A probabilistic approach for the socioeconomic assessment of urban river rehabilitation projects

Land Use Policy

Volumn 36, Issue , 2014, Pages 468-477

  Martínez Paz, José ^a   Pellicer Martínez, Francisco ^a   Colino, José ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MURCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

CBA; Contingent valuation; Environmental rehabilitation; Monte Carlo; Segura river

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; PLANNING METHOD; PROBABILITY; PROFITABILITY; PROJECT ASSESSMENT; SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; URBAN PLANNING;

SEGURA BASIN; SPAIN;

EID: 84886601906     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.09.023     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Almansa C., Calatrava J. Reconciling sustainability and discounting in Cost-Benefit Analysis: a methodological proposal. Ecological Economics 2007, 60(4):712-725.
2. Almansa C., Calatrava J., Martinez-Paz J.M. Extending the framework of the economic evaluation of erosion control actions in Mediterranean basins. Land Use Policy 2012, 29(2):294-308.
3. Almansa C., Martinez-Paz J.M. Intergenerational equity and dual discounting. Environment and Development Economics 2011, 16:685-707.
4. Almansa C., Martinez-Paz J.M. What weight should be assigned to future environmental impacts? A probabilistic cost benefit analysis using recent advances on discounting. Science of the Total Environment 2011, 409(7):1305-1314.
5. Balcombe K.G., Smith L.E.D. Refining the use of Monte Carlo techniques for risk analysis in project planning. Journal of Development Studies 1999, 36(2):113-135.
6. Bateman I.J., Day B.H., Georgiou S., Lake I. The aggregation of environmental benefit values: welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP. Ecological Economics 2006, 60(2):450-460.
7. Belmar O., Velasco J., Martinez-Capel F. Hydrological classification of natural flow regimes to support environmental flow assessments in intensively regulated Mediterranean rivers, Segura river basin (Spain). Environmental Management 2011, 47(5):992-1004.
8. Belmar O., Bruno D., Martínez-Capel F., Barquín J., Velasco J. Effects of flow regime alteration on fluvial habitats and riparian quality in a semiarid Mediterranean basin. Ecological Indicators 2013, 30:52-64.
9. Blomquist G.C., Whitehead J.C. Resource quality information and validity of willingness to pay in contingent valuation. Resource and Energy Economics 1998, 20(2):179-196.
10. Carson R.T., Hanemann W.H. Contingent valuation. Handbook of Environmental Economics: Valuing Environmental Changes 2005, vol. 2:821-936. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
11. CHS Esquema de temas importantes de la demarcación hidrográfica del Segura. Confederación Hidrográfica del Segura 2013, Ministerio de Medio Ambiente, Madrid.
12. Che Y., Yang K., Chen T., Xu Q. Assessing a riverfront rehabilitation project using the comprehensive index of public accessibility. Ecological Engineering 2012, 40:80-87.
13. Clemen R.T., Winkler R.L. Combining probability distributions from experts in risk analysis. Risk Analysis 1999, 19(2):187-203.
14. Cochran W.G. Sampling Techniques 1977, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 425p. third ed.
15. Cummings R.G., Brookshire D.S., Schulze W.D. Valuing Environmental Goods: An assessment of The Contingent Valuation Method 1986, Rowman and Allenheld, Totowa, NJ.
16. Cummings R.G., Taylor L.O. Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: a cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method. American Economic Review 1999, 89(3):649-665.
17. Dachary-Bernard J., Rambonilaza T. Choice experiment, multiple programmes contingent valuation and landscape preferences: how can we support the land use decision making process?. Land Use Policy 2012, 29:846-854.
18. Deason J., Dickey G., Kinnell J., Shabman L. Integrated planning framework for urban river rehabilitation. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 2010, 136(6):688-696.
19. Del Tánago M.G., De Jalón D.G. River restoration in Spain: theoretical and practical approach in the context of the European Water Framework Directive. Environmental Management 2012, 50(1):123-139.
