Thursday, May 21, 2020
An evaluation of the business and financial performance of morrisons - Free Essay Example
Sample details Pages: 22 Words: 6473 Downloads: 8 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Statistics Essay Did you like this example? Part 1 Project Objectives and Overall Research Approach 1.1 Introduction Markets across the world are gradually lifting themselves out of the doom and gloom of recession. Most markets in the UK have shown relative resiliency as they try and recover. Consumer spending and confidence have been fairly low due to adverse pressures created by the implementation of stringent fiscal and monetary policies by the government. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "An evaluation of the business and financial performance of morrisons" essay for you Create order The past couple of years have seen the worst effects of recession, hence businesses had to improvise and develop strategies which would focus on retaining existing customers while attracting new customers simultaneously. WM Morrison Supermarkets plc (herein after simply Morrison) has been a success story amidst all the large scale corporate failure and has managed to remain profitable while its competitors and businesses in general have struggled a great deal. Morrisons was founded by William Morrison in 1899, operating as an egg and butter stall in Bradford, North West England. From its humble beginning Morrisons grew rapidly both in terms of its size and its product portfolio. It was only in 1967 that Morrisons was first floated on the London Stock Exchange. As per TNSglobal.com (Nov 08) Morrisons accounted for 11.8% of the total retail supermarket share in the year 2008, making it the smallest of the big four supermarkets. Morrisons operated predominantly in Northern England and it was only in 2004 that Morrisons expanded its operations in the southern part of the UK through the acquisition of Safeway superstores. Further, as per the Annual Statements published in 2010, Morrisons turnover stood at 15.4bn which was generated from 420 superstores all across the UK. Morrisons operates entirely in the UK market. 1.2 Reasons for choosing the topic Morrisons mission statement which states Keeping things simple has often fascinated me as to how could such a massive organisation operate effectively by keeping things simple at all times. Therefore I choose to analyse the financial statements of Morrisons PLC over a three year period which would provide me answers to my personal curiosities whilst also completing an important research report in my academic career. Most of the knowledge required to compile the research report was acquired through my ACCA studies but this report took me one step further as it provided me with a platform from where I could apply my knowledge in a real life scenario. 1.3 Project Objectives This project report aims to achieve the following objectives: Analysis of the business and financial performance of Morrison PLC over a period of three years i.e. from the 1st of February 2007 to 31st of January 2010. A reflective analysis of the year on year performance of Morrison PLC with critical analysis of the effectiveness of current business strategies and their adequacy to deal with future business and market challenges. Evaluation of Morrisons competitive market position in comparison with its major competitors (with particular emphasis on J Sainsbury PLC, herein after simply Sinsburys). 1.4 Research Questions The project report aims to answer the following research questions: Effectiveness of Morrisons operational and financial strategies over the three year period in review. How well did Morrison perform in comparison to its major competitors (through the use of analytical analysis tools such as ratio analysis)? 1.5 Research Approach Following is the research methodology adopted while compiling this research report: Evaluating Morrisons business performance through the use of business models such as PESTEL, SWOT and Porters 5 forces. Comparative analysis of Morrisons PLC financial statements through the calculation of key ratios such as: profitability, liquidity, gearing, investor returns and efficiency. Accessing Morrisons competitive position with its major competitors (mainly Sainsburys) through the ratios calculated. Part 2 Information Gathering and Accounting/ Business techniques 2.1 Sources of Information 2.1.1 Annual Reports and Summary of Financial Statements The main source of information utilised for compiling the research and analysis report was the annual statements of Morrison PLC. The annual reports consisted of all the relevant financial information for ratio analysis. 2.1.2 Books on interpretation of Financial and Business Data Numerous business study books and articles were read to mainly understand the scope of business analyses models and their effectiveness in analysing Morrisons performance for the last three years. Books were also consulted to ascertain key ratios and comprehend them. I also had to understand what the ratios meant in the retail supermarket sector and realise the limitation of ratio analyses. 2.1.3 Media and Internet sources Electronic and print media were the most important sources of information. The annual statements were downloaded from the internet and expert views on Morrisons performance were consulted from the Financial Times and other authentic business journals. 2.2 Methods used in collecting information The entire research is based on secondary data (i.e. data collected by someone else for their own purposes). The reasons for basing the research upon secondary resources were that no obligation to conduct primary research and the limited time period in which the research had to be conducted and then the compilation of the report. Almost all the literature reviewed and consulted was done with certain amount of scepticism (critical review) so at to ensure that the information collected presented a balanced overview. Therefore the research data was collected from various sources. Internal management view was ascertained from the detailed annual statements, as the directors are responsible for producing such documents. A standard unqualified opinion by the auditors gave further authenticity to the financial information on which almost the entire report is based. As Morrison is also a constituent of London Stock Exchange independent media and expert views were available providing key insight in the companys past and present performance and the future outlook. 2.3 Limitations of information gathering As mentioned in the earlier sections of the report the research was entirely based on secondary data therefore a very slight possibility remains that the data might have been inaccurate and unreliable. Even though the research data has been very carefully selected the chances of error remain but the majority of the work can be deemed authentic and accurate. Further, the amount of information available through various resources was immense and therefore impractical to critically review all of it which might indicate that certain key information was either missed or overlooked. Almost all the information in the annual statement is historical in nature and therefore just reviewing past performances might not truly reflect present and future expectations. 2.4 Explanation of the accounting and/or business techniques The research report focuses on evaluating the business and financial performance of Morrison over a period of 3 years. The financial side of the evaluation will be done through the use of key performance related ratios, whilst the business performance will be examined through PESTEL, SWOT and Porters 5 forces models to evaluate macro and micro activities of the business. 2.4.1 Business Performance 2.4.1.1 PESTEL analysis PESTEL is abbreviated for Political, Economical, Social, Technological, Environmental and Legal framework. According to Johnson et al. (2008)[1] it involves an examination of the macro environment of an organisation with a view to identifying the factors that might affect a number of vital variables that are likely to influence the organisations supply and demand levels and its costs. 2.4.1.2 SWOT Analysis Johnson et al (2008) states that SWOT analysis is used to appraise the companys internal strengths, weaknesses, external opportunities and threats. Strengths and weaknesses are usually associated from processes within the company and opportunities and threats arise from factors outside the companys control. 2.4.1.3 Porters 5 Forces Analysis Porter (1980) states that it is essential for companies to have a detailed knowledge of competitors influence on the market and that if a company considers the five competitive forces it will be able to appreciate the structure of its industry and thereby be able to put itself in a position to withstand competitor pressure. 2.4.2 Financial Performance: 2.4.2.1 Ratio Analysis Financial ratios can be calculated by comparing two figures in the accounts which are inter-related in some way. The following ratios will be used to evaluate and analyse the financial performance of Morrison: 2.4.2.2 Liquidity Ratios BPP (2009) states that liquidity ratios illustrate the solvency of a business i.e. whether it is in a position to repay its short term debts. They focus on short term assets and liabilities. Creditors are likely to be interested in liquidity ratios to assess whether they will receive the money that they are owed. The ratios that will be calculated under this category are: * Current Ratio= current assets/ current liabilities, Providers of short term credit prefer a high current ratio. * Quick Ratio= current assets-inventory/ current liability Also commonly known as acid test ratio, it is a more severe test of liquidity as it does not include inventory as a liquid asset as they are not guaranteed to be sold, they may become obsolete or deteriorate. 2.4.2.3 Profitability Ratios According to BPP (2009) stakeholders such as shareholders, owners, managers, employers and potential investors are all likely to be interested in the profitability and efficiency of a business. The ratios calculated under this category will be: * Return on Capital Employed= profit before interest and tax/ capital employed The ROCE relates to the profit generated from operating activities with the capital employed. Capital employed is generally the net assets of the company and is also referred to as shareholders fund plus long term borrowings. * Gross profit margin= gross profit/sales * 100% Shows the gross profit made on sales turnover. * Net profit margin= net profit/sales * 100% The ratio helps to measure how well a business is controlling its overheads. 