IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eerhrr/94939.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing a best management practice scorecard with an auction metric to select proposals in a water quality tender

Author

Listed:
  • Rolfe, John
  • Windle, Jill

Abstract

This report compares evaluation frameworks for selecting landholder proposals to improve water quality. A water quality tender performed in the Burdekin region in Northern Australia in 2007/2008 was used as a case study. Tender bids can be assessed using an inputs-based best management practice scorecard or an outputs-based auction metric. Where landholder proposals are rated by inputs-based criteria, the scorecard approach, and other variants of multi-criteria analysis are commonly applied. Output-based approaches are typically applied in water quality and conservation tenders. This approach uses an environmental benefits index to summarise the cost-effectiveness of each proposal. The case study evaluation reported in this paper shows how multi-criteria analysis-type assessments are flawed. It demonstrates how public funding efficiency can be more than doubled by using auction metrics to assess landholder water quality improvement proposals.

Suggested Citation

  • Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2009. "Comparing a best management practice scorecard with an auction metric to select proposals in a water quality tender," Research Reports 94939, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:eerhrr:94939
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.94939
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/94939/files/EERH_RR43.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.94939?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. Productivity Commission, 2003. "Industries, land use and water quality in the Great Barrier Reef Catchment," Others 0305001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Uwe Latacz-Lohmann & Carel Van der Hamsvoort, 1997. "Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and an Application," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(2), pages 407-418.
    3. Uwe Latacz‐Lohmann & Carel P. C. M. Van der Hamsvoort, 1998. "Auctions as a Means of Creating a Market for Public Goods from Agriculture," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 334-345, September.
    4. Wünscher, Tobias & Engel, Stefanie & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: A tool for boosting conservation benefits," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 822-833, May.
    5. Unknown, 2003. "Industries, Land Use and Water Quality in the Great Barrier Reef Catchment," Commissioned Studies 31918, Productivity Commission.
    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. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2010. "Comparing a best management practice scorecard with an auction metric to select proposals in a water quality tender," 2010 Conference (54th), February 10-12, 2010, Adelaide, Australia 59262, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. John Rolfe & Jill Windle, 2009. "Comparing a best management practice scorecard with an auction metric to select proposals in a water quality tender," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0943, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    3. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2011. "Using auction mechanisms to reveal costs for water quality improvements in Great Barrier Reef catchments in Australia," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 98(4), pages 493-501, February.
    4. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2009. "Costing water quality improvements with auction mechanisms: case studies for the Great Barrier Reef in Australia," Research Reports 94884, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    5. John Rolfe & Jill Windle, 2009. "Costing Water Quality Improvements with auction mechanisms: case studies for the Great Barrier Reef in Australia," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0935, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    6. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    7. Schomers, Sarah & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2013. "Payments for ecosystem services: A review and comparison of developing and industrialized countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 16-30.
    8. Valle, Haydn & Capon, Timothy & Harris, Michael & Reeson, Andrew, 2012. "Coordination and Strategic Behaviour in Landscape Auctions," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124466, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    9. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2008. "Testing for differences in benefit transfer values between state and regional frameworks," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-20.
    10. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Soh, Moonwon & English, Burton C. & Yu, T. Edward & Boyer, Christopher N., 2019. "Targeting payments for forest carbon sequestration given ecological and economic objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 214-226.
    11. Whitten, Stuart M., 2017. "Designing and implementing conservation tender metrics: Twelve core considerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 561-571.
    12. Bazzani, Guido Maria & Viaggi, Davide, 2004. "Improving the design of agri-environmental policies: a case study in Italy," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 5(2), pages 1-15, August.
    13. Bartolini, Fabio & Gallerani, Vittorio & Raggi, Meri & Viaggi, Davide, 2005. "Contract Design and Targeting for the Production of Public Goods in Agriculture: The Impact of the 2003 Cap Reform," 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark 24559, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Markus Groth, 2009. "The transferability and performance of payment-by-results biodiversity conservation procurement auctions: empirical evidence from northernmost Germany," Working Paper Series in Economics 119, University of Lüneburg, Institute of Economics.
    15. Coggan, Anthea & Whitten, Stuart M. & Greyling, Tertius, 2010. "Preliminary principles to guide best practice water quality regulation from an economic perspective," 2010 Conference (54th), February 10-12, 2010, Adelaide, Australia 58890, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Schilizzi, Steven & Latacz-Lohmann, Uwe, 2009. "Predicting the performance of conservation tenders when information on bidders's costs is limited," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 48171, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    17. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2006. "Using Field Experiments to Explore the Use of Multiple Bidding Rounds in Conservation Auctions," Discussion Papers 25801, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Brett Bryan & Jeffery Connor et al, 2005., 2005. "Catchment Care - Developing an Auction Process for Biodiversity and Water Quality Gains. Volume 1 - Report," Natural Resource Management Economics 05_004, Policy and Economic Research Unit, CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, Australia.
    19. Stine Broch & Suzanne Vedel, 2012. "Using Choice Experiments to Investigate the Policy Relevance of Heterogeneity in Farmer Agri-Environmental Contract Preferences," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 561-581, April.
    20. Nong, Duy & Siriwardana, Mahinda, 2018. "Potential impacts of the Emissions Reduction Fund on the Australian economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 387-398.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    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:ags:eerhrr:94939. 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/asanuau.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.