    9. Fleming, David A. & Measham, Thomas G., 2015. "Local economic impacts of an unconventional energy boom: the coal seam gas industry in Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(1), January.
    10. Weller, Priska & Elsasser, Peter, 2018. "Preferences for forest structural attributes in Germany – Evidence from a choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-9.
    11. Rai, Rajesh Kumar & Scarborough, Helen, 2012. "Estimating the public benefits of mitigating damages caused by invasive plant species in a subsistence economy," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124421, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. Sarfo, Yaw & Musshoff, Oliver & Weber, Ron & Danne, Michael, 2021. "Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Digital Credit: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Madagascar," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315029, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Rose, John M. & Johnston, Robert J. & Bark, Rosalind H. & Pritchard, Jodie, 2019. "Managing groundwater in a mining region: an opportunity to compare best-worst and referendum data," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), October.
    14. Maples, Joshua G. & Lusk, Jayson L. & Peel, Derrell S., 2018. "Unintended consequences of the quest for increased efficiency in beef cattle: When bigger isn’t better," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 65-73.
    15. Howard, Gregory & Roe, Brian E., 2013. "Stripping Because You Want to Versus Stripping Because the Money is Good: A Latent Class Analysis of Farmer Preferences Regarding Filter Strip Programs," 2013 Annual Meeting, August 4-6, 2013, Washington, D.C. 149821, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    16. Kragt, Marit Ellen, 2013. "Comparing models of unobserved heterogeneity in environmental choice experiments," Working Papers 144447, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    17. Marit E Kragt & Jeff Bennett, 2009. "Using Choice Experiments to value River and Estuary Health in Tasmania with Individual Preference Heterogeneity," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0916, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University, revised Sep 2009.
    18. repec:ags:aare16:235308 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Marit Kragt & Jeffrey Bennett, 2012. "Attribute Framing in Choice Experiments: How Do Attribute Level Descriptions Affect Value Estimates?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 43-59, January.
    20. Somaye Narrei & Majid Ataee-pour, 2021. "Assessment of personal preferences concerning the social impacts of mining with choice experiment method," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(1), pages 39-49, April.
    21. Birol, Ekin & Asare-Marfo, Dorene & Karandikar,Bhushana & Roy, Devesh, 2011. "A latent class approach to investigating farmer demand for biofortified staple food crops in developing countries: The case of high-iron pearl millet in Maharashtra, India," HarvestPlus working papers 7, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

    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:ags:aareaj:260073. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.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.