2.4.2.4 Activity/ Efficiency ratios BPP (2009) states that activity or asset utilisation ratios allow a business to measure how effectively it uses its resources. The ratios that would be calculated under this category will be: * Receivables Turnover = credit sales/ trade receivables * Receivables period = receivables/ sales * 365days Receivables turnover and receivables period would be used to assess time taken by Morrisons to reclaim its short term debt on average. * Inventory Turnover = cost of sales/ inventory According to BPP (2009) this ratio measures the number of times during the year a business sells the value of its stocks * Inventory holding period = inventory/ cost of sales * 365days Stock turnover can be expressed in terms of the number of days it takes to sell inventory. 2.4.2.5 Gearing Ratio BPP (2009) states that the gearing ratio looks at the balance of funding in the capital structure of a business. Under this category the ratios that will be calculated are following: * Debt-equity ratio = total debt/ total equity This ratio establishes the total amount of shareholders fund (equity capital) in comparison to the total amount of borrowed capital (i.e. long term loans). * Interest cover = profit before tax and interest/ interest payable According to BPP (2009) the gearing ratio (i.e. debt-equity ratio) is a statement of financial position measure of financial risk. Interest cover is an income statement measure. The ratio assesses the businesss ability to pay interest by comparing profit and interest payments. 2.4.2.6 Investors Ratio Investors are interested in the returns or dividends they may get from holding shares. BPP (2009) states that a number of ratios can be used to measure these returns. The following ratios will be calculated under this category: * EPS= profit available to shareholders/ no. of shares ranked for dividend BPP (2009) defines EPS as a measure of how much each share is earning. It reflects how much is available to be paid to shareholders. * Price Earnings ratio= share price/ earnings per share According to BPP (2009) the price/earnings ratio is said to reflect the confidence shown in the company It shows how many years, at current earnings, it will take an investor to recover the cost of the share. * Dividend Yield= dividend per share/ market price * 100% BPP (2009) defines the dividend yield ratio as a measure of the value of the return on share for an investor. It shows the dividend per share as a percentage of the market price. 2.5 Limitation of ratio analysis BPP (2009) states that ratio analysis is not necessarily a complete measure of assessing a company financial performance. Limitations that can be associated with ratio analysis are as follows: Accounting principles followed whilst preparing financial statements should represent a true and fair reflection of the company and should be consistently applied over a period of time. Ratio analysis looses its credibility when management deliberately uses accounting policies to manipulate financial statements. Businesses are faced with unique risks even though they operate in the same industry. Hence the way businesses deal with there risks vary, limiting the scope of ratio analysis. BPP (2009) states that ratios on their own are meaningless. They have to be used as a benchmark to compare performance of the organisation against a similar company operating in a similar industry. Certain ratios are of a subjective nature therefore having standard definitions and formulae might not always be possible. Macroeconomic factors such as inflation rates, interest rates, changes in accounting policies and procedures are not accounted for when calculating ratios. Ratios also fail to recognise changes in corporate strategy and risk exposure of the company. 2.6 Limitation of SWOT / PESTEL / Porters Five Forces Results of SWOT analysis cannot be standardised as a threat for one organisation can be an opportunity for the other in a completely different environment. * One of the main disadvantages, as described by Dess et al (2004), is that SWOT analysis is primarily a static assessment. It focuses too much of a firms attention on one moment in time. Hence a SWOT analysis may ignore changing circumstances. * SWOT, PESTEL or Porters 5 Forces does not describe factors in terms of quantitative performance indicators. Part 3 Results, Analysis, Conclusions and Recommendations. 3.1 PESTEL analysis 3.1.1 P- POLITICAL As per the Annual Statement (2010) Morrisons did not make any political donation which is the Group policy. However this does not mean that Morrisons operation are not affected by the political decisions made by the government in the UK. Consumer spending power, both in the long and the short term are dictated by the governments fiscal and monetary policies. The UK economy like most other global economies suffered adversely due to the global recession which was directly linked with the global credit crunch crisis. During tough economic times consumer spending power is generally low due to soaring unemployment and uncertainty in the economic environment. Government in the UK has taken important measures to stimulate growth such as reducing VAT (indirect taxation) from 17.5% to 15% in the year ending December 2009, quantitative easing (i.e. pumping money in to the economy) and keeping interest rates low, encouraging people to spend rather than save. Morrisons activities in the retail supermarket industry are regulated by the Competition Commission which keeps a close eye on the activities of the so called big four supermarkets. This ensures that supermarkets do not enter in to price wars or collude to fix prices. Morrisons is also bound by UK and European legislations such as Health and Safety at work Act and National Minimum wage Act. Morrisons cannot legislate for changes in government policy but should pre-empt decisions and ensure that it is ready to face challenges which might result from changes in government policies. But it is safe to assume that Morrisons operates within a very coherent political set up and faces no barriers to trade due to governments political decision making. 3.1.2 E- Economical Morrison operates only within the UK retail supermarket industry and is therefore directly affected by the macroeconomic environment. The UK economy has been under recession over the past few years, which means contraction in the economy, leading to unemployment and weak consumer spending power due to reduction in disposable income. The direct affect of this is that customers look for bargain shopping rather than spending on premium quality products. But as Morrison operates in the retail grocery market the demand for most of its products remains largely in-elastic due to the fact that people have to feed themselves and provide for their daily needs no matter how hard their budgets are squeezed. Additionally people tend to buy food from supermarkets and eat at home rather than spending money in restaurants. Morrison has massively improved its own brand products which offer value for money and appeals to consumers who are willing to buy bargain products rather than premium quality products especially during tough economic times. Annual Statement (2010) states Sales of our own label Value range grew by 34% as consumers tightened their belts in a challenging economic environment. The following table taken from the Annual Statement 2010 further illustrates how Morrisons has consolidated its position in the UK market during the past few years: Therefore it can concluded on the basis of the above figures that Morrisons was able to enhance its position with the retail supermarket industry during adverse economic climate due to the fact it was able to supply quality products at modest prices than its competitors. 3.2.3 S- Social The social trend in UKs grocery market is that families shop almost regularly every week, mostly on the weekends targeting large supermarkets which provide them with all their family requirements under one roof. As stated in the Annual Statement 2010 Morrisons operates from 425 mega stores all across the UK catering towards the social trend of the market. Furthermore there is an ever growing emphasis towards health eating and a sustained fight against obesity. People are getting more and more conscious about what they eat. Morrisons remained a step ahead of its social demands and re-launched its Eat Smart product range and as per the Annual statement (2010 pg 21) Sales were up by 7% reflecting consumers continuing demand for a healthier diet and their concern over the nutritional value of the food they eat. 3.2.4 T- Technology Businesses across the UK are spending heavily on technological advancements, in order to gain competitive advantage over their competitors. Customers in the grocery market are increasingly using the internet to shop for their grocery needs therefore Morrisons has developed a very efficient (website) and robust (delivery system) mechanism to cater for such customers. Morrison has also launched self service check-outs in almost all of its large supermarkets resulting in improved customer service (i.e. decrease in waiting time to be served) subsequently increasing sales. Morrison is also rolling out the use of Voice-picking technology across all its grocery warehouses which has proved particularly successful in increasing depot productivity and pick accuracy and hence improving in-store product availability. (Grocerytrader, 2011) 3.2.5 E- Environmental Businesses across the world are under intense pressure to reduce their carbon footprints on the environment and adopt eco-friendly and sustainable processes. Morrisons thoroughly understands its environmental responsibility and has taken important steps to reduce its carbon footprints and subsequently become GREENER. Below is a graphical representation of decrease in Morrisons carbon footprint as stated in their Annual Review 2010 (pg14) (Source Morrison Annual Review 2010, pg 14) Morrison Annual Report and Financial Statements (2010) states that during the year, free reusable bags were issued to customers, and as a result of this and other initiatives carrier bag consumption was reduced by 126 million bags. Morrisons during 2010 also completed the conversion of filling station pumps to highly efficient vapour recovery pumps which emit much reduced levels of fuel vapour in to the atmosphere. Morrisons Halifax store was awarded an excellent rating from the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method indicating as to how much Morrison regards the environment in which it operates. (Morrisons, 2011) 3.2.6 L- Legal Morrison is obliged to operate in accordance with the British and European law. It has to ensure that labour and employment laws are not compromised in handling staff affairs. Any violation would result in expensive lawsuits and negative publicity. Morrison has to satisfy the minimum wage requirements. 