IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eco/journ2/2018-05-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Analysis of Environmental and Cultural Impacts of the Development of Palm Oil Plantation

Author

Listed:
  • Sri Walyoto

    (Department Islamic Economic and Business, Institut Agama Islam Negeri Surakarta, Jl. Pandawa, Karta Sura, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia,)

  • Jasanta Peranginangin

    (Department Islamic Economic and Business, Institut Agama Islam Negeri Surakarta, Jl. Pandawa, Karta Sura, Jawa Tengah, Indonesia.)

Abstract

This research focuses on the economic assessment of the development of palm oil plantation (Perkebunan Kelapa Sawit/ PKS) at the area of Taman Nasional Bukit Dua Belas (TNBD/ Bukit Dua Belas National Park) in Jambi Province. TNDB area is a forest dedicated to conserve the culture of Suku Anak Dalam (SAD or also known as Kubu People, a group of indigenous people of Jambi). The hollistic economic assessment of the present research is to estimate the benefits and cost to build a palm oil plantation in TNBD. The benefits consist of the benefits having palm trees and the woods whereas the cost consists of the cost to build a palm oil plantation, the cost to produce wood, the environmental cost, and the cost of the decline of indigenous culture. In this regard, the environmental cost refers to the erotion cost and the carbon release cost. On the other hand, the cost of indigenous culture s decline consists of the lost of SAD s culture from the perspective of community s users, the lost of SAD s culture from the perspective of indigenous people, and the lost of SAD s culture from the perspective of non users community (NBG). The assessment techniques apply the formula and benefit s shift to obtain the value palm oil plantation. The SAD s culture from the perspective of community s users is assessed from the cultural tourism of SAD and estimated with TCM. The SAD s culture from the perspective of indigenous people is estimated with CVM. SAD s culture from the perspective of non users community (NBG) is also estimated with CVM. The results of present research show that the building of PKS is sensitive to the choices of carbon price and discount level. The result of Net Present Value (NPV) of PKS is negative if the carbon price is around USD 5 per ton with approximate discount level is 8%. There is an equity issue which influences many groups of people.

Suggested Citation

  • Sri Walyoto & Jasanta Peranginangin, 2018. "Economic Analysis of Environmental and Cultural Impacts of the Development of Palm Oil Plantation," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 8(5), pages 212-222.
  • Handle: RePEc:eco:journ2:2018-05-27
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijeep/article/download/6604/3945
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.econjournals.com/index.php/ijeep/article/view/6604/3945
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nick Hanley & Clive L. Spash, 1993. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and the Environment," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 205.
    2. Jasanta PERANGINANGIN, 2015. "A Conceptual Mapping Resource Advantage Theory, Competitive Advantage Theory, and Transient Competitive Advantage," Expert Journal of Business and Management, Sprint Investify, vol. 3(2), pages 140-149.
    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. Jose M. Martínez-Paz & Angel Perni & Federico Martínez-Carrasco, 2013. "Assessment of the Programme of Measures for Coastal Lagoon Environmental Restoration Using Cost--Benefit Analysis," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 131-148, February.
    2. Karine Nyborg & Inger Spangen, 2000. "Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Democratic Ideal," Nordic Journal of Political Economy, Nordic Journal of Political Economy, vol. 26, pages 83-93.
    3. Mogaka, Violet Moraa & Mbatia, O.L.E. & Nzuma, Jonathan M., 2012. "Feasibility of Biofuel Production in Kenya: The Case of Jatropha," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126427, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    5. Martin C. Whitby & W. Neil Adger, 1997. "Natural And Reproducible Capital And The Sustainability Of Land Use In The Uk: A Reply," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(1‐3), pages 454-458, January.
    6. E.C.M. Ruijgrok & E.E.M. Nillesen, 2004. "The Socio-Economic Value of Natural Riverbanks in the Netherlands," Working Papers 2004.64, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    7. Spash, Clive L. & Ryan, Anthony M., 2010. "Ecological, Heterodox and Neoclassical Economics: Investigating the Differences," MPRA Paper 26292, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Bashar Raisa & Nandy Ananya, 2019. "A more efficient valuation of beaches using tourists’ perspectives and Geographic Information System (GIS): The case of Patenga of Chittagong, Bangladesh," Environmental & Socio-economic Studies, Sciendo, vol. 7(3), pages 54-65, September.
    9. Schilizzi, Steven, 2000. "The economics of ethical behaviour and environmental management," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123729, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    10. Mazur, Kasia & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2008. "Using focus groups to design a choice modelling questionnaire for estimating natural resource management benefits in NSW," Research Reports 94801, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    11. Halkos, George E. & Jones, Nikoleta, 2012. "Modeling the effect of social factors on improving biodiversity protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 90-99.
    12. Aline Chiabai & Ibon Galarraga & Anil Markandya & Unai Pascual, 2013. "The Equivalency Principle for Discounting the Value of Natural Assets: An Application to an Investment Project in the Basque Coast," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(4), pages 535-550, December.
    13. Rosalie Arendt & Till M. Bachmann & Masaharu Motoshita & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2020. "Comparison of Different Monetization Methods in LCA: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-39, December.
    14. Maria Nijnik & Arie Oskam & A. Nijnik, 2005. "Contribution Of Afforestation To Sustainable Land Management In Ukraine," ERSA conference papers ersa05p746, European Regional Science Association.
    15. van der Straaten, J., 1995. "Tourism in national parks," WORC Paper 95.12.030/2, Tilburg University, Work and Organization Research Centre.
    16. Olena Hankivsk & Jane Friesen & Colleen Varcoe & Fiona MacPhail & Lorraine Greaves & Charmaine Spencer, 2004. "Expanding Economic Costing in Health Care: Values, Gender and Diversity," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 30(3), pages 257-282, September.
    17. Prabha Prayaga & John Rolfe & Jack Sinden, 2006. "A Travel Cost Analysis of the Value of Special Events: Gemfest in Central Queensland," Tourism Economics, , vol. 12(3), pages 403-420, September.
    18. Peter Nijkamp & Chiara Maria Travisi & Gabriella Vindigni, 2002. "Pesticide Risk Valuation in Empirical Economics," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-112/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    19. Onil Banerjee & Martin Cicowiez & Adela Moreda, 2017. "Reconciliation Once and For All: Economic Impact Evaluation and Social Cost Benefit Analysis," CEDLAS, Working Papers 0207, CEDLAS, Universidad Nacional de La Plata.
    20. Erdlenbruch, Katrin & Thoyer, Sophie & Grelot, Frédéric & Kast, Robert & Enjolras, Geoffroy, 2009. "Risk-sharing policies in the context of the French Flood Prevention Action Programmes," MPRA Paper 20187, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic Analysis; Environmental and Cultural Impacts; Building PKS; NPV.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics

    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:eco:journ2:2018-05-27. 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: Ilhan Ozturk (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.econjournals.com .

    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.