IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v152y2018icp282-295.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Carolus, Johannes Friedrich
  • Hanley, Nick
  • Olsen, Søren Bøye
  • Pedersen, Søren Marcus

Abstract

Cost-Benefit Analysis is a method to assess the effects of policies and projects on social welfare. CBAs are usually applied in a top-down approach, in the sense that a decision-making body first decides on which policies or projects are to be considered, and then applies a set of uniform criteria to identifying and valuing relevant cost and benefit flows. This paper investigates the possible advantages, prerequisites and limitations of applying CBA in what may be considered an alternative, “bottom-up” manner. Instead of starting out with a pre-defined policy option, the suggested approach begins with the underlying environmental problem, and then assesses costs and benefits of strategies and solutions as identified by local and directly affected stakeholders. For empirical case studies concerning two river catchments in Sweden and Latvia, the bottom-up CBA approach utilises local knowledge, assesses plans which are not only developed for local conditions but are also likely to be more acceptable to local society, and sheds additional light on possible distributional effects. By not only benefitting from, but also supporting participatory environmental planning, bottom-up CBA is in line with the growing trend of embedding stakeholder participation within environmental policy and decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:152:y:2018:i:c:p:282-295
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.06.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800918303598
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.06.009?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nick Johnstone & Ysé Serret, 2006. "Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy: Introduction," Chapters, in: Ysé Serret & Nick Johnstone (ed.), The Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    3. Ekin Birol & Phoebe Koundouri & Yiannis Kountouris, 2008. "Using the Choice Experiment Method to Inform River Management in Poland: Flood Risk Reduction vs. Habitat Conservation in the Upper Silesia Region," DEOS Working Papers 0802, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    4. Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Scasný, Milan, 2010. "Study on benefit transfer in an international setting. How to improve welfare estimates in the case of the countries' income heterogeneity?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2409-2416, October.
    5. Thomas C Beierle & David M Konisky, 2001. "What are we Gaining from Stakeholder Involvement? Observations from Environmental Planning in the Great Lakes," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(4), pages 515-527, August.
    6. Human, Brett A. & Davies, Amanda, 2010. "Stakeholder consultation during the planning phase of scientific programs," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 645-654, May.
    7. Neal Hockley, 2014. "Cost–Benefit Analysis: A Decision-Support Tool or a Venue for Contesting Ecosystem Knowledge?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 283-300, April.
    8. Wright, Stuart A.L. & Fritsch, Oliver, 2011. "Operationalising active involvement in the EU Water Framework Directive: Why, when and how?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2268-2274.
    9. Atkinson, Giles & Groom, Ben & Hanley, Nicholas & Mourato, Susana, 2018. "Environmental Valuation and Benefit-Cost Analysis in U.K. Policy," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 97-119, April.
    10. Kaul, Sapna & Boyle, Kevin J. & Kuminoff, Nicolai V. & Parmeter, Christopher F. & Pope, Jaren C., 2013. "What can we learn from benefit transfer errors? Evidence from 20 years of research on convergent validity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 90-104.
    11. Ysé Serret & Nick Johnstone, 2006. "Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy: Conclusions and Policy Implications," Chapters, in: Ysé Serret & Nick Johnstone (ed.), The Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Dick, Jan & Turkelboom, Francis & Woods, Helen & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Bezák, Peter & Mederly, Peter & Leone, Michael & Verheyden, Wim & Kelemen, Eszter & H, 2018. "Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 552-565.
    13. Ekin Birol & Phoebe Koundouri (ed.), 2008. "Choice Experiments Informing Environmental Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4102.
    14. Grizzetti, B. & Liquete, C. & Antunes, P. & Carvalho, L. & Geamănă, N. & Giucă, R. & Leone, M. & McConnell, S. & Preda, E. & Santos, R. & Turkelboom, F. & Vădineanu, A. & Woods, H., 2016. "Ecosystem services for water policy: Insights across Europe," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 179-190.
    15. Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Liebe, Ulf & Hartje, Volkmar, 2009. "Benefits of biodiversity enhancement of nature-oriented silviculture: Evidence from two choice experiments in Germany," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 37-58, January.
    16. Ek, Kristina & Persson, Lars, 2016. "Priorities and preferences in the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive - A case study of the river Alsterån," CERE Working Papers 2016:18, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    17. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Ahtiainen, Heini & Artell, Janne & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Choosing a Functional Form for an International Benefit Transfer: Evidence from a Nine-country Valuation Experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 104-113.
    18. Hall, N. & Ashworth, P. & Devine-Wright, P., 2013. "Societal acceptance of wind farms: Analysis of four common themes across Australian case studies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 200-208.
    19. Queiroz, Luciana de Souza & Rossi, Sergio & Calvet-Mir, Laura & Ruiz-Mallén, Isabel & García-Betorz, Sara & Salvà -Prat, Júlia & Meireles, Antônio Jeovah de Andrade, 2017. "Neglected ecosystem services: Highlighting the socio-cultural perception of mangroves in decision-making processes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 137-145.
    20. Bertram, Christine & Dworak, Thomas & Görlitz, Stefan & Interwies, Eduard & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2014. "Cost-benefit analysis in the context of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive: The case of Germany," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 307-312.