3.3 SWOT analysis: 3.3.1 S- Strengths: Morrison has been regarded as one of the best providers of fresh quality food items. Morrisons business strategy of being the The food specialist for everyone distinguishes it from other grocery chains. Morrison takes immense pride in the provision of quality fresh food which is prepared in-store. This allows customers to choose from a variety of fresh food items such as: baked bread, meat cut to order, fish, seasonal deli selections and a range of delicious cakes and treats. Such diverse fresh food range is a major strength of Morrison and is also widely acknowledged by its customer base. Following is an illustration of the three distinct brand values of Morrison that strengthen their vision as stated in Annual Statement 2010 (pg 6): (Source Morrison Annual Review 2010, pg 6) As it is evident from the above diagram, Morrisons overall business strategy of Keeping things simple allows Morrison to concentrate on its historical strengths which is providing fresh quality food at reasonable prices. 3.3.2 W- Weaknesses: Morrison only expanded its operation in the Southern part of the UK in 2004 after the acquisition of Safeway superstores and still heavily relies on the Northern part of the UK which accounts for the major chunk of the sales revenue (55%). This leaves Morrison vulnerable to any adverse fluctuations in the economic activity of the Northern part of the UK. The following illustration taken from Annual Statement 2010 (pg 7, Courtesy Kantar World panel) depicts Morrisons market share by geographical region in the UK: (Source Morrison Annual Review 2010, pg 5) Morrison does not operate a loyalty scheme which rewards customers for shopping repeatedly in Morrison stores. This is a major weakness as some of the other loyalty schemes operated by competitors such as Tesco (Tesco Club card) and Sainsburys (Nectar Card) are able to attract secondary shoppers and retain primary shoppers through attractive rewards. Morrison at present largely operates through megastores whereas its competitors are increasingly investing in smaller convenience stores which are able to cater for local businesses and day to day shopping requirements. Tesco, Sainsburys and ASDA are increasingly capturing the local convenience stores market and if Morrison does not follow suit it risks losing a major chunk of the grocery market to its competitors. Morrison only operates in the UK market. Its main competitors ASDA and TESCO operate globally and are in a better position to offset their UK losses against any foreign gains whereas Morrison will have to bear the losses. The current recession indicated that developing economies such as India, Brazil and China were still posting strong growth patterns whereas the UK economy might be heading towards a double dip recession which would further dent Morrisons profitability. 3.3.3 O- Opportunities Morrison can further improve on its own brand products. In 2010 sales of own brand products were up by 34% indicating strong growth. During tough economic times customers tend to buy value for money products rather than premium quality products. Morrison can cater for such customers and further improve its revenues. E-commerce is increasingly becoming socially popular and more and more people are shopping for their grocery needs on-line. Morrison can improve its website and develop a more robust delivery system. Hence it can improve on its revenues and market share. Morrison should expand its operations in to lucrative developing economies and take its trusted brand over to countries such as India, China, Russia and Brazil and further consolidate its position as a highly trusted supplier of quality fresh food products. 3.3.4 T- Threats As the current UK government aims to reduce budget deficit it is introducing austerity measures and has also increased VAT (from 17.5% to 20%), putting more pressure on disposable income. Many experts fear a double-dip recession which might prove disastrous for businesses in the UK. Morrison has to ensure it remains a step ahead and continues to provide products which offer value for money or otherwise will risk losing sales and its market share to its competitors. This is validated by the fact that there has been a significant increase in demand of value goods compared to premium goods. (Source Morrison Annual Report and Financial Statements 2009, pg 16) Morrison so far seems reluctant to expand through convenience stores and depends largely on opening new megastores. There remains an imminent threat that Morrison might fail to seek planning permission from local authorities and might fail to expand. But however this further advocate towards the fact that Morrison should look to expand through both megastores and convenience stores. As per the TNS report of December 2008 the market was affected from the ALDI effect, this meant people were hunting for bargain products rather than quality products at premium pricing. Even though discount brands such as LIDL and ALDI represent a very small segment of the market Morrison should remain vigilant of their presence as they can easily erode in to Morrisons market share. (Source: https://adage.com/article/news/u-k-supermarket-chains-feel-aldi-effect/131086/, Accessed 20th March 2011) 3.4 Porters Five Forces 3.4.1 Threat of new entrants The threat of new entrants in to the UK retail grocery market remains largely low due to the massive amount of capital outlay required and the power of the existing so called big-four. TESCO, ASDA, Sainsburys and Morrisons operate very powerful marketing and advertisement campaigns making it very difficult for new entrants to gain a foot hold in the market. Following is a diagrammatic illustration of the big four dominance in the UK market: (Source Morrison Annual Review 2010, pg 5) Furthermore supermarket giants like TESCO and Sainsburys operate a very sophisticated and rewarding loyalty schemes. This ensures that customers stay loyal and do not switch to other brands. Large supermarket chains such as Morrison are able to offer significant price reductions and a large product portfolio. This also acts as a significant barrier to entry. Even though the threat of new entrants is low, Morrison has to be proactive to new competition and steps should be taken to neutralise their affect on the market. 3.4.2 Bargaining power of suppliers According to the Competition Commission report published in 2008 suppliers in the grocery/retail sector have little or no influence on the big four supermarket chains. The reason for such lack of influence is that supermarket chains such as Morrison can achieve a high volume of turnover on a very short period of time and therefore can dictate product prices to their suppliers. Suppliers have little or no choice but to enter in to such agreements with large supermarkets as they ensure regular cash-inflows and large orders. (Source: https://www.competition-commission.org.uk/rep_pub/reports/2008/538grocery.htm, Accessed 27th March 2011) Morrison ensures that it has a very cordial relationship with all its suppliers as the products they supply are of a paramount importance to the Morrisons brand name. As per Morrisons (2010 pg 13) the board adopts a policy which is to be fair and honest in dealings with farmers and suppliers. As of 2010 Morrisons average credit period stood at 29 days as compared to 33 days in 2009. Suppliers who constantly ensure quality products are supplied on time are given necessary incentives. 3.4.3 Bargaining power of customers The bargaining power of customers in the retail grocery market remains significantly high. Although the customers are not in a position to directly affect the price of an individual product but due to readily available alternatives they can alienate Morrison without any prejudice or prior notice. Therefore Morrisons has to remain very proactive when forecasting market trends and should always try and innovate ways through which it can look after its customers. 3.4.4 Threat of substitutes The threat of substitute products and retailers is significantly high as cost of switching products or suppliers is virtually non-existent. Customers in the retail grocery market do not follow a predictive trend and get disillusioned very quickly ,without any specific reason. Morrisons business strategy of Keeping things Simple and being the Food Specialist goes a long way in attracting customers to its megastores all across the UK. But regular incentives such Eat Healthy, Special Offers and Discounts should also be utilized to attract new and retain existing customers. 3.4.5 Rivalry amongst competitors Rivalry amongst the top-four competitors remains very aggressive and direct. Apart from the direct competition from the big four Morrison should also be vary of local (Iceland) and European (ALDI and LIDL) discount brands as they can also erode in to Morrisons market through aggressive pricing policies. Even though customers buying patterns are unpredictable but generally during tough economic times customers tend to hunt for bargains and therefore are prone to be attracted towards discount brands but Morrison should further diversify its own brand range and cater for such customers. As Morrison solely focuses on the provision of fresh quality food items it can eliminate aggressive rivalry by further improving on product quality and pricing. 3.5 Ratio Analysis Ratios on their own are meaningless and provide little information unless they are benchmarked against something appropriate. Therefore Morrisons ratio will be benchmarked against Sainsburys as it represents a major competitor and operates within the same industry facing similar kind of risks and rewards. Morrisons ratio will also be compared with previous year figure in order to achieve a relative trend in the financial performance over the past three years 3.5.1 Liquidity Ratios 2008 2009 2010 Morrison Liquidity Ratios Current Ratio           0.49           0.53           0.51 Acid test Ratio           0.25           0.28           0.24 Sainsburys Liquidity Ratios Current ratio 0.62 0.54 0.64 Acid test Ratio 0.36 0.30 0.39 3.5.1.1 Current Ratio An increasing trend can be observed in Morrisons current ratio from 2008 to 2010(Appendix C). The current ratio indicates the ability of Morrisons PLC to pay its short term liabilities from its short term assets. On the contrary Sainsburys current ratio has seen a see-saw effect going from 0.62 to 0.54 to 0.64 from 2008 to 2010(Appendix F). It is also worth considering that Morrisons operates almost entirely on cash and carry business approach and also adopts a very aggressive selling approach therefore little inventory is left over. 3.5.1.2 Acid Test Ratio Acid Test ratio of both companies reveal a similar trend as the current ratio: a small increase in 2009 for Morrison and a small dip in 2009 for Sainsburys. Acid test ratio is a much more stringent test of liquidity as it removes stock or inventory from the calculations in order to reveal the instant solvency of Morrison / Sainsburys. The numbers represent the fact that the stock constitutes almost 50% of the current assets (577/1094=53%) in the three years on average which fulfils Morrisons sales intensive approach. This also points out towards the fact that almost all goods sold are financed by creditors (i.e. suppliers). 