IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qed/dpaper/134.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Control Of Water And Coastal Pollution An Appraisal For Espirito,Brazil

Author

Listed:
  • MIGARA JAYAWARDENA
  • Glenn Jenkins

    (Queen's University, Kingston, On, Canada)

  • GANGADHAR SHUKLA

Abstract

A shortage of clean drinking water, the lack of an adequate sewage system, and rapid environmental degradation from waste dumping have prompted the State of Espirito Santo in Brazil to consider expanding the water supply and sewage disposal system in the region. This paper reports on the finding of a study to appraise the viability of a project to alleviate some of the shortfall in potable water and sewage service in the State. Recommendations are developed for improved investment and operational strategies through an integrated analysis of the financial, economic, distributive and risk aspect of the project. Result of the study indicate that even through the project, in its current state, is not likely to be financially profitable, it is expected to create significant economic gains for society through the reduction in environmental pollution. Furthermore, improvements in operation and management practices that address the issue of water leakage, invoicing and collections are keys to improving the financial viability, and perhaps ultimately, the economic viability of the system. A particular challenge provided by the study has been the measurement of intangible environmental benefit and their inclusion in the projects analysis of discounted net economic benefits. Without the measure of these benefits the overall economic value produced by this project would be seriously understated.

Suggested Citation

  • MIGARA JAYAWARDENA & Glenn Jenkins & GANGADHAR SHUKLA, 1999. "Control Of Water And Coastal Pollution An Appraisal For Espirito,Brazil," Development Discussion Papers 1999-04, JDI Executive Programs.
    • Handle: RePEc:qed:dpaper:134
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cri-world.com/publications/qed_dp_134.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://cri-world.com/publications/qed_dp_134.xls
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Savvides, Savvakis C., 1994. "Risk Analysis in Investment Appraisal," MPRA Paper 10035, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 14 Aug 2008.
    2. Jenkins, G.P., 1998. "Evaluation of Stakeholder Impacts in Cost-Benefit Analysis," Papers 631, Harvard - Institute for International Development.
    3. Glenn Jenkins, 1995. "Potable Water Supply Expansion: The Manila South Water Distribution Project," Development Discussion Papers 1995-05, JDI Executive Programs.
    4. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    5. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hasan Bicak & Glenn Jenkins, 1999. "Costs And Pricing Policies Related To Transporting Water By Tanker From Turkey To North Cyprus," Development Discussion Papers 1999-07, JDI Executive Programs.

    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. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panel's No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(2), pages 335-338, May.
    3. Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael & Kopp, Raymond J. & Krosnick, Jon A. & Mitchell, Robert C. & Presser, Stanley & Ruud, Paul A. & Smith, V. Kerry & Conaway, Michael & Martin, Kerry, 1996. "Was the NOAA Panel Correct about Contingent Valuation?," Discussion Papers 10503, Resources for the Future.
    4. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    5. Bodo Sturm & Joachim Weimann, 2006. "Experiments in Environmental Economics and Some Close Relatives," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 419-457, July.
    6. Ahuja, Vinod & McConnell, Kenneth E. & Umali-Deininger, Dina & de Haan, Cornelis, 2003. "Are the Poor Willing to Pay for Livestock Services? Evidence from Rural India," Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics, Indian Society of Agricultural Economics, vol. 58(1), March.
    7. Stephanie Simpson & Brid Gleeson Hanna, 2010. "Willingness to pay for a clear night sky: use of the contingent valuation method," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(11), pages 1095-1103.
    8. Bruno S. Frey & Simon Luechinger & Alois Stutzer, 2007. "Calculating Tragedy: Assessing The Costs Of Terrorism," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 1-24, February.
    9. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    10. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    11. John C. Whitehead, 2024. "They doth protest too much, methinks: Reply to “Reply to Whitehead”," Working Papers 24-04, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    12. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. repec:ken:wpaper:0805 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. V. Smith & Xiaolong Zhang & Raymond Palmquist, 1997. "Marine Debris, Beach Quality, and Non-Market Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(3), pages 223-247, October.
    15. Steenstra, Alex, 2009. "Accommodating Indigenous Cultural Values in Water Resource Management: The Waikato River, New Zealand; the Murray- Darling Basin, Australia; and the Colorado River, USA," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 47937, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    16. Bernt Kartman & Nils‐Olov Stålhammar & Magnus Johannesson, 1996. "Valuation of health changes with the contingent valuation method: A test of scope and question order effects," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 5(6), pages 531-541, November.
    17. Olof Johansson-Stenman, 1998. "The Importance of Ethics in Environmental Economics with a Focus on Existence Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 429-442, April.
    18. Bruno S. Frey & Simon Luechinger, 2005. "Measuring terrorism," Chapters, in: Alain Marciano & Jean-Michel Josselin (ed.), Law and the State, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Rossi, Martín, 2000. "Midiendo el valor social de la calidad de los servicios públicos: el agua," UADE Textos de Discusión 20_2000, Instituto de Economía, Universidad Argentina de la Empresa.
    20. Carson, Richard T., 1998. "Valuation of tropical rainforests: philosophical and practical issues in the use of contingent valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 15-29, January.
    21. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Brazil; water; sewage; environmental; investment; contingent valuation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • L95 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Transportation and Utilities - - - Gas Utilities; Pipelines; Water Utilities

    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:qed:dpaper:134. 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: Mark Babcock (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/qedquca.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.