IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/75969.html

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. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B.L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits Of Private Land: The Case Of Prime Agricultural Land," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(01), pages 1-11, July.
    3. Guy Garrod & Kenneth G. Willis, 1999. "Economic Valuation of the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1368.
    4. 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.
    5. Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey (ed.), 2001. "The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2028.
    6. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B.L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits Of Private Land: The Case Of Prime Agricultural Land," Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 17(01), pages 1-11, July.
    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. Akcura, Elcin, 2015. "Mandatory versus voluntary payment for green electricity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 84-94.
    2. 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.
    3. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Tweeten, Luther G., 1997. "Competing For Scarce Land: Food Security And Farmland Preservation," Economics and Sociology Occasional Papers - ESO Series 28325, Ohio State University, Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics.
    7. Bergstrom, John, 1999. "Exploring and Expanding the Landscape Values Terrain," Western Region Archives 321704, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    8. Joshua Duke & Lori Lynch, 2007. "Gauging support for innovative farmland preservation techniques," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 40(2), pages 123-155, June.
    9. Bergstrom, John C., 1998. "Exploring And Expanding The Landscape Values Terrain," Faculty Series 16653, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    10. Dietrich Earnhart, 2006. "Using Contingent-Pricing Analysis to Value Open Space and Its Duration at Residential Locations," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 17-35.
    11. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    12. Randall, Alan & Hoehn, John P., 2000. "Valuing Injury To Natural Resources: The Effect Of Resource Quality Information On Perceptions And Contingent Values," Staff Paper Series 11507, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    13. 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.
    14. Francois Bonnieux & Robert D. Weaver & . University of Newcastle Upon Tyne,newcastle Upon Tyne (usa), 1995. "Managing agriculture's impacts on the environment : basic economics and international evidence," Post-Print hal-01931696, HAL.
    15. Lynch, Lori & Duke, Joshua M., 2007. "Economic Benefits of Farmland Preservation: Evidence from the United States," Working Papers 7342, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    16. Bergstrom, John C., 2001. "Postproductivism And Rural Land Values," Faculty Series 16689, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    17. Weaver, Robert D., 1989. "Rational Roots Of "Irrational" Behavior: Discussion," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 18(2), pages 1-5, October.
    18. Sande, Doris N. & Mullen, Jeffrey D. & Nzaku, Kilungu, 2009. "Amenity benefits and public policy: An application to the Georgia Pecan Industry," 2009 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2009, Atlanta, Georgia 46851, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    19. Xin Yang & Anlu Zhang & Fan Zhang, 2019. "Farmers’ Heterogeneous Willingness to Pay for Farmland Non-Market Goods and Services on the Basis of a Mixed Logit Model—A Case Study of Wuhan, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(20), pages 1-14, October.
    20. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    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.