3.5.1.3 Reasoning The decrease in the current and acid test ratio of Morrison from 2009 to 2010 can be attributed to the increase in financial liabilities from 1 m in 2009 to 213 m in 2010. This increase in bank loans has been due to aggressive expanding strategy of Morrison where they have opened 19 new Co-op/Somerfield Stores in the first half of 2010. (Source Morrison Annual Report and Financial Statements 2010, pg 60) Opening new stores does require a large capital expenditure hence increasing gearing ratio, but this also means that more cash is required to buy stocks that will be sold in those supermarkets. From 2007 to 2010 Morrison has opened a total of 57 new stores nationwide under their strategy of National to Nationwide. The following picture explains the increase in Morrison stores from 2007 to 2010: (Source Morrison Annual Report and Financial Statements 2010, pg 7) 3.5.2 Profitability Ratios 2008 2009 2010 Morrison Profitability Ratios Return on capital employed (ROCE) 13.98% 14.85% 18.33% Gross Profit Margin 6.31% 6.28% 6.89% Net Profit Margin 4.72% 4.62% 5.89% Sainsburys Profitability Ratios Return on capital employed (ROCE) 10.74% 15.38% 14.30% Gross Profit Margin 5.62% 5.48% 5.42% Net Profit Margin 2.97% 3.56% 3.56% 3.5.2.1 Return on Capital employed Morrisons return on capital employed has increased from 2008 to 2010 from 13.98% to 18.33% (Appendix C). Comparatively Sainsburys ROCE has only increased marginally from 10.74% to 14.30 in the years 2008 to 2010 (Appendix F). The ROCE indicates the percentage of profit made on capital invested; hence a higher value of ROCE indicates efficient use of capital and a lower value vice versa. Morrisons average ROCE for 2008 to 2010 is 15.72% and that of Sainsburys is 13.47%, revealing more profitability in Morrison. The improvement in Morrisons ROCE is good news for both existing and potential shareholders. 3.5.2.3 Gross Profit margin Morrisons gross profit margin (GPM) was calculated as 6.31%, 6.28% and 6.89% for 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively (Appendix C). Gross profit margin indicates the profit margin achieved by Morrisons on it sales revenue after deducting direct costs. Sainsburys on the other hand had a GPM of 5.62%, 5.48% and 5.42% in 2008, 2009 and 2010 respectively(Appendix F). This indicates Morrisons has adopted a much stringent cost control mechanism, compared to Sainsbury, while being profitable at the same time. 3.5.2.4 Net Profit Margin Morrisons net profit margin (NPM) has increased from 4.72% in 2008 to 5.89% in 2010(Appendix C). The increase in NPM of Morrisons in 2010 can be largely attributable to reduction in administrative (overhead) expenses. This is achieved by minimising waste and maximising efficiency in individual cost centres. 3.5.2.5 Reasoning One of the main reasons for the increase in the profitability of Morrisons is its ever increasing market share that has been climbing from 11.9% in 2007 to 12.6% in 2010. As per Morrisons Annual Report and Financial statements 2010 total average basket sizes increased by 2.4% and customer numbers were up 6.7%. On average 10.5m customers are now visiting our stores each week This is confirmed by the fact that the UK grocery market has increased by 4.7% in 2009/10 and in that increase Morrisons percentage increase has been 9.1%. (Annual Report and Financial Statement 2010, pg 5) 3.5.3 Efficiency Ratios 2008 2009 2010 Morrison Efficiency Ratios Receivable turnover (times)         65.17         59.30         76.67 Receivable collection period (days)           5.60           6.16           4.76 Inventory turnover times         29.34         29.41         26.71 Inventory turnover in days         12.44         12.41         13.67 Sainsburys Efficiency Ratios Receivable turnover (times) 86.59 96.98 92.86 Receivable collection period (days) 4.22 3.76 3.93 Inventory turnover times 26.19 27.45 28.44 Inventory turnover in days 13.94 13.30 12.83 3.5.3.1 Receivable turnover and receivable collection days Morrisons receivable collection days has decreased from 5.6 to 4.76 in the years 2008 to 2010(Appendix C). This is because Morrisons rarely sells its grocery and food products on credit. Hence the amount of receivables and the time taken to recover the receivables is low. In comparison while Morrisons receivable period averaged 5.51 days that of Sainsburys averaged 3.97 days(Appendix C and F). 3.5.3.2 Inventory turnover The inventory turnover in times has of Morrisons has decreased from 29.34 to 26.71 times in the years 2008 to 2009(Appendix C). On the contrary that of Sainsburys has seen the opposite effect of increasing from 26.19 to 28.00 times(Appendix F). 3.5.3.3 Reasoning The decrease in the receivable days indicates efficient credit control procedures. The advantage of having a lower value for this ratio is that, the lower it is the more Morrison can invest and earn interest or pay up their trade creditors. The decrease in the inventory turnover days can lead to the conclusion that since 2008 to 2010, either Morrison has raised its price or their customers have started buying more premium products. This observation can be supported by Morrisons claim that the sales growths of their value products have seen a dip in 2009 with growth in their premium products as UK tries to come out of recession. (Source: Annual Report and Financial Statements 2010 , Morrison, pg 5) 3.5.4 Gearing Ratios 2008 2009 2010 Morrison Gearing Ratios Gearing           0.32           0.37           0.34 Interest Cover (times)         10.20         11.18         15.12 Sainsburys Gearing Ratios Gearing 0.41 0.50 0.47 Interest Cover (times) 4.02 4.55 4.80 3.5.4.1 Debt/equity ratio Morrisons gearing stood at 34% in 2010, 37% in 2009, and 32% in 2008(Appendix C). This indicates that the companys operations are funded largely by equity capital rather than debt capital. It also means that for every 1 invested by the equity holders 0.34 pence were invested by borrowed capital. Sainsburys gearing on the other hand was calculated as 47% in 2010 and 50% in 2009(Appendix F) 3.5.4.2 Interest Cover This was calculated as 15.12 times in 2010 and 11.12 times in 2009(Appendix C). The relative stability in interest cover ratio is very encouraging and guarantees a good credit rating for the company before its financiers. 3.5.4.3 Reasoning Even though Morrisons gearing is in line with industry expectations but it can be argued that borrowed capital is easier than raising capital. Morrisons net debt has increased significantly during the past three years as depicted above. The small increase in 2009 is due to organic growth of Morrison in 2009, where they opened 11 organic stores and 34 former Co-op/Somerfield stores opened (preliminary results 31 January 2010). This led to Morrisons taking in heavy long term loans hence increasing their gearing ratio in 2009. (Source: Annual Report and Financial Statements 2010, Morrison, pg 25) 3.5.5 Investors Ratios 2008 2009 2010 Morrison Investor Ratio Earnings per share (pence)         20.79         17.39         22.80 Price/earnings ratio         13.90         15.57         13.13 Dividend per share (pence)           4.80           5.80           8.20 Dividend Yield 1.66% 2.14% 2.74% Sainsburys Investor Ratio Earnings per share (pence) 19.14 16.62 32.10 Price/earnings ratio 19.69 17.63 10.45 Dividend per share (pence) 11.4 13.2 14.2 Dividend Yield 3.02% 4.51% 4.24% 3.5.5.1 Earnings per share Morrisons earnings per share were calculated as 22.8, 17.4 and 20.8 pence for 2010, 2009 and 2008 effectively(Appendix C). After a slight dip in 2009 which meant shareholders were losing on their wealth Morrisons has posted a strong EPS in 2010 indicating to its equity shareholders that they will increase their wealth if they continue to invest in Morrison. Comparing that to Sainsburys EPS, we can see an immense increase in its value from 2008 to 2010(Appendix F). 3.5.5.2 Price earnings ratio Price/earnings ratio indicates the amount of time in years it would take Morrisons equity shareholder to recover their investment at current earnings. Morrisons PE ratio was calculated as 13.13, 15.57 and 13.90 times in 2010, 2009 and 2008(Appendix C). The decrease in PE ratio could be largely attributable to the fall in share prices as a result of uncertainty faced by the investors in both the UK and global markets. A similar trend is observed in the P/E ratio of Sainsburys from 2008 to 2010(Appendix F). 3.5.5.3 Dividend Yield Morrisons dividend yield was calculated as 2.74, 2.14 and 1.66% in 2010, 2009 and 2008(Appendix C). After retaining profits in 2009 and 2008 Morrisons is willing to give more profits as dividends to its equity shareholders. It must be noted that profits retained are utilised for business development and expansion. 3.5.5.4 Reasoning The dip in 2009 could be largely attributed to very tough business environment which meant contraction in demand and consumer purchase power. Although a decrease in EPS and P/E ratio is observed Morrisons dividend Yield has increased significantly from 1.66% to 2.74%(Appendix C). This can be confirmed by the diagram below from its Annual report and financial statements 2010. (Annual Report and Financial Statements 2009, pg15) The following graph portrays Morrisons share price compared to Sainburys and its other competitors. 3.6 Conclusion and Recommendations Morrisons financial and business analysis presents a very healthy position. Morrisons key ratios present a very good picture to both its existing and potential shareholders. Morrisons is also improving on its year on year profits and liquidity figures. In terms of macro business environment Morrison operates in a very cordial and coherent infrastructure which supports growth and competition which are vital to improve effectiveness and efficiency. Government in the UK is taking positive measures to enhance economic growth and improve customer purchasing power. Morrisons has been strong during the recession and should consolidate its position further when the UK economy shows signs of growth. Morrisons has always been true to its traditions and despite the temptations to diversify in non-food products it continues to remain resilient and offers best quality fresh food to its customers. Morrisons at present only operates in the UK market and has only recently diversified its business in the southern part of the country. They are a trusted brand in North of England but hard work and dedication is required to acquire such status in other parts of the country. They also face stiff competition from rival retailers such as Tesco, Sainsburys and ASDA in the UK market. Therefore Morrisons should aim to diversify its business into lucrative developing markets such as China, Russia and India. The opportunities in these markets are enormous and through the use of the right product mix and advertising campaigns Morrisons can further improve its profitability.
