Application of the IEAB's Recommendations and Guidance for Economic
Analysis in Subbasin Planning to the Clearwater Subbasin Management Plan
April 2003
read full document > (30k PDF)
Introduction
This paper is being provided for two purposes:
- to suggest improvements related to economic content of the draft
Clearwater Subbasin Management Plan (the draft Clearwater Plan), and
- to help subbasin planners understand and implement suggestions
provided in the Independent Economic Analysis Board's (IEAB) Recommendations
and Guidance for Economic Analysis in Subbasin Planning (Economic
Recommendations) by reference to the draft Clearwater Plan.
The draft Clearwater Plan was released before the Economic
Recommendations were developed. Therefore, our suggestions should not be
taken as criticism of the Clearwater Plan. Rather, we take this
opportunity to suggest improvements in the draft plan related to
economics, and we use the Clearwater Assessment and Plan as points of
departure to show how the Economic Recommendations might be implemented.
The Clearwater Assessment does include some socioeconomic information, and
this information can be used as a basis for suggestions on how to make
such economic information more useful to planners and the Council.
The IEAB has reviewed the Independent Science Review Panel's (ISRP)
"Review of the Draft Clearwater
Subbasin Plan." This paper builds on the ISRP review by showing
how some of the ISRP recommendations are closely related to economic as
well as biological concerns.
In summary, the Clearwater Subbasin Plan did not progress far enough to
allow for meaningful economic analysis and interpretation of recommended
actions as contemplated by the IEAB in the Economic Recommendations. In
particular, recommendations for specific habitat and hatchery actions are
not provided. Instead, the Clearwater Management Plan is focused on
general goals and objectives. The Inventory provides a detailed list of
ongoing projects in the region, but the Management Plan does not provide
enough information about future priorities to suggest how future projects
might be different from the status quo. The IEAB believes that more
evaluation and bundling of ongoing, proposed and potential projects as
examples of strategies and actions could focus a revised Clearwater
subbasin plan and future subbasin planning efforts. This approach would
also be more likely to provide opportunities for economic impact and
cost-effectiveness analysis.
The Technical Guide for Subbasin Planners (the Technical Guide) is not
mandatory. Given flexibility, a variety of interpretations for plan
requirements, focus of effort, key terminologies, and methodologies for
prioritizing actions may be adopted. Such variations among subbasin plans
will not be helpful for the Council, because ultimately decisions will
have to be made that cut across subbasins. A focus on ongoing, proposed
and potential projects would focus limited planning resources on the most
immediate and likely actions and their effects.
The Economic Recommendations are provided below with the associated
sections of the Clearwater Plan identified. The Clearwater Plan
information is discussed, and related ISRP comments are mentioned if
relevant. Changes are suggested that would improve the usefulness of the
economic information. Again, the Clearwater Plan should not be faulted if
its economic information could be improved, because the authors did not
have the Economic Recommendations available when the Plan was developed.
Rather, this evaluation by the IEAB is intended to help improve the
Management Plan as it moves from the current draft to the final version.
Related links: Clearwater
Subbasin Planning
^ top
 |
Documents in Acrobat PDF format
require the Acrobat reader plugin |
|
home