Soil bioengineering as an alternative for roadside management - Benefit-cost analysis case study

被引:0
|
作者
Hagen, S
Salisbury, S
Wierenga, M
Xu, G
Lewis, L
机构
[1] Washington State Dept Transportat, Olympia, WA 98504 USA
[2] US Forest Serv, USDA, Prineville, OR 97754 USA
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TU [建筑科学];
学科分类号
0813 ;
摘要
As an environmentally compatible and cost-efficient alternative for roadside management, soil bioengineering has become increasingly important and attractive. Soil bioengineering uses live plants and plant parts as building materials for engineering and ecologically sound solutions to erosion control, slope and stream bank stabilization, landscape restoration, and wildlife habitats. However, not all decision makers are aware of the specific benefits of this approach. This case study applied a benefit-cost analysis to an experimental soil bioengineering demonstration project to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of soil bioengineering as an alternative to traditional roadside management. Traditional roadside management methods (geotechnical solutions) were used as the baseline, and soil bioengineering treatments were treated as an investment alternative. Cost savings, along with other environmental benefits, were assessed and compared with construction costs. The effects of life cycle, effectiveness, and discounting were included in the analysis to ensure comparability between both treatments. The analytical results demonstrate that soil bioengineering methods, if technically feasible, could be adopted to produce equal or better economic and environmental results. The findings of the research project and the economic analysis indicate that soil bioengineering is an efficient and environmentally beneficial tool for roadside management.
引用
收藏
页码:97 / 104
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Benefit-Cost Analysis of Flood Management, A Case Study of Jammu and Kashmir
    Jan, Kowser Ali
    Balaji, R.
    [J]. 5TH WORLD CONGRESS ON DISASTER MANAGEMENT, VOL. 2: Nature and Human Induced Disasters, 2023, : 130 - 135
  • [2] Benefit-cost analysis of vegetation management alternatives: An Ontario case study
    Homagain, Krish
    Shahi, Chander K.
    Luckai, Nancy J.
    Leitch, Mathew
    Bell, F. Wayne
    [J]. FORESTRY CHRONICLE, 2011, 87 (02): : 260 - 273
  • [3] Benefit-cost analysis
    Kingston, G
    [J]. ECONOMIC RECORD, 2004, 80 (251) : 468 - 469
  • [4] Total cost analysis: An alternative to benefit-cost analysis in evaluating transportation alternatives
    Patrick DeCorla- Souza
    Jerry Everett
    Brian Gardner
    Michael Culp
    [J]. Transportation, 1997, 24 : 107 - 123
  • [5] Benefit-cost analysis
    Dorman, P
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 1997, 11 (02): : 188 - 190
  • [6] Total cost analysis: An alternative to benefit-cost analysis in evaluating transportation alternatives
    DeCorlaSouza, P
    Everett, J
    Gardner, B
    Culp, M
    [J]. TRANSPORTATION, 1997, 24 (02) : 107 - 123
  • [7] BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE TECHNIQUES OF PRODUCTION FOR EMPLOYMENT CREATION
    MEHMET, O
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL LABOUR REVIEW, 1971, 104 (1-2) : 37 - 50
  • [8] Benefit-Cost Analysis of Weather Information for Winter Maintenance A Case Study
    Strong, Christopher
    Shi, Xianming
    [J]. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD, 2008, (2055) : 119 - 127
  • [9] Case Study of Benefit-Cost Analysis of an Intercity Passenger Rail Service
    Loetterle, Francis E.
    Johnson, Melanie
    Quandel, Charles
    Barr, Carey
    Komendantov, Andrew
    Horst, Toni
    [J]. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD, 2017, (2608) : 78 - 85
  • [10] Traffic Incident Management Programs and Benefit-Cost Analysis
    Ma, Jiaqi
    Lochrane, Taylor
    Jodoin, Paul
    [J]. ITE JOURNAL-INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, 2016, 86 (05): : 30 - 36