Cost Benefits Of A National Park

The Biodiversity Treaty sanctioned that countries whose biological resources are exploited by bioprospecting companies have a right to share the financial benefits resulting from the sale of these resources (Adair, 1997). National parklands are owned by the federal government. Therefore, our national parks have the legal right to share in the financial benefits that

The Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) was conducted so that the stakeholders could make an informed decision

In 2016, the National Park Service (NPS) celebrated 100 years of preservation and conservation of our nation’s parks, monuments, and historical sites. Currently, the federal government has proposed significant proposed budget cuts to the National Park Service. If the government makes these cuts, then Americans could lose the national parks along with the beauty, culture, and history that comes with them. This would happen because the NPS would lose most of its funding that is needed in order to keep the national parks well­preserved. Investing in the NPS should be a priority in our nation because it provides educational programs, unites all ages and races, and preserves and conserves the national parks.

Assess the potential environmental impact of a proposed construction project on the local natural environment.

There are several traditional methods that can be used in appraising investment decisions. For instance, the net present value method (NPV) which entails estimating the costs and revenues of a project and discounting these figures to get their present values. Projects with the biggest positive net present value are the ones chosen as they represent the best stream of benefits of investing in the project over and above recovering the cost of initiating the projects. The discount rate is another method which is similar to the net present value method but reflects more on the time preference. This approach may focus on the opportunity cost of

Seven articles were finally evaluated in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. All of these papers found explaining the research question and the economic evaluation explicitly.

The Cost benefit analysis is a financial model where companies or government establishments implement on their decision making. The model simply evaluates costs and benefits of a certain decision which enables the organization to choose the “right” option. (O’Farrell, R.,n.d.) The beauty of the CBA model lies in its simplicity, the chosen option is easily justifiable, when the costs are higher than the benefits then there is no compelling reason to make that decision. (O’Farrell, R. ,n.d.) In addition to its simplicity, the model is applicable to various types of decisions, it enable

The people should not make an national park because is to dangerous for everybody. Is dangerous because when someone builds an national park and when a tornado or an earthquake that can cause a lot of death because the national park would be in the middle of the canyon. Some people thinks it would be good to build a national park in the middle of the canyon but most of the people are disagree. In some parts of the canyon are rivers and blue water, and that looks good for some people but the water can cause a lot of deaths because if the river grow up and if people is at the national that can cause death too. National park would make a lot of money, the canyon for people is an famous place to make an national park but they don't know how dangerous is. The canyon brings a lot of attractions for people and a lot of fun things. National park is fun for some people but they don't really know what causes.

To identify the incremental direct and indirect effects of the proposed project on selected valued ecosystem components (VEC) within the area of the project location, and;

Whole Life Appraisal (WLA) method also known as Life Cycle Costing is the process of identification and documentation of all the costs that involved over the life span of assets. Managers, investors and owners from time to time require to make decisions concerning the investment, acquisition and ongoing usage of diverse assets such as plant and equipment, design, construction and repair costs of construction projects and maintenance of these facilities with the assets that are housed there-in. Whole Life Appraisal offers an opportunity for decisions makers to be able to evaluate the future costs involved in the projects they engage in so that they can make the best decisions. This is important because the future costs involved in usage and acquisition are usually greater than the initial costs of deploying these projects or acquiring assets. This essay will elaborate on the limitations of whole life appraisal (WLA) in making investment decisions for components, elements and whole projects.

The analysis for this project was done two separate ways. First, the net present value of the project as a whole was found, and second, the net present value for both projects individually was calculated. For the project taken as a whole, the net present value was $–23,353.81. This means there would be a negative return if the diesel boat were chosen. Also, for the projects taken individually, choosing to rehabilitate the Conway had a net present value of $17,210.35, while the choosing the diesel had a net present value of $-269,677.98, which also shows that rehabilitating the Conway is the better choice because it brings in a positive return while the diesel boat would not.

Australia is a developed country where developing takes place every day in different field to enhance its quality. There 19 places enlisted by UNESCO World heritage that attracts the many people from the globe to explore its beauty. But time have changes, people began to travel for adventurous sports and for recreational. Keeping in mind, the project, the North Eastern Mountain Bike Development project (NEMTB) has initiated. For that, business case has been drafted. Business case is an argument typically documented which is proposed to persuade a decision maker to approve some sort of activity or action. As a rule, it needs to express a clear path to an appealing rate of profitability or return on investments. It is not limited to one area but defines (a) what is the need of business? (b) What are the strategy and what benefits are expected? (c) What are the problems for defined successful outcome? (d) Why a particular option is preferred from among the others? (e) How funding will be provided or whether the cost will be affordable? (f) What external resources will be sourced? (g) How long the benefits will be delivered? (h) What risk are involved and how they will be managed? (i) What are the recommendations and what is concluded? So, a business case document ought to look at advantages and risk involved with and, on the other hand not taking the action. The conclusion ought to be a convincing contention for execution.

Pölönen et al in 2011 conducted research on “The effectiveness of the Finnish EIA system”. He inspected main weaknesses and strengths of EIA as a participatory and preventive environmental management tool. According to him EIA has enhanced the legitimacy of the planning processes and tools used in environmental policy. The planning has been made more transparent through the participation of stakeholders. In the early phase of Planning, the participation has made it possible to strengthen the trust between stakeholders, and allows sound consensus in disagreement. It has also prevented appeals in the later phases of decision making. EIA also has influence on project design and also on the valuations. EIA may eliminate the most harmful

Although sites in the National Park System can sometimes be difficult to categorize due to their diversity, each site is given a designation that attempts to best capture the nature and uses of site. As determined by Congress in 1970, all units within the system have equal legal standing. This means that all sites within the National Park System have equal protection under the law. The National Park System falls under the purview of the Department of the Interior.

The APEEP model first connects emissions of air pollutants to physical effects, by employing the USEPA national emission inventory of air pollution. Those physical effects include adverse effects on human health, decreased timber and agriculture yields, reduced visibility, accelerated depreciation of materials, and reductions in recreation services. Then, the model translates the physical effects into monetary terms using standard estimates of mortality and morbidity risks, market values of goods or services, and results of other valuation studies (e.g. Chestnut and Rowe, 1990; McClelland et al., 1993).