Turning around the least liveability: a cost–benefit framework for Dhaka

Alam, Khorshed (2016) Turning around the least liveability: a cost–benefit framework for Dhaka. Technical Report. Copenhagen Consensus Center , Dhaka, Bangladesh. [Report]

[img]
Preview
Text (Published Version)
Alam_Dhaka_Liveability.pdf
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

Download (2430Kb) | Preview

Abstract

The aim of this study is to seek smart solutions to key socio-economic, environmental, and infrastructural issues facing Dhaka city, the capital of Bangladesh. Specifically, a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) is employed to assess the suitability of selected intervention strategies for a liveable Dhaka city from the perspective of the society. This study investigates the following key research questions: (i) How can Dhaka, a rapidly growing city, become liveable (interventions)?; (ii) How much is the liveability worth (costs)?; (iii) What are the socio-economic, health, and environmental benefits of interventions (benefits)?; and (iv) Are the interventions worth undertaking (net benefit)?

The report findings are based on two focus group discussions and a number of key informant interviews in the study area, as well as on an extensive review of published documents. Economic analysis revealed that the benefit–cost ratio at 10% discount rate and internal rate of return of the project are 1.92 and 42%, respectively, which indicate the project is attractive, both financially and economically. However, this leaves policymakers, planners, development partners, and concerned citizens to make value judgment calls when interpreting these numbers. The results, which should be interpreted alongside the social and political imperatives of a rapidly growing megacity, suggest an immediate intervention to avoid any further deterioration of the environment and social structure.

The CBA findings are also used to assess the sensitivity of outcomes to identified risks and uncertainties. This sensitivity analysis will give policymakers an idea of the degree of uncertainty surrounding the intervention strategies and the significance of that uncertainty.
CBA should be considered as an aid to the debate on whether to invest in the improvement of environmental quality and public utility services, and the decision on whether the investment is in the public’s interest, not a decision itself. Socio-political imperatives and citizens’ willingness as well as readiness to participate in the intervention actions are a significant consideration in this research.


Statistics for USQ ePrint 32675
Statistics for this ePrint Item
Item Type: Report (Technical Report)
Item Status: Live Archive
Additional Information: This work has been produced as a part of the Bangladesh Priorities project, a collaboration between Copenhagen Consensus Center and BRAC Research and Evaluation Department. The Bangladesh Priorities project was made possible by a generous grant from the C&A Foundation. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (CC BY 4.0). Under the Creative Commons Attribution license, you are free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt this work, including for commercial purposes, under the following conditions: Attribution - Please cite the work as follows: #AUTHOR NAME#, #PAPER TITLE#, Bangladesh Priorities, Copenhagen Consensus Center, 2016. License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 4.0.
Faculty / Department / School: Current - Faculty of Business, Education, Law and Arts - School of Commerce
Date Deposited: 08 Aug 2017 02:02
Last Modified: 11 Dec 2017 23:33
Uncontrolled Keywords: Buriganga River, cost-benefit analysis, ecosystem restoration, public utility, solid waste management, stormwater drainage, sustainability
Fields of Research : 14 Economics > 1402 Applied Economics > 140218 Urban and Regional Economics
14 Economics > 1402 Applied Economics > 140299 Applied Economics not elsewhere classified
12 Built Environment and Design > 1205 Urban and Regional Planning > 120599 Urban and Regional Planning not elsewhere classified
Socio-Economic Objective: D Environment > 96 Environment > 9605 Ecosystem Assessment and Management > 960511 Ecosystem Assessment and Management of Urban and Industrial Environments
D Environment > 96 Environment > 9607 Environmental Policy, Legislation and Standards > 960709 Urban Water Policy
B Economic Development > 91 Economic Framework > 9199 Other Economic Framework > 919999 Economic Framework not elsewhere classified
URI: http://eprints.usq.edu.au/id/eprint/32675

Actions (login required)

View Item Archive Repository Staff Only