Valuing Strategic Coastal Monitoring Data

Transcription

1 Valuing Strategic Coastal Monitoring Data Stewart Rowe Principal Coastal Officer Scarborough Borough Council North East Coastal Group Chairman Telford 28 th of March 2017

2 Simply put coastal monitoring is a long running story about coastal change on which to base future decisions. Data driven decisions backed up by verifiable data, rather than by intuition or personal experience. It is evidence based decision making.

3 The principle monitoring and analytical tasks include: Beach profile surveys Beach spot height surveys Bathymetric surveys Aerial surveys LiDAR surveys Production of digital orthophotos Habitat mapping Wave and tidal measurement Satellite remote sensing Data management and quality control Internet data dissemination Analysis of and reporting of data Integration of data to deliver national objectives Programme performance review

4

5 Approved budget 2016/17 to 2020/21 Region 2016/ / / / /21 Total Northeast 745, , , , ,383 2,902,660 East Riding 353,000 59,685 55,370 55,370 55, ,796 Anglia 1,080, , , , ,772 4,334,465 Southeast 1,537,200 1,776,094 1,675,414 1,589,363 1,494,707 8,072,779 Southwest 1,033, , , , ,791 3,961,328 Northwest 835, , , , ,224 3,149,972 Total 5,583,737 4,539,925 4,732,766 4,108,325 4,035,247 23,000,000

6 Monitoring budget represents about 2% of EA s 6-year FCERM capital programme

7 The Programme data have found a wide range of uses by other government agencies and departments and other strategic research

8 A National Framework has existed since 2008 for the delivery of a suite of Regional Coastal Monitoring programmes across England. However, there is presently no mechanism that is widely and unequivocally accepted for monetising this value within the context of a conventional business case. This results in battles over the economic appraisals that are required every five years to support business cases for the continuation of the National Framework. This presentation aims to will review existing approaches to valuing coastal monitoring data with the intent of establishing an agreed methodology at the outset of next five-year programme so that statistics and information can proactively be collected pertaining to data uses to help corroborate future business cases when they are next required.

9 1 st Business Case a PAR for the 2008 to 2011 Programme PAR made the clear statement that Assessing the benefits of coastal monitoring is not easily assessed in a conventional PAG3 sense. Benefits calculated based on enabling project savings such as savings in the collection of field data for strategies and works. This involved assumptions for example savings in data collection for schemes based on 10% of capital expenditure based on scheme related studies.

10 2 nd business case a StAR for the programme It is recognised that conventional approaches to benefit cost analysis as used in coastal risk management are not appropriate to a monitoring programme. Professor Andy Bradbury Programme accounted for 5% of annual investment in coastal flood risk management. Broadly based on putting a value to various datasets. Also accounted for intangibles. Based on savings to schemes not damages averted.

11 3 rd and current StAR Savings in delivery of capital and maintenance of FCERM Savings arising from improved phasing of schemes Operational savings in material costs at beach management sites Savings arising from identification of non-commercial supply of beach recharge materials Benefits to construction phase- information for contractors Management savings in FCERM Efficiency savings in contract management Savings in time arising from acquisition of data Legal requirements avoidance of fines

12 Upcoming 4 th Business case Website downloads National Strategic monitoring data from the Regions is centrally held at the Channel Coast observatory. The calculation of data valuation preferred by the programme is quite simple, average the cost of data collection for a specific task across the programme and attribute a value to the data downloaded accordingly. For example the average cost per square km of Lidar survey data is 350km2, therefore each km2 downloaded from the CCO website is valued at 350km2. (This does not include any procurement costs or project management costs) and so on Results show that since 2011 ~ 1.1b of data has been downloaded.

13 Data type Total download value No. downloads Unit cost Unit ABMS aerial photos 965,300 2, Image Bathymetry - single beam 157,636,650 85,209 1,850 Survey/Management Unit Bathymetry - swath 280,434, ,586 1,850 1 km 2 tile Lidar 212,840, , km 2 tile Ortho-photography/FCIR 149,226, , km 2 tile Time series, waves, tides, met 196,203,000 28,029 7,000 Per site per year Topographic 97,023, , Survey/Management Unit Seabed Mapping 2,950, ,000 Varies, typically km 2 Reports - Annual Survey Report 14,295,000 2,859 5,000 Reports - BMP 11,776,000 1,472 8,000 Reports - Coastal Wave Network 1,125, ,000 Per report Reports - Tide Network 92, ,000 Reports - Technical 300, ,000 Reports - Other 882, ,000 To date: 14/03/2017 (all regions) 1,125,750,250 1,456,643

14

15

16

17 We need to look for a better way to account for the social, economic and environmental values that result from our activities. The language varies impact, return, benefit, value the real question is how much of a difference are our monitoring activities making now and in the future?

18 Conclusion If we accept the why we collect coastal data the next step is to agree the value this data brings to society in return for investment society makes in the programme, what is the programmes social return on investment? We argue that the value of the data can be calculated by using the cost of collection as a proxy for benefit or social return on investment, which when downloaded can be apportioned and multiplied to create a robust benefit case argument for the next business case. Questions and thoughts?