Stakeholder Perceptions about Incorporating Externalities and Vulnerability into Benefit–Cost Analysis Tools for Watershed Flood Risk Mitigation

Thomas H. Douthat (), Fahmida Akhter, Rachelle Sanderson and Jerrod Penn
Additional contact information
Thomas H. Douthat: College of the Coast and Environment, Department of Environmental Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
Fahmida Akhter: College of the Coast and Environment, Department of Environmental Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
Rachelle Sanderson: Capital Region Planning Commission, Baton Rouge, LA 70816, USA
Jerrod Penn: Department of Agriculture Economics & Agribusiness, Louisiana State University & LSU Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA

Sustainability, 2023, vol. 15, issue 9, 1-23

Abstract: Multi-scalar climate hazards in watersheds and growing consideration regarding equity call for innovation in how agencies evaluate and prioritize mitigation and adaptation projects. Benefit–Cost Analysis (BCA) is one approach that is increasingly being applied to decision-making (i.e., FEMA BCA toolkit), but that has not been applied to watershed and equity-based flood management initiatives. This paper addresses this topic and presents a case study evaluating projects for watershed flood and climate mitigation projects by the Louisiana Watershed Initiative (Louisiana, USA). Through semi-structured interviews with stakeholders and practitioners, we found that BCA tool design must be embedded in the program and policy in order to be successfully applied and that equity has not traditionally been a core value of mitigation practice. Even though many stakeholders understand the need for incorporating environmental and social project consequences at a watershed scale, challenges to doing so include inequitable barriers to project design in competitive processes, the complexity of integrating modeling and environmental outcomes data, jurisdictional interests, and the need for better science communication with local decision-makers.

Keywords: watershed; floods; mitigation; planning; environmental management; adaptation; benefit–cost analysis; hazards mitigation; sustainable water management; decision support tools (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7473/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7473/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7473-:d:1138144

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().