20. E.C, 2000 European Commission Directive 2000/60/CE of the European Parliament and the Council on the 23rd of October 2000: establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities 2000, L327:1-72.
21. EC, 2003.European Commission Guide to Cost-Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects: Structural Funds-ERDF, Cohesion Fund and ISPA, Prepared for the Evaluation Unit 2003, DG Regional Policy, Brussels.
22. EC, 2008.European Commission Guide to Cost-Benefit Analysis of Investment Projects: Structural Funds-ERDF, Cohesion Fund and ISPA, Prepared for the Evaluation unit 2008, DG Regional Policy, Brussels.
23. Eden S., Tunstall S. Ecological versus social restoration? How urban river restoration challenges but also fails to challenge the science - policy nexus in the United Kingdom. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy 2006, 24(5):661-680.
24. Freeman R.E., Ray R.O. Landscape ecology practice by small scale river conservation groups. Landscape and Urban Planning 2001, 56(3-4):171-184.
25. Frimpong E.A., Lee J.G., Sutton T.M. Cost effectiveness of vegetative filter strips and instream half-logs for ecological restoration. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 2006, 42(5):1349-1361.
26. Fuster G., Schuhmacher M., Domingo J.L. Cost-benefit analysis as a tool for decision making in environmental projects - application to a reduction of dioxin emissions in Tarragona Province, Spain. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 2004, 11(5):307-312.
27. García J., García-Latorre J., Sanchez-Picón A. Dealing with aridity: socio-economic structures and environmental changes in an arid Mediterranean region. Land Use Policy 2001, 18:53-64.
28. Gomez R., Hurtado I., Suarez M.L., Vidal-Abarca M.R. Ramblas in south-east Spain: threatened and valuable ecosystems. Aquatic Conservation-Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 2005, 15(4):387-402.
29. Grindlay A., Zamorano M., Rodriguez M.I., Molero E., Urrea M.A. Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive: integration of hydrological and regional planning at the Segura River Basin, southeast Spain. Land Use Policy 2011, 28:242-256.
30. Hanemann M. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses: reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1988, 71:1057-1061.
31. Hauer F.R., Lorang M.S. River regulation, decline of ecological resources, and potential for restoration in a semi-arid lands river in the western USA. Aquatic Sciences 2004, 66(4):388-401.
32. Hein L., van Koppen K., de Groot R.S., van Ierland E.C. Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 2006, 57(2):209-228.
33. Henderson N., Bateman I. Empirical and public choice evidence for hyperbolic social discount rates and the implications for intergenerational discounting. Environmental and Resource Economics 1995, 5(4):413-423.
34. Hildreth C., Lu J.Y. Demand Relations with Autocorrelated Disturbances 1960, vol. 276. Michigan State University Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin, East Lansing, MI.
35. INE Cifras de población y censo demográfico 2012, Instituto Nacional de Estadística de España, (In Spanish) Available at http://www.ine.es/.
36. Jongeneela R., Polman N., Slangena L. Cost-benefit analysis of the Dutch nature policy: transaction costs and land market impacts. Land Use Policy 2012, 29:827-836.
37. Junker B., Buchecker M. Aesthetic preferences versus ecological objectives in river restorations. Landscape and Urban Planning 2008, 85(3-4):141-154.
38. Kozak J., Lant C., Shaikh S., Wang G. The geography of ecosystem service value: the case of the Des Plaines and Cache River wetlands, Illinois. Applied Geography 2011, 31(1):303-311.
39. Kniivilä M. Users and non-users of conservation areas: are there differences in WTP, motives and the validity of responses in CVM surveys?. Ecological Economics 2006, 59(4):530-539.
40. Liu S., Costanza R., Farber S., Troy A. Valuing ecosystem services. Theory, practice, and the need for a transdisciplinary synthesis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2010, 1185:54-78.