    21. Maes, Joachim & Liquete, Camino & Teller, Anne & Erhard, Markus & Paracchini, Maria Luisa & Barredo, José I. & Grizzetti, Bruna & Cardoso, Ana & Somma, Francesca & Petersen, Jan-Erik & Meiner, Andrus, 2016. "An indicator framework for assessing ecosystem services in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 14-23.
    22. H. Spencer Banzhaf, 2009. "Objective or Multi-Objective? Two Historically Competing Visions for Benefit-Cost Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 85(1), pages 3-23.
    23. Sunstein, Cass R, 2000. "Cognition and Cost-Benefit Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 1059-1103, June.
    24. Sabatier, Paul A., 1986. "Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Implementation Research: a Critical Analysis and Suggested Synthesis," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 21-48, January.
    25. Klauer, Bernd & Sigel, Katja & Schiller, Johannes, 2016. "Disproportionate costs in the EU Water Framework Directive—How to justify less stringent environmental objectives," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 10-17.
    26. Posner, Stephen & Getz, Christy & Ricketts, Taylor, 2016. "Evaluating the impact of ecosystem service assessments on decision-makers," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 30-37.
    27. repec:reg:rpubli:98 is not listed on IDEAS
    28. Robert W. Hahn & Paul C. Tetlock, 2008. "Has Economic Analysis Improved Regulatory Decisions?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(1), pages 67-84, Winter.
    29. Turner, R. Kerry & Georgiou, Stavros & Gren, Ing-Marie & Wulff, Fredric & Barrett, Scott & Soderqvist, Tore & Bateman, Ian J. & Folke, Carl & Langaas, Sindre & Zylicz, Tomasz, 1999. "Managing nutrient fluxes and pollution in the Baltic: an interdisciplinary simulation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 333-352, August.
    30. Ysé Serret & Nick Johnstone (ed.), 2006. "The Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3800.
    31. Anil Markandya, 2016. "Cost benefit analysis and the environment: How to best cover impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem services," OECD Environment Working Papers 101, OECD Publishing.
    32. Albert, Christian & Schröter-Schlaack, Christoph & Hansjürgens, Bernd & Dehnhardt, Alexandra & Döring, Ralf & Job, Hubert & Köppel, Johann & Krätzig, Sebastian & Matzdorf, Bettina & Reutter, Mich, 2017. "An economic perspective on land use decisions in agricultural landscapes: Insights from the TEEB Germany Study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 69-78.
    33. David W. Pearce, 2006. "Framework for Assessing the Distribution of Environmental Quality," Chapters, in: Ysé Serret & Nick Johnstone (ed.), The Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    34. Arnout R.H. Fischer & Meike T. A. Wentholt & Gene Rowe & Lynn J. Frewer, 2014. "Expert involvement in policy development: A systematic review of current practice," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(3), pages 332-343.
    35. Grizzetti, B. & Lanzanova, D. & Liquete, C. & Reynaud, A. & Cardoso, A.C., 2016. "Assessing water ecosystem services for water resource management," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 194-203.
    36. Barton, David N., 2002. "The transferability of benefit transfer: contingent valuation of water quality improvements in Costa Rica," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 147-164, August.
    37. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    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. Yingxin Chen & Jing Zhang & Pandu R. Tadikamalla & Xutong Gao, 2019. "The Relationship among Government, Enterprise, and Public in Environmental Governance from the Perspective of Multi-Player Evolutionary Game," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Meginnis, Keila & Hanley, Nick & Mujumbusi, Lazaaro & Lamberton, Poppy H.L., 2020. "Non-monetary numeraires: Varying the payment vehicle in a choice experiment for health interventions in Uganda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    3. Khulan Myagmar & Bayanjargal Darkhijav & Tsolmon Renchin & Dugarjav Chultem, 2023. "Cost–benefit analysis for riverbank erosion control approaches in the steppe area," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(9), pages 9251-9266, September.
    4. Endre Kildal Iversen & Kristine Grimsrud & Henrik Lindhjem & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen, 2019. "Trade-offs between carbon sequestration, landscape aesthetics and biodiversity in a cost-benefit analysis of land use options in Norway," Discussion Papers 915, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    5. Zanchi, Giuliana & Brady, Mark V., 2019. "Evaluating the contribution of forest ecosystem services to societal welfare through linking dynamic ecosystem modelling with economic valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    6. Callesen, Gustav Marquard & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Schou, Jesper Sølver, 2022. "Socioeconomic effects of a bottom-up multifunctional land consolidation project," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    7. Pappalardo, Gioacchino & West, Grant Howard & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Toscano, Sabrina & Pecorino, Biagio, 2022. "The effect of a UNESCO world heritage site designation on willingness to pay to preserve an agri-environmental good: The case of the dry stone walls in Mt. Etna," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    8. Agathe Osinski, 2021. "Towards a Critical Sustainability Science? Participation of Disadvantaged Actors and Power Relations in Transdisciplinary Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, January.
