IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare06/139932.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating the Efficiency of a Devolved Grants Program: A Central Queensland case study

Author

Listed:
  • Yee, Shion
  • Rolfe, John

Abstract

There have been trends for governments to adopt more ‘bottom-up’ approaches on a range of matters including environmental and natural resource management planning. An example is the devolution of public funds to regional natural resource management (NRM) bodies in many areas of Australia. However, there is little empirical evidence available to guide policymakers in determining best value arrangements and strategic investments for building a region’s ‘collaborative advantage’. An economic appraisal of engagement processes might focus on evaluating whether the benefits of particular governance arrangements outweigh the costs. The identification and assessment of many of the costs and benefits associated with various engagement processes is not an easy task. Many of the costs can be classified as transaction costs, where the costs of collaboration and engagement in a process can be likened to the search, negotiation, monitoring, and enforcement costs familiar from market transactions. In a marginal analysis setting, the question is whether the costs incurred from an alternative governance arrangement are justified when the benefits are considered. The benefits of a more participatory and inclusive governance arrangement might include improvements to resource allocation, achieving changes in attitudes to land management practices, reduction in conflict, and development of ‘administrative capital’. These benefits are difficult to estimate, although non-market valuation techniques can offer some insights into the magnitude of such benefits. An outline of an approach to evaluate the benefits and costs of a Devolved Grants program administered by the Fitzroy Basin Association (FBA) regional natural resource management (NRM) body in Central Queensland is presented in this paper.

Suggested Citation

  • Yee, Shion & Rolfe, John, 2006. "Evaluating the Efficiency of a Devolved Grants Program: A Central Queensland case study," 2006 Conference (50th), February 8-10, 2006, Sydney, Australia 139932, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare06:139932
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.139932
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/139932/files/2006_yee.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.139932?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luzar, E. Jane & Diagne, Assane, 1999. "Participation in the next generation of agriculture conservation programs: the role of environmental attitudes," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 335-349.
    2. William M. Dugger, 1996. "The Mechanisms of Governance," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 1212-1216, December.
    3. McCann, Laura & Colby, Bonnie & Easter, K. William & Kasterine, Alexander & Kuperan, K.V., 2005. "Transaction cost measurement for evaluating environmental policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(4), pages 527-542, March.
    4. Marshall, Graham R., 1999. "Economics of Incorporating Public Participation in Efforts to Redress Degradation of Agricultural Land," 1999 Conference (43th), January 20-22, 1999, Christchurch, New Zealand 123849, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Lynne, Gary D. & Franklin Casey, C. & Hodges, Alan & Rahmani, Mohammed, 1995. "Conservation technology adoption decisions and the theory of planned behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 581-598, December.
    6. Marshall, Graham R., 2004. "Farmers cooperating in the commons? A study of collective action in salinity management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3-4), pages 271-286, December.
    7. Buchy, M. & Hoverman, S., 2000. "Understanding public participation in forest planning: a review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 15-25, May.
    8. Marshall, Graham R., 2003. "Towards a Resource Economics for Adaptive Managers," 2003 Conference (47th), February 12-14, 2003, Fremantle, Australia 57921, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    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. Vishal Kumar Laheri & Purushottam Kumar Arya, 2015. "A Study on Consumer Decision towards Purchase of Organic Food Products: A Case Study of Delhi," Indian Journal of Commerce and Management Studies, Educational Research Multimedia & Publications,India, vol. 6(2), pages 84-87, May.
    2. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Hoang, Long Phi & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A comparative study of transaction costs of payments for forest ecosystem services in Vietnam," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 141-149.
    3. Shang, Linmei & Heckelei, Thomas & Gerullis, Maria K. & Börner, Jan & Rasch, Sebastian, 2021. "Adoption and diffusion of digital farming technologies - integrating farm-level evidence and system interaction," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    4. Corradi, Nicola & Priftis, Konstantinos & Jacucci, Giulio & Gamberini, Luciano, 2013. "Oops, I forgot the light on! The cognitive mechanisms supporting the execution of energy saving behaviors," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 88-96.
    5. Bayard, Budry & Jolly, Curtis, 2007. "Environmental behavior structure and socio-economic conditions of hillside farmers: A multiple-group structural equation modeling approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 433-440, May.
    6. Bourceret, Amélie & Amblard, Laurence & Mathias, Jean-Denis, 2022. "Adapting the governance of social–ecological systems to behavioural dynamics: An agent-based model for water quality management using the theory of planned behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    7. Daniel Ruppert & Martin Welp & Michael Spies & Niels Thevs, 2020. "Farmers’ Perceptions of Tree Shelterbelts on Agricultural Land in Rural Kyrgyzstan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, February.
    8. Bachev, Hrabrin, 2014. "Environmental Management in Agriculture – Case of Bulgaria," MPRA Paper 59054, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Ornella Boutry, 2010. "A New Institutional Approach of Resource Use Conflicts: The Case of Poitou-Charentes," Post-Print hal-00655829, HAL.
    10. Bonnin Roca, Jaime & O'Sullivan, Eoin, 2020. "Seeking coherence between barriers to manufacturing technology adoption and innovation policy," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 230(C).
    11. Volker Meyer & Sally Priest & Christian Kuhlicke, 2012. "Economic evaluation of structural and non-structural flood risk management measures: examples from the Mulde River," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 62(2), pages 301-324, June.
    12. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Influences of transaction costs in environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1777-1784, July.
    13. Phan, Thu-Ha Dang & Brouwer, Roy & Davidson, Marc David, 2017. "A Global Survey and Review of the Determinants of Transaction Costs of Forestry Carbon Projects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 1-10.
    14. Mazzocchi, Mario & Lobb, Alexandra E. & Traill, W. Bruce, 2006. "Food Scares and Consumer Behaviour: A European Perspective," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25613, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    15. Teemu Kautonen & Marco van Gelderen & Erno T. Tornikoski, 2011. "Predicting entrepreneurial behaviour: a test of the theory of planned behaviour," Post-Print hal-00741505, HAL.
    16. Kumar, Bipul & Manrai, Ajay K. & Manrai, Lalita A., 2017. "Purchasing behaviour for environmentally sustainable products: A conceptual framework and empirical study," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 1-9.
    17. Xuan Liu & Qiancheng Wang & Hsi-Hsien Wei & Hung-Lin Chi & Yaotian Ma & Izzy Yi Jian, 2020. "Psychological and Demographic Factors Affecting Household Energy-Saving Intentions: A TPB-Based Study in Northwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, January.
    18. Karppinen, Heimo, 2005. "Forest owners' choice of reforestation method: an application of the theory of planned behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 393-409, March.
    19. Hrabrin Bachev, 2014. "Environmental management in agriculture," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 1, pages 29-55,56-79.
    20. Karppinen, Heimo & Berghäll, Sami, 2015. "Forest owners' stand improvement decisions: Applying the Theory of Planned Behavior," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 275-284.

    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:ags:aare06:139932. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.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.