IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/slucer/2012_001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost-Benefit Analysis in a Framework of Stakeholder Involvement and Integrated Coastal Zone Modeling

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Active involvement of local stakeholders is currently an increasingly important requirement in European environmental regulations such as the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). The same is true for economic analyses such as cost-benefit analysis (CBA). For example, the Swedish WFD implementation requires i) quantification of cost and benefits of proposed measures and ii) stakeholder involvement. How can these two requirements be integrated in practice? And can such requirements facilitate implementation of projects with a potential net benefit? This paper presents a stepwise CBA procedure with participatory elements and applies it for evaluating nutrient management options for reducing eutrophication effects in the coastal area of Himmerfjärden SW of Stockholm, Sweden. The CBA indicates a positive net benefit for a combination of options involving increased nitrogen removal at a major sewage treatment plant, creation of new wetlands and connecting a proportion of private sewers to sewage treatment plants. The procedure also illustrates how the interdisciplinary development of a coupled ecological-economic simulation model can be used as a tool for facilitating the involvement of stakeholders in a CBA.

Suggested Citation

  • Kinell, Gerda & Söderqvist, Tore & Elmgren, Ragnar & Walve, Jacob & Franzén, Frida, 2012. "Cost-Benefit Analysis in a Framework of Stakeholder Involvement and Integrated Coastal Zone Modeling," CERE Working Papers 2012:1, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:slucer:2012_001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-sekon.slu.se/~gbost/CERE_WP2012-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Östberg, Katarina & Håkansson, Cecilia & Hasselström, Linus & Bostedt, Göran, 2011. "Benefit Transfer for Environmental Improvements in Coastal Areas: General vs. Specific Models," CERE Working Papers 2011:2, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    2. Östberg, Katarina & Hasselström, Linus & Håkansson, Cecilia, 2010. "Non-market valuation of the coastal environment - uniting political aims, ecological and economic knowledge," CERE Working Papers 2010:10, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    3. 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.
    4. Jenkins, G.P., 1998. "Evaluation of Stakeholder Impacts in Cost-Benefit Analysis," Papers 631, Harvard - Institute for International Development.
    5. Grimble, Robin & Wellard, Kate, 1997. "Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 173-193, October.
    6. John A. Downing, 2009. "Valuing Water Quality as a Function of Water Quality Measures," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 91(1), pages 106-123.
    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. Cecilia Håkansson & Katarina Östberg & Göran Bostedt, 2016. "Estimating distributional effects of environmental policy in Swedish coastal environments - a walk along different dimensions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 49-78, March.
    2. Håkansson, Cecilia & Östberg, Katarina & Bostedt, Göran, 2012. "Estimating Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy in Swedish Coastal Environments – A Walk along different Socio-economic Dimensions," CERE Working Papers 2012:18, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
    3. Tobias Holmsgaard Larsen & Thomas Lundhede & Søren Bøye Olsen & Brian H. Jacobsen, 2021. "Incorporating time lags and uncertainty in cost-benefit analysis of water quality improvements – a case study of Limfjorden, Denmark," IFRO Working Paper 2021/01, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.

    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. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    2. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Gillespie, Stuart & van den Bold, Mara, 2015. "Stories of change in nutrition: A tool pool," IFPRI discussion papers 1494, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Patrick Lloyd‐Smith & Ewa Zawojska, 2025. "How stable and predictable are welfare estimates using recreation demand models?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 107(3), pages 846-868, May.
    5. Wolok, Eduart & Yapanto, Lis M & Olii, Abdul Hafidz & Tanipu, Funco, 2021. "Industrial Development in Fisheries Based on Blue Economy of Tominy Bay," OSF Preprints tqnzx, Center for Open Science.
    6. Bicak, Hasan Ali & Jenkins, Glenn P. & Ozdemirag, Ali, 2002. "Water flow risks and stakeholder impacts on the choice of a dam site," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 46(2), pages 1-21.
    7. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    8. Anne Hardy & Leonie J. Pearson, 2016. "Determining Sustainable Tourism in Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    9. Sebastian Gechert & Bianka Mey & Matej Opatrny & Tomas Havranek & T. D. Stanley & Pedro R. D. Bom & Hristos Doucouliagos & Philipp Heimberger & Zuzana Irsova & Heiko J. Rachinger, 2025. "Conventional wisdom, meta‐analysis, and research revision in economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 980-999, July.
    10. Katharina Löhr & Christian Hochmuth & Frieder Graef & Jane Wambura & Stefan Sieber, 2017. "Conflict management programs in trans-disciplinary research projects: the case of a food security project in Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(6), pages 1189-1201, December.
    11. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    12. repec:sae:envval:v:18:y:2009:i:2:p:153-176 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Babatunde O. Abidoye & Joseph A. Herriges & Justin L. Tobias, 2012. "Controlling for Observed and Unobserved Site Characteristics in RUM Models of Recreation Demand," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1070-1093.
    14. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    15. Raphael Hoerler & Fabian Haerri & Merja Hoppe, 2019. "New Solutions in Sustainable Commuting—The Attitudes and Experience of European Stakeholders and Experts in Switzerland," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Saint Ville, Arlette S. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Phillip, Leroy E., 2017. "How do stakeholder interactions influence national food security policy in the Caribbean? The case of Saint Lucia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 53-64.
    17. Edossa, D. C. & Babel, M. S. & Das Gupta, A. & Awulachew, Seleshi Bekele, 2005. "Indigenous systems of conflict resolution in Oromia, Ethiopia," IWMI Books, Reports H038765, International Water Management Institute.
    18. Keeler, Bonnie L. & Wood, Spencer A. & Polasky, Stephen & Kling, Catherine L. & Filstrup, Christopher T. & Downing, John A., 2015. "Recreational demand for clean water: evidence from geotagged photographs by visitors to lakes," ISU General Staff Papers 201501290800001557, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    19. 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.
    20. Cécile Barnaud & Annemarie van Paassen, 2013. "Equity, power games, and legitimacy: dilemmas of participatory natural resource management," Post-Print hal-01386409, HAL.
    21. Oluyomi A. Osobajo & David Moore, 2017. "Who is Who? Identifying the Different Sub-groups of Secondary Stakeholders within a Community: A Case Study of the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria Communities," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(9), pages 188-209, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cost-benefit analysis; stakeholder involvement; integrated modeling; eutrophication;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis

    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:hhs:slucer:2012_001. 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: Mona Bonta Bergman (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.cere.se .

    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.