Cost-benefit analysis for recycling of agricultural wastes in Taiwan

被引:45
|
作者
Hsu, Esher [1 ]
机构
[1] Natl Taipei Univ, Dept Stat, 67 Sect 3,Min Sheng East Rd, Taipei 104, Taiwan
关键词
Agricultural waste; Recycling; Cost-benefit analysis; Compost; Biomass fuel; Biogas;
D O I
10.1016/j.wasman.2020.09.051
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Agricultural waste can be recycled in different ways. Cost-effectiveness is important information for investment decision-making of enterprises and policy-making of government to choose a profitable way to recycle agricultural waste. Therefore, this paper aims to present a cost-benefit analysis to assess and compare the cost-effectiveness between feasible recycling methods, and further propose cost-effective ways for recycling agricultural waste in Taiwan. Three recycling types of agricultural wastes, namely, composting, biogas power generation and biomass fuel are selected for cost-benefit analysis based on related regulations and policy supports of agricultural waste management in Taiwan. Primary data collected by sampling surveys conducted in 2018 supplemented by secondary data from national statistics are used for this study. Study results show that all three recycling types of agricultural wastes discussed in this study are profitable under corresponding economic conditions in 2018 with benefit/cost ratio greater than 1 and positive net present value; as expected, the cost-effectiveness of agricultural waste recycling varies depending on the recycling types, composition of input materials, and economic scales. Mixing chicken manure with other agricultural wastes for composting and using rice straw to make biomass fuel rods are estimated to have higher cost-effectiveness; livestock farms with small farming scale have relatively low biogas energy recovery efficiency; the cost-effectiveness of biogas power generation highly depends on fixed-in tariffs (FITs). Results imply that policy support for establishing co-processing centers of agricultural waste and differentiated FITs would be good measures to stimulate recycling efficiency of agricultural waste in Taiwan. (C) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:424 / 432
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] ROLE OF COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS IN PLANNING AGRICULTURAL R AND D PROGRAMS
    WISE, WS
    RESEARCH POLICY, 1975, 4 (03) : 246 - 261
  • [12] Sustainability of Agricultural Crop Policies in Rwanda: An Integrated Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Miklyaev, Mikhail
    Jenkins, Glenn
    Shobowale, David
    SUSTAINABILITY, 2021, 13 (01) : 1 - 22
  • [13] The Cost-Benefit Fallacy: Why Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Broken and How to Fix It
    Flyvbjerg, Bent
    Bester, Dirk W.
    JOURNAL OF BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS, 2021, 12 (03) : 395 - 419
  • [14] Beware the cost-benefit analysis
    Spence, Des
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2012, 345
  • [15] Cost-Benefit Analysis in Reasoning
    Alaoui, Larbi
    Penta, Antonio
    JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 2022, : 881 - 925
  • [16] Incommensurability and cost-benefit analysis
    Adler, M
    UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA LAW REVIEW, 1998, 146 (05) : 1371 - 1418
  • [17] Co-recycling of sludge and municipal solid waste: A cost-benefit analysis
    Butt, EP
    Morse, GK
    Guy, JA
    Lester, JN
    ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY, 1998, 19 (12) : 1163 - 1175
  • [18] COST-BENEFIT MODEL OF RURAL TO URBAN MIGRATION IN TAIWAN
    SPEARE, A
    POPULATION STUDIES-A JOURNAL OF DEMOGRAPHY, 1971, 25 (01): : 117 - 130
  • [19] In Defence of Cost-Benefit Analysis
    Ergas, Henry
    AGENDA-A JOURNAL OF POLICY ANALYSIS AND REFORM, 2009, 16 (03) : 31 - 40
  • [20] Cost-benefit analysis: examples
    Linn, Mott
    BOTTOM LINE, 2011, 24 (01): : 68 - 72