Wednesday, May 6, 2020
Performance Analysis Fantasy in C Major, Op. 15 (D. 760)...
Performance Analysis: Fantasy in C Major, Op. 15 (D. 760) (â€Å"Wanderer†Fantasy) Schubert composed the Fantasy in C Major (â€Å"Wanderer†Fantasy) in 1822. This fantasy became a milestone in music history because it was the first time when a composer â€Å"integrated a four-movement sonata into a single movement.†Schubert did so by matching the sequence of a traditional four-movement sonata (Allegro, Adagio, Scherzo, Finale) to one big sonata form (exposition, development, recapitulation, coda). This exploration opened a new era of composing romantic music because it created an expanded form with more freedom in theme. Composers in this way were granted more freedom to compose based on their personal imagination and to compose with more virtuosity.†¦show more content†¦But still, Brendel’s performance shares modern â€Å"strait†characteristics with Pollini’s recording because of its accuracy from the text. It was more difficult to find recordings earlier than the 1950s, but recordings from Walter Rehberg, Edwin Fisch er, Vladimir Sofronitzky and Elly Ney proved that earlier approaches to the Wanderer Fantasy were somewhat different. Their practices of this piece were marked by agogic accent, rhythmic nuance, in a way with more freedom from the romantic approach and less accuracy from the â€Å"straight†playing. The recording Walter Rehberg made in 1927 started with a quarter note equals 158 and slowed down to an eighth note equals to 55 in Adagio. Not only the range for tempo rubato was wider, but there were also agogic accent and rhythmic nuance in his playing. An example would be at bar 32 in Allegro, where Rehberg created an agogic accent by letting the chord on right hand appear slightly later (Example 3). In Adagio, Rehberg spread out some chords from bar 9 to bar 17 to emphasis the melody (Example 4). The arpeggiated chord was a trait of romantic practice and was shared by Edwin Fischer in his recording in 1934. Fischer spread out every chord as an accent on sforzando from bar 165 to 176 in Allegro (Example 5). Fischer also did not follow every dynamic mark on the score. Instead of starting with fortissimo in Presto, Fischer played a piano. This occurred at bar 277
Decision Making Process Paper Free Essays
Decision-Making Process Paper MGT/230 June 26, 2011 Abstract The decision-making process has six stages. These stages consist of identifying and diagnosing the problem, generating alternative solutions, evaluating alternatives, making the choice, implementing the decision, and evaluate the decision. Choosing to go back to school and what school to attend was a problem that I had that needed to be figured out. We will write a custom essay sample on Decision Making Process Paper or any similar topic only for you Order Now I did not use the decision-making process; if I had I am not sure if my decision would have been the same. Deciding to go back to school was something I thought about for a few months but taking the steps to do so was something that only took an hour to do. The decision-making process has six stages but I may have only taken three of those steps in my process. The decision-making stages are to identify and diagnose the problem, generate alternative solutions, evaluate alternatives, make the choice, implement the decision, and evaluate the decision (Management, 2011). To identify and diagnose the problems means to recognize a problem or something he of she wants to do that exist and solve it. Generate alternative solutions can be divide into two categories, which are ready-made solutions and custom-made solutions. Ready made solutions are solutions you have tried before or advice from others with similar problems, and custom made solutions are solutions designed for a specific solution. Evaluate alternatives means deciding which solution will be best and which solution will fit the problem that you have. After considering all the solution, you will have to make a choice. Once you have made your choice, implement the decision. Implement the decision means to take action. Start the plan to solve your problem. The last stage is to evaluate the decision by collecting information on how well the decision is working. These are the six stages of the decision-making process. My problem was deciding ongoing back to school and which school to attend. My steps were to think about what would be best and my family in regard to me to go back to school, which school to go to, and apply to that school. My family was involved in y process because I wanted their input on everything that I did. My first step was to discuss the idea ongoing back to school, which to my family was not an issue because they believed that I had so much knowledge that I needed to do something with it, but I was hesitant because of my children. My second step was to decide which school to attend. The choice was between University of Phoenix and Gaston Community College. I choice these two schools because my stepmother goes to Phoenix and she advis ed me it would be a good opportunity. Gaston Community College was a suggestion my boyfriend had because it was close to where I lived but the only problem was my children were not in daycare, so who would be able to watch them and I was in school. Another problem was they did not offer any online programs that year in my field. My decision was easy because I thought of my children first. The last step I took was applying to University of Phoenix. I did not take the same steps as the decision-making process contains but I may have taken a few. I did identify that I had a problem, came up with solutions, make a choice and implemented my decision. The decision-making process has six steps, but I only used four of those steps in my process. If I had used the decision-making process my decision may be different. If I had thought about every detail of my life, for example, my children going to school this year, I may have chosen the community college because it would have been convenient at the time. Also if I had taken the steps to talk to daycares about putting my youngest child in one, I would not have to worry about finding a babysitter when I went to school. The decision-making process would have made me ask questions about what I wanted and what I could do. The process also would have allowed me to evaluate my decision and determine if a community college would have been right. My problem was going back to school and which school to attend. I may not have followed the decision-making process but I do believe I have made the right choice. The decision-making process has six stages: identify and diagnose the problem, generate alternative solutions, evaluate alternatives, make the choice, implement the decision, and evaluate the decision. The decision-making process can be very effective if one were to use it. Reference Bateman, T. S. , and Snell, S. A (2011). Management: Leading Collaborating in a Competitive World (9th e. d. ). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Irwin. How to cite Decision Making Process Paper, Essays
Saturday, April 25, 2020
Lynx Essays (1048 words) - Lynx, Bobcat, Predators, Trapping, Kitten
Lynx With a pounce and a hop the speedy lynx chases the bleached white hare through the bushes. Poof! The hare disappears into the shiny white powder. Then the sly lynx picks up the scent of the hare and pounces toward the small hairball. The sharp elongated claws don't dig in, and the hare's long slender legs launch himself out of the hole and out of danger. The swift cat swings his claws around to hit the fast hare, but he hits the snow right under his back legs. The hare runs right between two willow trees and into a narrow opening which has a bunch of fallen willow trees. The hare has escaped from the lynx this one time, but the lynx will find other food. The lynx is a pale brown to brownish grey with black streaks on its neck, forehead, and on the back. It has a short tail, long tuffed ears, long slender legs, wide feet for control in the snow, and long very soft fur. The lynx will grow to be 30 to 40 inches long, and 24 to 28 inches high from feet to shoulders. They usually weight 15 to 45 pounds. When you see the lynx, at first sight, it looks gaunt and lanky, but it is really fast and muscular. The back legs are longer than the fore legs for better pouncing ability. "From the front the lynx looks royal with its hair on its face coming out to two points" (Myers 136). The lynx is closely related to the bobcat, which populates the north American region. The bobcat does not have big fluffy paws, or is not as big as the lynx in relative size. They have two different food varieties. The lynx eats hares ,and also may prey on small deer, dall sheep, grouse, mice. Rarely they feed on fish. On the other hand bobcats feed on grouse , fish, and other small rodents. Lynx chase and still hunt their prey. They chase hares or they stay up on cliffs and branches, and waiting to pounce on the animal as it goes by. The lynx ranges from Alaska, all the way across Canada. The lynx are usually found in climax forests and dense undercovers. They are usually found where hares are abundant. If there are no hares in the vicinity, they travel out into the tundra to find food. "Lynx breed during March and April. The gestation period is 60 days long" ( Myers 135) . They will have from 1- 4 kittens each year. They usually have dens, where they keep their kittens, in hollow trees or under a pile of brush. The kittens stay with the female until well into the next winter. The kittens don't open their eyes until 10 days after birth. They also only nurse for 3 to 4 months. When the population of the hares are up the litters of 2 to 4 kittens have a lot better chance to survive in the wilderness with their parents. When food is not abundant the female lynx might not have a litter at all that year or not until the hares have come back. Lynx usually are silent, but the males make a screeching noise to find a mate during breeding season. The weird thing about the lynx is when it is in a trap. It doesn't make a sound. It sits there calmly accepting its death. The Lynx are sly creatures that prowl at night to find their food. That is usually the reason why people don't see the lynx out in the wilderness a lot. The lynx are sensitive to bright light, because their eyes are made to see at night. Adult males usually hunt alone, not in packs like wolves.The females usually hunt with their family if the kittens are old enough to go along. The kits hunt with their mother and learn skills from her until they leave in the fallowing winter. The huge feet of the lynx give it superb agility in the snow. The lynx has been known to chase down slow clumsy fox that has slim and slender feet that don't give them any leverage on top of the snow. Trapping lynx is not particularly easy. Trappers use both snares and traps on the lynx. An abundant number of hares means there will be a lot of lynx that year. In the years when lynx are abundant, a good trapper may take a dozen in a month. The fine fur of
