Cost-benefit analysis is generally used for evaluation of social investments, but it is argued that the method for benefit evaluation demands further consideration. Regarding projects related to waterside environment development, cost-benefit analysis is problematic because projects usually involve environmental components for which it is difficult to evaluate the value in monetary terms. In addition, many conflicts among local government and residents have occurred along with waterside environment development projects. Residents' requirements for projects are usually so broad that a project valuation system incorporating a conflict management concept is necessary to achieve consensus.
Therefore, this study first establishes a multi-criteria valuation system for waterside environments based on residents' impressions about rivers. Secondly, a conflict risk index is proposed to evaluate quantitatively, the diversity of people's sense of values. Thirdly, the methodology of works is explained with a case study of two regions in a river basin of Kamo River, Kyoto. The methodology is applied to questionnaire results for residents in the regions, and a priority of waterside environmental components to be developed is analyzed using multi-criteria analysis. The prioritized components are thought to be superior to others in terms of increasing people's use of the waterside areas as well as reducing conflict risks among residents in promoting the waterside development project.
View full abstract