IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Evaluating Nature Conservation: The Case of Meadow Birds in The Netherlands

  • Strijker, Dirk
  • Sijtsma, F.J.
  • Bettels, K.
Registered author(s):

    Healthy growth towards sustainability requires evaluation methods that incorporate ecological and economic effects. Evaluating ecological effects in monetary terms would permit the use of Cost-Benefit Analysis. Major methodological difficulties hamper use of this approach. In this paper an alternative evaluation method is used. The method consists of a Multicriteria Analysis (MCA), in which the different aspects of nature conservation projects can be evaluated in their own terms. The net result of the monetarised effects is part of a CBA that is integrated as one of the criteria. This framework is applied to a major, publicly financed nature conservation project in the Netherlands. The project is based on a fixed budget and a fixed area in which nature can be produced using different methods. In this project, apart from analysing the net results, besides the net results of a CBA, only one other criterion is analysed: the production of nature. In this way, the concept is reduced to a straightforward analysis of the performance (cost-effectiveness) of the different methods used to produce natural environment.

    If 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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by Greek Association of Agricultural Economists in its journal Agricultural Economics Review.

    Volume (Year): 01 (2000)
    Issue (Month): 2 (August)

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:ags:aergaa:26457
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    as in new window
    1. Nick Hanley & Clive Spash & Lorna Walker, 1995. "Problems in valuing the benefits of biodiversity protection," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(3), pages 249-272, April.
    2. Toman, Michael, 1998. "Sustainable Decisionmaking: The State of the Art from an Economics Perspective," Discussion Papers dp-98-39, Resources For the Future.
    3. Christie, Mike & Hanley, Nick & Warren, John & Murphy, Kevin & Wright, Robert & Hyde, Tony, 2006. "Valuing the diversity of biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 304-317, June.
    4. Toman, Michael, 1998. "SPECIAL SECTION: FORUM ON VALUATION OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES: Why not to calculate the value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 57-60, April.
    5. Nick Hanley, 1992. "Are there environmental limits to cost benefit analysis?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 33-59, January.
    6. Van Pelt, M. & Kuyvenhoven, A. & Nijkamp, P., 1990. "Project Appraisal And Substainability: The Applicability Of Cost-Benefit And Multi-Criteria Analysis," Mansholt Working Papers 1990-5, Wageningen University, Mansholt Graduate School of Social Sciences.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aergaa:26457. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.