Wednesday, March 18, 2020
Embedding Economic Drivers in Participative Water Management Essays
Embedding Economic Drivers in Participative Water Management Essays Embedding Economic Drivers in Participative Water Management Paper Embedding Economic Drivers in Participative Water Management Paper Abstract Country location influences the institutional surroundings of the infrastructures related to water systems. In the Netherlands, water management has its own particularities. Temporarily inflow of affluent water from the rivers or the sea resulted in a highly developed institutional setting based on flood risk prevention. From an economic perspective, managing water is about allocating and using water in an effective and efficient way. This article deals with the coordination problem related to multi functionality of water systems. ‘Allocation efficiency’ is the issue. The diversity of water systems such as rivers, lakes, ditches or groundwater is multifunctional and within the systems, demand is competing. Decision makers should be aware of the different aspects of infrastructures that interfere with water systems. Further on in the decision-making, these aspects need to be valued. This may be done explicitly (for example in a formal cost-benefit analysis) or implicitly. Implicit valuation takes place when the outcome of a choice is expressed without an explicit weight and value of the effects a project has. The focus of this article is on economic drivers that express values to decision makers and thereby may stimulate the implementation of planned water projects. The problem addressed here is how these economic drivers may be institutionalized and what institutional (re-)designs are necessary to organize the coordination problem related to the multi functionality of water systems. It is part of participative water management that, under the name of Joint Planning Approach (JPA), is developed during the ‘Freude am Fluss’ international project that aims at formulating and realizing adaptation strategies in water management, specifically the realization of more space for rivers. 1. Introduction The Netherlands are known for their water management practices. Obviously, this is resulting from an economy located in the delta of the rivers Rhine, Meuse and Scheldt. Country location influences its institutional surroundings, which means that also water management in a different setting has other particularities. High water levels of rivers or the sea resulted in a robust institutional setting concerning flood risk prevention. From an economic perspective, managing water is about allocating and using water in an effective and efficient way. In this respect three main levels of decision making can be identified: the international level (with countries and supranational organizations); the national level (with governments and stakeholders); the level of the individual (with users like consumers and producers). This article deals with the efficient allocation of the many functions water systems provide. In other words, the coordination problem related to multi functionality of water systems is at stake. For example, a river, or one of the many other types of water system, may absorb waste streams (cooling water, polluted waste water) in competition with ecological and other economic activities, such as production of drinking water. From an economic point of view, clean, fresh water can be interpreted as a scarce commodity. Scarcity of water and water systems is sometimes reflected in the prices users need to pay, or in collective resources (collected taxes), governments provide money out of. Increasingly, water managers allocate natural resources of a water system on the basis of the value of water systems. This means that decision-makers should be fully aware of all these values connected to a water system. These values may be explicitly reflected in a market price or implicitly acknowledged by means of meeting qualitative or quantitative standards. For decision-makers, this issue of getting a complete and accurate understanding of the value of water systems is crucial, but generally, information asymmetry is at hand. The policy makers are often not fully aware of the costs and benefits of each separate function a water system possibly may fulfill. Besides, stakeholders want to take their role in the decision- making process that precedes the acknowledgement or rejection of the functions a water system may fulfill in the future or against which costs this will take place. These values can be explicated by the involvement of the public or representing stakeholders within decision-making processes (Van Ast and Boot, 2003). Nevertheless, decision-makers can never be sure that the outcome of public participation in terms of value is realistic for the full range of values of the water system. How can policy makers be assisted in this complex and dynamic challenge of getting ecological values incorporated in a balanced way? Not only economic and ecological functions are at stake, but also social and cultural values have to be considered. What are the rules of this allocation game? 2. Contents The importance of economic drivers that can stimulate implementation of planned water projects is high (WMO, 2006). Creating more room for rivers is necessary to reduce climate change induced water levels. Realization of projects that aim at giving back territories to natural systems however is extremely difficult in terms of costs and culture. The ‘Freude am Fluss’ (FaF) international project aims at improving and smoothening the realization of ‘Room for Rivers’ projects. A basis stream of research within the project deals with participative water management that is developed under the name of ‘Joint Planning Approach’. One of the research objectives of FaF (2008) is the identification of economic drivers that can foster realization of these projects, including the institutional arrangements that can embed these drivers. Figure 1 shows the different steps in the FaFproject, that were taken to develop a JPA that includes public and private value s. Explication of these values can function as necessary economic drivers for the realization of water projects. The JPA should assure that economic, ecological and social values that policy makers aim for, are integrated into regional planning. This integration is approached from the perspective of the process of institutional design that policy makers are key actors in. Figure 1, economic drivers and the Joint Planning Approach After the introduction of the subject and the contents of this article, section 3 describes the framework of interactive policy-making JPA. Further the economic drivers of managing multifunctional water systems and the infrastructures that contribute to or even co-create the multi-functionality are elaborated. In many cases the water system is accompanied by infrastructures that play a key role to provide the services to the people. This is the case for infrastructures related to functions such as providing drinking water, sanitation and transportation. The difficulty of reflecting the total economic value of water systems in decision making is discussed in section 4. To illustrate the concepts, firstly, in section 5 a framework is presented, in which economic drivers can be captured. This is illustrated in a case study, presented in section 6. Finally, in section 7 conclusions are drawn and practical recommendations are presented. 3. Joint Planning Approach The Joint Planning Approach (JPA) is developed within the Freude am Fluss-project (FaF, 2008). It incorporates the idea that the performance of water systems has an ecological, a social and an economical dimension. It assists the capturing of the total economic value of innovative regional planning by measuring the economic value realized by managing the multi-functional dimensions of water systems. If innovative regional planning implies a sound combination of, for example the housing function of riverbeds (like the use of floating houses) and the transportation function (transportation by boats and transportation by trucks over roads), a net economic benefit should be gained. In general, the Joint Planning Approach (JPA) provides an action oriented framework on how authorities, local communities and private actors can organize the planning process from the earliest stage of problem identification up to the agreement on what measures to implement (De Groot, 2008). Additionally, the JPA facilitates the design of institutional arrangements that embeds the values (framed as economic drivers) related to concrete measures that shape regional in combination with its river systems. In the FaF-project, this framework is applied to regional planning along rivers. The term ‘joint’ implies that all morally considerable actors that are involved in causes, effects or solutions of the problem are also involved, directly or by representation, in the planning process. These actors are referred as stakeholders and are regarded as the ‘morally considerable entities’. This includes individual people but also future generations, and the elements of nature that are recognized, e.g. in policy documents, as carrying intrinsic value. The representation can be directly, e.g. as a farmers group representing involved floodplain farmers or indirectly, as an NGO representing the interests of nature. However, representation may imply that also governmental organizations take part of the planning process because they are democratically vested to represent all kinds of values the protection of which individual people cannot easily organize (the ‘common good’ or ‘system-level rationality’) or tend to forget in the midst of the affairs of daily life. JPA should help in realizing inclusive planning that involves a broad set of stakeholders that depends on the perception of the problem, its causes, effects and solutions. No standard lists of participants in FaF can be provided. Because perceptions what the problems and possible solutions are to manage a river and its direct surrounding may shift over time. The possible technological solutions with its challenges