41. Loomis J., Kent P., Strange L., Fausch K., Covich A. Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey. Ecological Economics 2000, 33(1):103-117.
42. Mata R., Fernandez S. La Huerta de Murcia: landscape guidelines for a peri-urban territory. Landscape Research 2004, 29(4):385-397.
43. Martínez-Carrasco F., Schwentesius R., Martínez-Paz J., Gomez-Cruz M. Characteristics and comparative of organic food producers in Southeastern Europe: the case of the Murcia Region, Spain. Agrociencia 2009, 43:649-657.
44. Martínez-Paz J.M., Perni A., Martínez-Carrasco F. Assessment of the programme of measures for coastal lagoon environmental restoration using Cost-Benefit Analysis. European Planning Studies 2013, 21(2):131-148.
45. Mitchell R.C., Carson R.T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method 1989, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
46. Mizsey P., Delgado L., Benko T. Comparison of environmental impact and external cost assessment methods. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 2009, 14(7):665-675.
47. Niemela J. Ecology and urban planning. Biodiversity and Conservation 1999, 8(1):119-131.
48. Oñate J., Peco B. Policy impact on desertification: stakeholders' perceptions in southeast Spain. Land Use Policy 2005, 22(2):103-114.
49. Pearce D., Atkinson G., Mourato S. Cost-Benefit Analysis and The Environment: Recent Developments 2006, París, OECD Publishing, 315p.
50. Perni A., Martinez-Carrasco F., Martinez-Paz J.M. Economic valuation of coastal lagoon environmental restoration: Mar Menor (SE Spain). Ciencias Marinas 2011, 37(2):175-190.
51. Perni A., Martinez-Paz J., Martinez-Carrasco F. Social preferences and economic valuation for water quality and river restoration: the Segura River, Spain. Water and Environment Journal 2012, 26(2):274-284.
52. Perni A., Martínez-Paz J.M. A participatory approach for selecting cost-effective measures in the WFD context: the Mar Menor (SE Spain). Science of the Total Environment 2013, 458:303-311.
53. Ramajo-Hernández J., del Saz-Salazar S. Estimating the non-market benefits of water quality improvement for a case study in Spain: a contingent valuation approach. Environmental Science and Policy 2012, 22:47-59.
54. Reiser B., Shechter M. Incorporating zero values in the economic valuation of environmental program benefits. Environmetrics 1999, 10(1):87-101.
55. Rico-Amoros A., Olcina-Cantos J., Sauri D. Tourist land use patterns and water demand: evidence from the western Mediterranean. Land Use Policy 2009, 26:493-501.
56. Salling K.B., Leleur S. Transport appraisal and Monte Carlo simulation by use of the CBA-DK model. Transport Policy 2011, 18(1):236-245.
57. Sánchez J.F. Análisis Coste Beneficio de la recuperación del río Segura en la ciudad de Murcia 2010, Master thesis in Environmental Sciences, Universidad de Murcia, Spain, (In Spanish).
58. Tyrvainen L. The amenity value of the urban forest: an application of the hedonic pricing method. Landscape and Urban Planning 1997, 37(3-4):211-222.
59. Vandermeulen V., Verspecht A., Vermeire B., Van Huylenbroeck G., Gellynck X. The use of economic valuation to create public support for green infrastructure investments in urban areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 2011, 103(2):198-206.
60. Vining A., Weimer D. An assessment of important issues concerning the application of benefit-cost analysis to social policy. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis 2010, 1(1). Article 6.
61. Vose D. Risk Analysis: A Quantitative Guide 2002, John Wiley and Sons, London. second ed.
62. Walker W.E., Harremoës P., Rotmans J., Van der Sluijs J.P., Van Asselt M.B.A., Janssen P., Krayer von Krauss M.P. Defining uncertainty: a conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Journal of Integrated Assessment 2003, 4(1):5-17.
63. Walton B.M., Salling M., Wyles J., Wolin J. Biological integrity in urban streams: toward resolving multiple dimensions of urbanization. Landscape and Urban Planning 2007, 79(1):110-123.
64. Zhao J., Liu Q., Lin L., Lu H., Wang Y. Assessing the comprehensive restoration of an urban river: an integrated application of contingent valuation in Shanghai, China. Science of the Total Environment 2013, 458-460:517-526.