Abstract
Recent literature shows a lively debate on how tocapture ecological and environmental aspects indifferent evaluation methods and the closely relatedissue of the (im)possibilities of monetization ofthese aspects. Although economists in general tend tofavour Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) aboveMulti-Criteria Analysis (MCA), part of the literaturesuggests that CBA falls short of being the onlydecision-making device for environmental problems,both for theoretical and practical reasons. This paperdiscusses both evaluation methods and the main resultsof a major, publicly-financed nature conservationproject in The Netherlands.
The evaluation method combines the straightforwardnessof CBA with the flexibility of MCA. Conceptually, itconsists of a MCA, the net result of a CBA beingintegrated as one of the criteria. The differentaspects of the nature conservation project that can bemonetized are incorporated into the CBA. Otheraspects such as changes in biodiversity or scenicbeauty are analysed in their own dimension,provided (cardinal) quantification is possible. Infact, the analysis consists of a very simple MCA, withtwo criteria: social costs and a quantitative measureof nature.
Quantifying the amount of nature in its own,non-monetary dimension is a key element of theempirical analysis. A detailed quantitative estimateis made of the improvement of nature, based upon 564species and 131 different ecosystems. The result ofthe evaluation is a trade-off at the national levelbetween ecological improvements (plus 18 percent) andsocial costs (DFl. 3.4 billion net present value). Dueto the detailed quantification of the effect on naturethe evaluation also yields results about thecost-effectiveness of four different instruments tocreate and to preserve nature. That part of theanalysis shows that complete withdrawal ofagricultural land for nature purposes in the projectin general is more cost-effective than subsidizingnature-friendly farming, although the former is moreexpensive.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bal, D., H. M. Beije, Y. R. Hoogeveen, S. R. J. Jansen and P. J. van der Reest (1995), Handboek Natuurdoeltypen in Nederland. Wageningen: IKC Natuurbeheer.
Bana e Costa, C. and M. Pirlot (1997), ‘Thoughts on the Future of the Multicriteria Field: Basic Convictions and Outline for a General Methodology’, in J. Climaco, ed., Multicriteria Analysis. Berling: Springer Verlag, 412-422.
Bateman, I. (1994), ‘Research Methods for Valuing Environmental Benefits’, in A. Dubgaard, I. Bateman and M. Merlo, eds., Economic Valuation of Benefits from Countryside Stewardship. Kiel: Wissenschaftsverlag Vauk Kiel Ag, 47-82.
Berenschot (1994), Onderzoek naar de financiële gevolgen van het relatienota-beleid. Utrecht: Berenschot Interim Management.
Bink, R. J., D. Bal, V. M. van den Berk and L. J. Draaijer, eds. (1994), Toestand van de natuur 2. Wageningen: Rapport IKC-NBLF, nr. 4.
Costanza, R., R. d'Arge, R. de Groot, S. Faber, M. Graaso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O'Neill, J. Paruelo, R. G. Raskin, P. Sutton and M. van den Belt (1997), ‘The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital’, Nature 387.
CLM (1995), Naar een natuurmeetlat voor landbouwbedrijven. Utrecht: Centrum voor Landbouw en Milieu.
Hanley, N. (1992), ‘Are There Environmental Limits to Cost-Benefit Analysis?’, Environmental and Resource Economics 2, 33-59.
Hanley, N. and C. L. Spash (1993), Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Environment. Edward Elgar, U.K.
Hanley, N., Spash, C. and Walker, L. (1995), ‘Problems in Valuing the Benefits of Biodiversity Protection’, Environmental and Resource Economics 5, 249-272.
Hoevenagel, R. (1994), The Contingent Valuation Method: Scope and Validity, PhD thesis, Free University, Amsterdam.
IKC Natuurbeheer (1995), Handboek Natuurdoeltypen in Nederland. Wageningen.
Korhonen, P. and J. Wallenius (1997), ‘Behavioral Issues in MCDM: Neglected Research Questions’, in J. Climaco, ed., Multi Criteria Analysis. Berling: Springer Verlag, 412-422.
LEI-DLO (1995), ‘De betekenis van de landbouw voor de Nederlandse economie’, Publicatie 1.29. Den Haag: LEI-DLO.
LNV (1990), Natuurbeleidsplan regeringsbeslissing. SDU, 's Gravenhage.
LNV (1995), Ecosystemen in Nederland. Den Haag: LNV.
Nijkamp, P. (1980), Environmental Policy Analysis; Operational Methods and Models. Chichester.
Nijkamp, P and A. van Delft (1977), Multi-Criteria Analysis and Regional Decision-Making. Leiden: Nijhoff.
OECD (1995), Environmental Performance Reviews; the Netherlands. Paris.
OECD (1997), Investing in Biological Diversity; The Cairns Conference. Paris.
Oskam, A. J. (1994), Het landbouw/natuur-vraagstuk: economisch gezien. Wageningen: LU Wageningen, Vakgroep AAE (unpublished).
Pelt, M. van, A. Kuyvenhoven and P. Nijkamp (1990), ‘Project Appraisal and Sustainability: the Applicability of Cost-benefit and Multi-Criteria Analysis’, Wageningen Economic Papers 5. Wageningen.
Sagoff, M. (1988), The Economy of the Earth. Cambridge.
Sijtsma, F. J. and D. Strijker (1995), Effect-analyse Ecologische Hoofdstructuur, Deel I: Hoofdrapportand Deel II: Natuurwaarde. Groningen: Stichting REG.
Slangen, L. H. G. (1994), ‘De financiële en economische aspecten van het omzetten van landbouw-gronden in natuurterreinen’, Agrarisch Recht 54(7), 313-318.
Smith, V. K. (1997), ‘Mispriced Planet’, Regulation 20(3), 16-17.
Wenstop, F., A. Carlsen, O. Bergland and P. Magnus (1997), ‘Valuation of Environmental Goods with Expert Panels’, in J. Climaco, ed., Multi Criteria Analysis. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 539-548.
Zimmerman, H.-J. and L. Gutsche (1991), Multi-Criteria Analyse. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Strijker, D., Sijtsma, F.J. & Wiersma, D. Evaluation of Nature Conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics 16, 363–378 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008344604392
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008344604392