    9. Hong-Zhen Zhang & Ling-Yun He & ZhongXiang Zhang, 2023. "Can Transverse Eco-compensation Mechanism Correct Resource Misallocation in Watershed Environmental Governance? A Cost-benefit Analysis of the Pilot Project of Xin’an River in China," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(4), pages 947-973, April.
    10. Nik Nor Rahimah Nik Ab Rahim & Jamal Othman & Norlida Hanim Mohd Salleh & Norshamliza Chamhuri, 2021. "A Non-Market Valuation Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis for Sanitary Landfill Project Appraisal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Paolo Sospiro & Leonardo Nibbi & Marco Ciro Liscio & Maurizio De Lucia, 2021. "Cost–Benefit Analysis of Pumped Hydroelectricity Storage Investment in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-20, December.

    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. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Alberini, Anna & Bigano, Andrea & Ščasný, Milan & Zvěřinová, Iva, 2018. "Preferences for Energy Efficiency vs. Renewables: What Is the Willingness to Pay to Reduce CO2 Emissions?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 171-185.
    3. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Ahtiainen, Heini & Artell, Janne & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Choosing a Functional Form for an International Benefit Transfer: Evidence from a Nine-country Valuation Experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 104-113.
    4. Meya, Jasper N. & Drupp, Moritz A. & Hanley, Nick, 2021. "Testing structural benefit transfer: The role of income inequality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    5. Ewa Zawojska & Zbigniew Szkop & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Tomasz Żylicz, 2016. "Economic valuation of ecosystem services provided by the Wilanów Park: A benefit transfer study," Working Papers 2016-31, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    6. Marta Aloi & Frederic Tournemaine, 2013. "Inequality, growth, and environmental quality tradeoffs in a model with human capital accumulation," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 46(3), pages 1123-1155, August.
    7. Karen Bell, 2017. "‘Living Well’ as a Path to Social, Ecological and Economic Sustainability," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(4), pages 19-33.
    8. Anzaldua, Gerardo & Gerner, Nadine V. & Lago, Manuel & Abhold, Katrina & Hinzmann, Mandy & Beyer, Sarah & Winking, Caroline & Riegels, Niels & Krogsgaard Jensen, Jørgen & Termes, Montserrat & Amorós, 2018. "Getting into the water with the Ecosystem Services Approach: The DESSIN ESS evaluation framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 318-326.
    9. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.
    10. Alberini, Anna & Bigano, Andrea & Ščasný, Milan & Zvěřinová, Iva, 2016. "Preferences for Energy Efficiency vs. Renewables: How Much Does a Ton of CO2 Emissions Cost?," MITP: Mitigation, Innovation and Transformation Pathways 249352, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    11. Dick, Jan & Turkelboom, Francis & Woods, Helen & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Bezák, Peter & Mederly, Peter & Leone, Michael & Verheyden, Wim & Kelemen, Eszter & H, 2018. "Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 552-565.
    12. Kieslich, Marcus & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2021. "Implementation context and science-policy interfaces: Implications for the economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    13. Schaffrin, André & Reibling, Nadine, 2015. "Household energy and climate mitigation policies: Investigating energy practices in the housing sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1-10.
    14. Éloi Laurent & Jacques Le Cacheux, 2012. "Carbone sans frontières. Quelles solutions fiscales face aux émissions importées ?," Revue de l'OFCE, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(3), pages 83-98.
    15. Boris Cournède & Jean-Marc Fournier & Peter Hoeller, 2018. "Public finance structure and inclusive growth," OECD Economic Policy Papers 25, OECD Publishing.
    16. Baumgärtner, Stefan & Drupp, Moritz A. & Meya, Jasper N. & Munz, Jan M. & Quaas, Martin F., 2016. "Income inequality and willingness to pay for public environmental goods," Economics Working Papers 2016-04, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    17. Houle, David, 2019. "Un climat démocratique? Le rôle de l’opinion publique dans l’adoption de la tarification du carbone dans les provinces canadiennes," SocArXiv atkz8, Center for Open Science.
    18. T. Pacetti & G. Castelli & E. Bresci & E. Caporali, 2020. "Water Values: Participatory Water Ecosystem Services Assessment in the Arno River Basin, Italy," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(14), pages 4527-4544, November.
    19. Zulian, Grazia & Stange, Erik & Woods, Helen & Carvalho, Laurence & Dick, Jan & Andrews, Christopher & Baró, Francesc & Vizcaino, Pilar & Barton, David N. & Nowel, Megan & Rusch, Graciela M. & Autune, 2018. "Practical application of spatial ecosystem service models to aid decision support," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 465-480.
    20. Ürge-Vorsatz, Diana & Kelemen, Agnes & Tirado-Herrero, Sergio & Thomas, Stefan & Thema, Johannes & Mzavanadze, Nora & Hauptstock, Dorothea & Suerkemper, Felix & Teubler, Jens & Gupta, Mukesh & Chatter, 2016. "Measuring multiple impacts of low-carbon energy options in a green economy context," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1409-1426.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Planning; Stakeholder Approach; Participatory Approaches; Ecosystem Services; Water Framework Directive; Catchment Management;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis

    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:eee:ecolec:v:152:y:2018:i:c:p:282-295. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.