and threats may evolve. Also, the political context may change and consequently the policy approaches towards managing water systems. The Joint Planning Approach is based on a number of principles emerging from various scientific disciplines (De Groot and Lenders, 2006). Crucial is the contribution from ecological science with insights and new concepts of non-equilibrium ecosystem behavior (Smits et al., 2000). This has triggered notions of ‘adaptive management’, that do not aim to fix ecosystems in states of presumed climax, but aim to maintain ecosystem quali ty, for the benefit of people and nature alike, by way of intensive monitoring and flexible responses to change (e.g. Holling and Gunderson, 2002). Adaptive management should be guided by a long-term vision in order to prevent that the sum of many small adaptive steps could end up in an undesired overall result. In this respect policy approaches such as ‘room-for rivers’ is incorporated into the plans that result from the FaF-project. JPA may be coined as a practical guideline but the relationships it builds upon are derived from theoretical insights into the combinations of variables that affect the incentives and actions of stakeholders in water systems (Ostrom, 2007). The JPA builds upon strong relationships between the Resource systems (the geographical area with its water and landscape), resource units, governance system and users of the resource systems. It are these relationships that frame economic drivers into variables (institutional arrangements) that build the governance of rivers. De Groot and Lenders (2006) brought forward in the FaF-project that in the social sciences, resistance against the seemingly irrevocable logic of the Tragedy of the Commons (the idea that communality of property can only lead to destruction of that property; see for instance Hardin (1968)) has led to increased insight that local communities can be quite successful in the management of their common resources, and the conditions under which this is possible (e.g. Ostrom 1990). At the same time, however, local communities cannot easily be entrusted with monitoring and management of systems far beyond their spatial scale, such as sea-wide fisheries or whole river basins. The combination of new drive for community-based work and the limitation of community capacities has led to the rise of ‘co-management’ (or ‘collaborative management’, or ‘joint management’) as a central concept for empirical study, management ideas and theory-making. In co-management, local actors and supra-local agencies share visions and divide roles in the management of a given resource, in styles and balances depending on the resource itself, its local and supra-local functions, and the local and supra-local management capacities. See for instance Borrini-Feyerabend et al. (2004) for a general exploration and Wilson et al. (2003) reviewing the co-management traditions existing already in the fishery sector. Concurrently in policy and political science, approaches have emerged that rather than viewing policies as mechanistic models of inputs and outputs and viewing politics as a mere competition between opposing programs. In a broad system perspective, with the world as a complex system, learning, feedback and adaptations take place through highly linked, self-organizing networks. This makes it easier to understand how collaborative dialogues function and produce innovative actions. See for instance Hajer and Wagenaar (2003) for an overview. A sufficient level of social capital (organizational density and mutual trust within communities and between communities and government) is an important prerequisite for such dialogues to be successful, but at the same time, research has shown that social capital can also be produced during the dialogues themselves (e.g. Ostrom 1990). The latter may be of special relevance for societies in transition, where social capital tends to be low; see for ins tance Chloupkova et al. (2003), comparing social capital in Denmark and Poland. In these terms, the JPA can be characterized as an approach for the adaptive, vision-guided collaborative planning of river sections, in a framework of room-for-river policies. The JPA is composed of a number of public planning steps. They vary much in weight and content in each actual planning situation, but the steps give the JPA its basic structure. The process starts with a ‘step zero’, in which the initiators internally design the envisaged JPA application of their local situation. Then follows the real (public) planning process, ordered in six steps. The whole of the process is formulated as: 0. Preparing the JPA application 1. Mutual learning 2. Shared visioning 3. Rules and institutions 4. Joint options exploration 5. Joint design and decision-making 6. Towards implementation. Especially from the step from visioning towards a realistic project is depending from the existence of economic drivers. This means that the identification of economic drivers that can fire up the JPA-process is of utmost importance. Typically for the approach is that the JPA generates technical plans but also helps in creating the institutional context in which these technical options can be implemented. For example, sometimes the permitting processes should allow for a regional plan along with some interventions in a river like the location of a windmill park or new infrastructures that facilitate transportation of goods and electricity. Political will may force current permitting procedures to change. Conflicting values needs to be settled in a JPA and the outcome embedded by means of a institutional (re-)design. JPA has been practiced in areas in France, Germany and The Netherlands. The standardized interactive methodology shows remarkably positive results in terms of understanding under stakeholders (FaF, 2008). Policy makers in different countries may have different opinions about the relevance of some economic drivers, the values behind these drivers and how these values become drivers behind concrete projects in regional planning. Some policy makers may want to perform a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) by means of using a single decision-making supportive technique and present a net benefit to societal welfare. Other policy makers want to aim for some specific economic benefits for a sector (for example, transportation or housing) and represent this stake in the decision-making process. JPA acknowledges this diversity up to some degree by stimulating participation of (often local) stakeholders. Also, JPA makes explicit that the rules of the game that guide the stakeholders in their policy making are not static but may change as result of the planning procedures. It acknowledges the dynamics in relevant values and the governance of a water system (Kuks, 2002; Hoevenaars, 2004; Oosthoek, 2006). JPA may increase these dynamics itself and shapes the institutional context of managing river systems. 4. Economic drivers As has been mentioned, one of the objectives of FaF is the identification of economic drivers for ‘room for the river’ solutions. To explore economic drivers in relation to integrated water management a variety of approaches are of interest, each of which contains different elements. A distinction can be made in different types of benefits for society, different functions of the river system and several values of natural systems. The focus on a more holistic approach to water management as a water system results in the balancing of economic, environmental and social benefits for a wide set of stakeholders. a) Economic Benefits Economic benefits reflect the creation of welfare in a society and can be divided into goods and services of freshwater ecosystems. Economic goods include water (for drinking, agriculture, cooling, production etc.), bio-products (fish, shellfish, plants) and resources (clay, sand). Economic services include flood control and water quality control of river plains, wetlands and watersheds (including forest landscapes) and tourism. The classification of an impact on welfare is strongly related to the economic valuation process. b) Ecological Benefits Ecological benefits focus specifically on increased biodiversity and protection of rare species in river basins. These environmental benefits include river basins as living space for species like fish and birds, diversity of river landscapes (forests, wetlands, floodplains) and dynamic ecosystems (nutrient rich, versatile). The classification of ecological effects as benefits is strongly related to the definition and interpretation of ecological quality. c) Social (and cultural) Benefits Social benefits include elements of enjoyment related to nature (recreation and tourism, living space) and sustainability aspects (future generations), but also social justice and equity. The positively perceived changes in the allocation of economic benefits and costs to specific stakeholders are strongly related to the adoption of certain policy principles, such as the Polluter Pays Principle. It this respect, it is important that in most cases the realisation of regional plans have benefits for the society that are neither pure economic, social or ecological. The impacts cannot be captured within one dimension for all stakeholders. The key of integrated water management is to approach the water system as a whole, from upstream to downstream, and balancing upstream-downstream stakeholder interests and needs. Table 1 illustrates the different combinations of the potential variety in impact on the benefits. Table 1: Example of water system performance: three dimensions of the potential impact of regional plans. In the Netherlands several institutions are involved in realising new approaches in water management. The key drivers are governments, non-governmental organisations (NGO’s) and academic institutions, often in close collaboration with each other and with the private sector. A good example is the Freude am Fluss (FaF) project, of which a key component, JPA, has been mentioned extensively. Involving many institutions in these kind of projects results in spreading of the new introduced approaches. JPA aims at identifying the economic drivers for a management approach to rivers and the design of institutions that transform economic drivers into the identification of current and future cash flows related to these drivers. By using this approach economic drivers may become financial drivers for individual stakeholders. A practical example of the identification of economic drivers is the ‘One Europe More Nature Program’ of