We made a submission to the NSW Treasury and Department of Planning Guideline for the use of Cost Benefit Analysis in mining and coal seam gas proposals. We think the guidelines are a good start, but could be improved:
- We’re pleased that cost benefit analysis (CBA) is to move from being an obscure appendix of environmental impact statements to part of development applications. Debate about the economic merits of a project, its effects on the welfare of society, are far better suited to a development application stage, than a part of the process where project approval has largely been assumed.
- We’re concerned that CBA is only to be “optional” for proponents. We fear that applicants with projects with dubious economic merit would be exactly those who would choose not to undertake “optional” CBA.
- We endorse calls for compulsory peer review. Too often it seems our reviews are the only scrutiny given to economic assessments.
- We don’t think the guidelines adequately explain the shortcomings of CBA or explain when other approaches might be necessary.
- Other points relate to health, greenhouse emissions and discount rates.
Click below for the guidelines and our full submission.
Ecolarge Dec 2012 NSW CBA submission FINAL
DPI 2012 CBA Guidelines for mining and CSG
