IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/75969.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic Valuation of Sand and Gravel in Davao del Norte, Philippines

Author

Listed:
  • Tamayo, Adrian
  • Tagalo, Romulo

Abstract

The study aims to quantify the economic value of the sand and gravel which is deemed as a non-renewable resource. A survey was conducted to extract the consumer surplus of the households, also construct the demand equation for the resource. With the demand equation for sand and gravel at , the consumer surplus was estimated at P8271. Using the economic valuation technique, the economic value of sand and gravel was estimated at P729,568,368. Thus, a very high value imputed on the environmental resource. The survey showed that 82% of the population in Davao del Norte is amenable for a policy to regulate sand and gravel extraction. With the new valuation measure of the sand and gravel, a new price may be introduced at price range between P125-P225 per cubic meter. The new price is set to be used as payment for environmental services and compensation projects at the quarry sites. Also, the cost structures of permitees in Davao del Norte are too low compared to the operators in Compostela Valley, Davao Oriental and Davao City. The cost of operation in Davao del Norte is approximately 18% of the cost in Davao Oriental and 20% of the cost of Compostela Valley. The cost differences are largely due to the permit cost which is cheaper in Panabo and Tagum than in other areas. This is suggestive that the permitees may likely absorb the cost rather than transfer operation given their high producer surplus value.

Suggested Citation

  • Tamayo, Adrian & Tagalo, Romulo, 2016. "Economic Valuation of Sand and Gravel in Davao del Norte, Philippines," MPRA Paper 75969, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:75969
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/75969/1/MPRA_paper_75969.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Howarth, Richard B & Norgaard, Richard B, 1992. "Environmental Valuation under Sustainable Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 473-477, May.
    2. Turnovsky, Stephen J & Shalit, Haim & Schmitz, Andrew, 1980. "Consumer's Surplus, Price Instability, and Consumer Welfare," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(1), pages 135-152, January.
    3. Guy Garrod & Kenneth G. Willis, 1999. "Economic Valuation of the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1368.
    4. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B. L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 139-149, July.
    5. Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey (ed.), 2001. "The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2028.
    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. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.
    2. Richard Bennett & Ken Willis, 2008. "Public values for badgers, bovine TB reduction and management strategies," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(4), pages 511-523.
    3. Akcura, Elcin, 2015. "Mandatory versus voluntary payment for green electricity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 84-94.
    4. Marangon, Francesco & Visintin, Francesca, 2007. "Rural landscape valuation in a cross-border region," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 84.
    5. Mazzanti, Massimiliano, 2003. "Valuing cultural heritage in a multi-attribute framework microeconomic perspectives and policy implications," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 549-569, November.
    6. Chun-Hung Lee & Chiung-Hsin Wang, 2017. "Estimating Residents’ Preferences of the Land Use Program Surrounding Forest Park, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-19, April.
    7. Marcial Echenique & Raghavendra Seshagiri, 2009. "Attribute-Based Willingness to Pay for Improved Water Services: A Developing Country Application," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(3), pages 384-397, June.
    8. Catalina M. Torres Figuerola & Antoni Riera Font, 2009. "Defining environmental attributes as external costs in choice experiments: A discussion," CRE Working Papers (Documents de treball del CRE) 2009/1, Centre de Recerca Econòmica (UIB ·"Sa Nostra").
    9. Eggert, Håkan & Olsson, Björn, 2004. "Heterogeneous preferences for marine amenities: A choice experiment applied to water quality," Working Papers in Economics 126, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    10. Elcin Akcura, 2013. "Mandatory versus voluntary payment for green electricity," Working Papers 161, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Office of the Chief Economist.
    11. Elcin Akcura, 2013. "Mandatory vs voluntary Payment for Green Electricity," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1339, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    12. Rolfe, John & Loch, Adam & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2002. "Framing effects and benefit transfer in the Fitzroy basin," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 174038, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    13. K. Balcombe & A. Bailey & A. Chalak & I. Fraser, 2007. "Bayesian Estimation of Willingness‐to‐pay Where Respondents Mis‐report Their Preferences," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 69(3), pages 413-438, June.
    14. Verbic, Miroslav & Slabe-Erker, Renata, 2009. "An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1316-1328, March.
    15. Goddard, Jessica J. & Kallis, Giorgos & Norgaard, Richard B., 2019. "Keeping multiple antennae up: Coevolutionary foundations for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Divine Ikenwilo & Sebastian Heidenreich & Mandy Ryan & Colette Mankowski & Jameel Nazir & Verity Watson, 2018. "The Best of Both Worlds: An Example Mixed Methods Approach to Understand Men’s Preferences for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(1), pages 55-67, February.
    17. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    18. Khan, Md. Tajuddin & Kishore, Avinash & Joshi, Pramod Kumar, 2016. "Gender dimensions on farmers’ preferences for direct-seeded rice with drum seeder in India:," IFPRI discussion papers 1550, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Naz Abdulkareem Arif, 2020. "Estimate Household’s Willingness to Pay for Improved Tap Water Quality in Duhok Province," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 4(11), pages 152-159.
    20. Kallas, Z. & Gómez-Limón, J.A., 2007. "Valoración De La Multifuncionalidad Agraria: Una Aplicación A Través Del Método De Los Experimentos De Elección/Agricultural Multifunctionality Valuation: A Case Study Using The Choice Experiment," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 107-144, Abril.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-renewable natural resource; willingness to pay;

    JEL classification:

    • Q3 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation
    • Q31 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - Demand and Supply; Prices
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    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:pra:mprapa:75969. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.