Ex-ante impact assessment for research on natural resources management: methods and application to aquatic resource systems

cg.description.themeMiscellaneous themesen_US
cg.identifier.ISIindexedISI indexed
cg.identifier.statusLimited access
cg.identifier.urlhttp://rev.oxfordjournals.org/content/14/3/217.abstract
cg.identifier.worldfish917
cg.subject.agrovocimpact assessment
cg.subject.agrovocmanagement
cg.subject.agrovocresearch
cg.subject.worldfishaquatic resources
dc.creatorBriones, R.
dc.creatorDey, M.M.
dc.creatorStobutzki, I.
dc.creatorPrein, M.
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-27T10:36:21Z
dc.date.available2018-11-27T10:36:21Z
dc.date.issued2005
dc.description.abstractUnder a particular representation of the impact path way of natural resource management (NRM) research, economic surplus techniques can also be used for ex ante impact assessment. The method is applied to the case of the WorldFish Center, an international organization specializing in research on aquatic resources in developing countries. A survey of expert opinion is used to estimate productivity improvements and adoption rates for NRM research and its application. A supply-demand model for aquatic commodities is constructed to calculate the resulting change in economic surplus. Results indicate that ex ante economic impact is highest for NRM on coral reefs and inland aquatic systems.
dc.description.versionPeer Review
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.identifierhttp://rev.oxfordjournals.org/content/14/3/217.abstract
dc.identifier.citationResearch Evaluation 14(3): 217-227
dc.identifier.issn0958-2029
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12348/1908
dc.languageen
dc.publisherOxford University Press
dc.sourceResearch Evaluation
dc.titleEx-ante impact assessment for research on natural resources management: methods and application to aquatic resource systems
dc.typeJournal Article
dcterms.bibliographicCitationBriones, R. et al. (2005). Ex-ante impact assessment for research on natural resources management: methods and application to aquatic resource systems. Research Evaluation 14(3): 217-227

Files