DISCUSS D ECISION I NFORMATION S YSTEM FOR C OMMUNITY U NDERSTANDING OF S PATIAL S cenarios Land Victoria DANIEL PAEZ Centre for SDIs and Land Administration

DDECISION IINFORMATION SSYSTEM FOR CCOMMUNITY UUNDERSTANDING OF SSPATIAL SScenarios

Land VictoriaDANIEL PAEZ

Centre for SDIs and Land Administration

Department Of GeomaticsUniversity of Melbourne

Supervisors

Professor Ian Williamson

Professor Ian Bishop

Land Victoria seminar

October 28th, 2004



PhD CandidateCentre for SDIs and Land Administration

Supervisors






Supervisors






Supervisors






Supervisors



Benefits resulting directly from Option 1 (PV = 4%)

Water savings (@$70/ML/year) 57.1

Commercial land use (based on agriculture) 1.8

Savings in cost of water treatment in Shepparton 1.3

Current management and operation costs avoided 12.5

Total quantified benefits 78.6

Loss of net economic value of recreation activities 4.3

Capital costs of works 13.5

Wetland establishment costs 0.2

Buffer establishment costs 0.7

Wetland and buffer maintenance costs 0.4

Total quantified costs 75.7

Net Present value 2.92.9




Supervisors



Option or scenario 2

NPV = -1.3 Millions

IRR = 1.3%

Option or scenario 1

NPV = 2.3 Millions

IRR = 12%




Supervisors



What regions are the beneficiaries?

Who is going to be affected?




Supervisors



Research Problem

The lack of a spatial dimension in Cost-Benefit Analysis limits the ability to make policy decisions

Research Objective

To develop a method and associated tools to incorporate a spatial dimension into the policy making process




Supervisors



Why we want a spatial dimension?

•To better understand the effects of the project

•To allow public participation

•To generate more indicators for decision-making (NVP/population) and support not only economic factors




Supervisors



DISCUSS:

•Analysis follows CBA

•It is not a technical system producing a final results

•The main objective is to identify effects and regions where discrepancies between stakeholders exist




Supervisors



DISCUSS:




Supervisors






Supervisors






Supervisors






Supervisors



Option 1Return to Winton Swamp

Low Disagreement

High Disagreement

Result Stakeholders (excluding government official)




Supervisors








Supervisors




Negative Effect

Positive effect





Supervisors




NPV = 2.3 MillionsIRR = 12%




Supervisors




NPV = 2.3 Millions

Option 4Revised operating rules for Lake Mokoan

NPV = -21.4 Millions




Supervisors




NPV = 2.3 Millions

Option 4Revised operating rules for Lake Mokoan

NPV = -21.4 Millions

Documents

DISCUSS D ECISION I NFORMATION S YSTEM FOR C OMMUNITY U NDERSTANDING OF S PATIAL S cenarios Land Victoria DANIEL PAEZ Centre for SDIs and Land Administration