7377

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7377
• Author: Kusler, J. A. and S. Daly.
• Title: Wetlands and River Corridor Management.
• USFW Year: 1989.
• USFW - Doc Type: \
• Copyright Material: NO

Cost Benefit Analysis and
Environmental Impact Assessment
The decisions which cause impacts in wetlands
are often very old and well established. The
disappearance of the upper reaches of River Ver in
the permeable chalk-based Chiltern Hills of
England derives in large part from the granting of
a license to construct a huge well near the river
in 1952 (Halcrow 1988). The maximum abstraction
was set at the estimate of rainfall minus actual
evapotranspiration. During those post-war years of
reconstruction, the arrival of a major U.S. motor
manufacturer in the nearby town was a cause of
national celebration. Today, as the pumping from
the well finally reaches the permitted maximum,
there is a major campaign to save the spring-fed
meadows, the special chalk stream ecology and the
landscape of the river. The major problem facing
the community group endeavoring to save the valley
bottom wetlands is that licences, issued before
the passage of the 1963 Water Resources Act, were
made indefinite "licences of right" by that
legislation.
Wetlands are often ignored in the formulation
of water resource schemes and river basin
management strategies. Sadly, the 1975 Plan
Directeur des Eau du Nord de Is Tunisie and
subsequent elaborations of that scheme (Direction
EGTH 1982) have completely ignored the existence
downstream of the Ichkeul National Park. This has
designations under Ramsar, World Heritage and
Biosphere Reserve conventions as well as a major
fishery and nationally significant grazing lands.
In principle, cost-benefit analyses should only
permit rational decision making and should protect
wetland resources from ill-conceived degradation.
However, it is often the case that these analyses
are organised to favour traditional forms of
capital-intensive "development". For example, it
is often assumed that the current prices for the
products of the scheme will remain at what are
often record levels; all of the farmers are
assumed to adopt the new systems of cultivation
whilst none of the farmers is assumed to be likely
to increase production without the implementation
of the large scheme; and socio-economic factors
such as the employment situation, the transport
network and systems of land ownership are always
assumed to work perfectly in the post-scheme
world. Adams and Hollis (1989) showed that, for
the 14,000 ha Kadawa irrigation scheme near Kano
in Nigeria, the ratio of production to cost
declined from 13:1 in 1984 to 2.7:1 in 1986.
However, the true ratio would be much more
unfavourable because the 180 million naira of
capital costs was regarded as sunk capital; the
repayment of loans in foreign currency was ignored
even though the scheme produced very little that
could be exported or used for import substitution;
the gross figures for farmers' production ignored
labour cost and other inputs by the farmers; and
the scheme was actually costing the government
6.16 million naira a year to operate.
Environmental impact assessment (EIA) is often
seen as a solution to all of the problems of
wetland degradation. However, it is essentially a
negative technique which is often seen to block or
delay development. By its very nature it is almost
always concentrated on large schemes whilst small
projects or decisions by individuals at a micro-
scale can easily evade the rigour of EIA. Sadly,
it is possible for developers to "buy" or to bias
environmental impact assessments. For instance,
the Greek government contracted a single member of
the Hellenic Ornithological Society to undertake
an EIA on the effects of the major Achelos River
diversion scheme on the downstream coastal lagoons
at Messalonghi. The resulting study has not been
accepted by the Hellenic Ornithological Society
and the whole episode has generated fundamental
divisions in the small conservation community in
Greece.
In many circumstances EIA is not undertaken. In
situations where a good study is completed, the
EIA is frequently ignored because of what are
perceived to be overriding national priorities.
EIA on its own is not sufficient to protect
wetland resources. It can only be one element
within a much broader strategy which seeks to
promote the positive benefits of wetlands rather
than concentrating on the negative review of
projects. The Ramsar Bureau's working group on
criteria and wise use has drafted such a broad-
based strategy for consideration at the next
Conference of the Contracting Parties (Ramsay
Bureau 1988).
Factors Affecting Management
The fact that wetlands are still viewed as
wastelands in many parts of the world represents
twin failures on the part of the "wetlands
community". First, there has been a failure to
demonstrate the functions and values of wetlands
in many countries of the world. Second, the
communication of the functions and values of
wetlands to the public and politicians has been
deficient in large areas of the globe. The U.S.
experience in both functional analysis (National
Wildlife Federation 1987) and its dissemination to
decision makers (Conservation Foundation 1988)
will be invaluable in the campaign to conserve
wetlands worldwide.
There are public subsidies both overt and
covert for wetland destruction. In Tunisia, until
the last few months, the government paid all the
cost of pumping drainage water from low-lying
fields. Such a policy naturally causes wetlands to
shrink rapidly in the face of agricultural
expansion. In Greece, the price of electricity for
pumping irrigation water from wells is set at 25%
below the normal price. This covert policy has the
effect of lowering water table levels, as at the
site of former Lake Karla between Volos and
Larissa.
International funds still appear to be plenti-
ful for projects which result in wetland destruc-
tion. The World Bank, (Cleave 1988) has certainly
taken a lead in establishing a division to deal
with environmental issues and it is now widely
acknowledged as a green-edged organization. Most
of the financial institutions responsible for
foreign aid from the Federal Republic of Germany
22