Skip to main content
Log in

Marginal opportunity cost as a planning concept in natural resource management

  • Published:
The Annals of Regional Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Renewable resources are being used in non-sustainable ways in many countries in the world. The costs of non-sustainability need to be enumerated and valued in order to establish the desirability or otherwise of such development paths. The appropriate concept is marginal opportunity cost (MOC), a measure of the social costs of resource depletion. This concept is set in the context of models of the development process which stress the relationship between environment and development as a “coevolutionary” one rather than one of trading off material gain against environmental quality. Measures of MOC need to reflect the often intricate physical and ecological interlinkages within ecosystems, allowing for, e.g., the relationship between deforestation, soil erosion, streamflow and sedimentation. In turn, MOC comprises direct costs of resource use, the externalities arising from ecological interlinkage, and a user cost component which arises because of non-sustainable resource use. Formulated in this way, MOC has implications for shadow pricing exercises, national accounting, and for the choice of sector and geographical area for project appraisal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson, D. (1987).The Economics of Rural Afforestation in Ecologically Threatened Areas, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ayres, R. U. and Kneese, A. V. (1969). “Production, Consumption and Externalities.”American Economic Review. Vol. 59.

  3. Bartelmus, P. (1986).Environment and Development. Allen and Unwin, London.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boulding, K. (1966). “The Economics of Coming Spaceship Earth” in H. Jarrett, ed.Environmental Quality in Growing Economy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Brown, L. (1981).Building a Sustainable Society. Norton, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chambers, R. (1983).Rural Development: Putting the Last First. Longman, London.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Common, M. (1987). “Poverty and Progress Revisited,” in D. Collard, D. W. Pearce, and D. Ulph (eds.),Economics, Growth and Sustainable Environments. Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Conway, G. (1983). “Agroecosystem analysis.” ICCET Seris E. No. 1, Centre for Environmental Technology, Imperial College, London.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Hacche, G. (1979).The Theory of Economic Growth. Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hafkamp, W. (1984).Economic-Environmental Modeling in a National-Regional System. North Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Holdgate, M. (1982).The World Environment. 1972–82. Tycooly, Dublin.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jones, H. (1975).An Introduction to Modern Theories of Economic Growth. Nelson, London.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kneese, A. V., Ayres, R. U. and d'Arge, R. (1970).Economics and the Environment: A Materials Balance Approach. Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.

  14. Little, I. and Mirrlees, J. (1974).Project Appraisal and Planning for Development Countries. Heinemann, London.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Munasinghe, M. and Schramm, G. (1983).Energy Economics, Demand Management and Conservation Policy. Van Nostrand, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Norgaard, R. (1984). “Coevolutionary Development Potential,”Land Economics, Vol. 60.

  17. Norgaard, R. (1987). “The Epistemological Basis for Agroecology,” in A. M. Altieri.The Scientific Basis of Agroecology. Boulder, Colorado.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Page, T. (1977).Conservation and Economic Efficiency. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pearce, D. W. (1976) “The Limits of Cost Benefit Analysis as a Guide to Environmental Policy,”Kyklos. Fasc. 1.

  20. Pearce, D. W. (1987). “The Economics of Natural Resource Degradation in Developing Countries,” in R. K. Turner (ed.),Sustainable Environmental Management: Principles and Practice, Frances Pinter, London.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pearce, D. W. (1987a). “The Foundations of an Ecological Economics,”Ecological Modelling. (Forthcoming)

  22. Pearce, D. W. (1987b). “Optimal Prices for Sustainable Development,” in D. Collard, D. W. Pearce and D. Ulph (eds.),Economics, Growth and Sustainable Environments. Macmillan, London.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Pearce, D. W. (1987c) “Sustainable Development: Ecology and Economic Progress,” University College London (mimeo).

  24. Pearce, D. W. and Markandya, A. (1987). “The Costs of Natural Resource Depletion in Low Income Developing Countries.” University College, London. (Mimeo)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Repetto, R. (ed.). (1986a)The Global Possible. Yale University Press, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Repetto, R. (1986b).World Enough and Time. Yale University Press, New Haven.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Repetto, R. (1986c).Natural Resource Accounting in a Resource Based Economy: an Indonesian Case Study. World Resources Institute, Washington, D. C.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Repetto, R. (1986d).Economic Policy Reform for Natural Resource Conservation. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Sfeir-Younis, A. (1986).Soil Conservation in Developing Countries. World Bank, Washington, D.C. (Mimeo)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Squire, L. and Van der Tak, H. (1975).Economic Analysis of Projects. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Warford, J. (1987).Environmental Growth and Development, Projects Development Committee, World Bank, Washington, D.C. (Mimeo)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wilkinson, R. G. (1973).Poverty and Progress. Methuen, London.

    Google Scholar 

  33. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). (1980).World Conservation Strategy. Gland, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

  34. World Health Organization. (1986).World Health Statistics: Safe Water Supply and Sanitation: Prerequisites for Health for All. Geneva.

  35. World Resources Institute. (1986).World Resources Report. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pearce, D., Markandya, A. Marginal opportunity cost as a planning concept in natural resource management. Ann Reg Sci 21, 18–32 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01287280

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01287280

Keywords

Navigation