the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). WWF is collaborating with local knowledge institutes, governments and the private sector in river basins in 6 EU member states to identify, create and communicate practical examples of alternatives for rural development in Europe, that are good for people and for nature. At the foundation of the project is the Living Rivers concept aiming at conserving nature from source to sea. For example in the Netherlands, WWF is working with Stichting Arc in the Rhine river basin in the Gelderse Poort, where a new economy is being built that is not only also creating new jobs, but also helps to restore ecological processes and landscape quality. From the perspective of the physical system, in this case the river system, different functions can be identified. Economic drivers are based on the value people attribute to the different functions. From the perspective of society, economic drivers refer to the perceived benefit of a value that actors attribute to the consequences for them of a decision affecting the river system. These benefits can be assessed from two perspectives: those benefits that accrue to society as a whole (macro-economic drivers) and benefits that accrue to individual stakeholders (micro-economic drivers). Table 2 summarizes the main drivers in relation to the functions of a river system. Table 2: Examples of macro-economic and financial drivers of new water management approaches. If the benefits that people attribute to the above mentioned functions are associated with real cash flows, the economic drivers are simultaneously financial drivers. However, many economic benefits and costs are not associated with direct cash flows. For example, the value of a house may increase as a result of regional planning, but as long as the house has not been sold, the gain is not associated with ‘real’ cash flows. On the other hand there is an increase in property tax, which shows clearly the increased value. Another example is the increase of recreation activities around an upgraded river system. This is generally not associated with any actual cash expenditure, since the river is freely accessible to all. However, indirect economic activities that could be the result should also be taken into account. Revenues from transport to the area or increased mental wellness resulting in higher productivity can surely lead to an implicit increase of economic value and hence should be taken into consideration as an economic driver. It is often regarded as a pitfall that many cash flows are not clearly visible. In the determination of the economic feasibility, innovative ways of integrated water management may be regarded as economically unfeasible due to a lack of insight into the true economic value of regional plans that create more room for the river in an integrated way. With respect to the value of water systems and water in specific, some reflection should be added about the special position, water has in economic sciences. Obviously, treating water as an economic good can have large advantages in optimizing water scarcity issues. For other goods and services that water systems can deliver, the efficiency improvement can be expected. Nevertheless, water delivers very special services and water is certainly not a ‘normal’ economic good. Table 3 compares the different attributes of water to other important commodities. Table 3: Comparison water and other commodities, based on Van der Zaag and Savenije (2006; pp. 14) Amongst others, Van der Zaag and Savenije (2006) state that just letting the market decide upon the price, does not result in the most favourable allocation of the scarce good ‘water’. They argue that water should have a set price. This fixed price sends out a message to all users that water is a scarce good and should be treated that way. Their view on the economics of water is pragmatic, implying informed choices of use. Applying this approach to all other values water systems can deliver, means that prices should not depend on the market. Putting fixed prices can help people in understanding the need for a change in their approach to water management. Often, water is still seen as an enemy that can do a lot of harm, neglecting that water is essential for human survival and a special commodity that should be treated that way. Besides, other types of values can play an important role too. Social, cultural, religious and historical values that can not be translated easily in financial terms can be distinguished, next to issues related to risk. Also the intrinsic value, that by definition does not have any relation with (economic) use, should also be considered. Regarding the socio-cultural value of water systems, The Netherlands as a country provide an outstanding illustration. The Dutch have been fighting against water for centuries. Water history has been dominated by a battle against the water of both rivers and sea. Many practices of water management reflect the incorporation of these kinds of socio-cultural values, like the habit to discharge water into the ocean as fast as possible. The proposed measures in the ‘Room for the River’ program entail a fundamental change in attitude towards water management in the Netherlands. Instead of fighting against the water, the paradigm is changed in living with water. This includes that the water is given more space and should be retained longer in certain areas, meaning a loss of land in this highly populated country. The history of fighting against water has much influence on how people feel about the proposed measures in the ‘Room for the River’ project. A fundamental change in attitude is not likely to happen overnight. Socio-cultural value can also be illustrated by the essential role water plays in major religions around the world as a sacred gift of God. Religious interpretations and rules about ethically adequate use of water can strongly influence water management practices, but for that matter does not seem to have much influence in ‘Room for the Riverprojects’’ in Western Europe. In contrast, risk issues do have much influence on people’s attitude towards water systems and hence the value they attribute to the functions the water system delivers. Research by Klaveren and Oostdijk (2002) found that especially the place of building the house, i.e. on a safe position, is important for the feeling of safety. Highly visible dikes can also increase this feeling of safety. On the other hand, misleading or unclear information decreases the feeling of safety experiences by inhabitants. In the empirical research of Broekhoven et al. (2006) peoples values with respect to how The Netherlands should protect itself in the scope of the policy concept of Space for Water were investigated. When Dutch people are asked how they think the Netherlands should protect itself against rising water levels, they respond that a combination of measures should be executed. The majority supports the heightening, enlarging and maintaining of dikes. Only a rather small minority of informed inhabitants supports the creation of retention areas, emergency runoff and reservoirs as risk decreasing. Only very few people name giving more room to the river or using nature as a protection option. It is clear that this ‘dike-culture’, in which dike protected land is valued high, is a large obstacle for ‘room for the river’-projects. On the other hand, many interviewed people consider conservation of historical landscape very important (Klaveren and Oostdijk 2002), even when dike heightening is necessary from a risk perspective. Here the intrinsic value of historical elements in the landscape, of nature and of beauty comes to the surface. In a strict sense, intrinsic value can be defined as the value that is in the object itself, not depending on human valuation. In a more practical meaning it refers to the value for people not depending on practical use (Bouma and Saeijs, 2000). Protecting a historical dike is a good example of an instiutionalised cultural value within water management. The rules of the allocation, or economic processes, are referred to in the institutionaleconomic theory as institutions. Since the re-emergence of institutional economics in the seventies of the last century, the role of contracts within transactions has been the main unit of analysis. Amongst others, Williamson (1999) describes the importance of organizations within a market economy. Besides relative prices also organisational elements, as formalized in contracts, are taken into account. By introducing organizational and context dependent elements in economic theory, recent research is broadening the institutional perspective on economic development. Contracts can be seen as the institutionalization of norms, values and beliefs that provide rules-of-the game for the economic processes in a society. In practice the design is very difficult because of its complexity. Many actors may be involved, all having their own values, norms and perceived risks related to the final outcomes of the contract. In the case study this will be further explored in section 6. But first, in section 5 a framework for the design of the institutional arrangements dealing with economic drivers is presented. 5. The institutionalization of economic drivers In order to explicate the economic drivers behind Room for the River-projects, a guideline developed in the FaF-project (Van Ast et al, 2008), can be applied by decisionmakers. Taking these steps, divided in three main steps, stimulates the implementation of ‘Room for the River’ in practical cases. Step 1: Create a policy setting that links regional planning with river management (both water quantity and water quality control). Formulate a formal statement in which the multi-functionality of rivers is acknowledged. The link between regional planning and river management should be organized. The following questions may be raised to the relevant stakeholders of the policy process: What are the physical, social and ecological effects of regional planning? To what extent represent these effects a change in the total economic value of the river and for who are these economic drivers relevant? How can the decision-makers account for the total economic value? Step 2: Identify and/or (co-)design cost effective projects that enhance the concept of room for the river (a multi-functional approach to rivers). The set of projects can for example consist of the construction of houses and dikes. The set of projects should have as a result that the river keeps performing its essential functions, together with its economic, social and ecological gains and losses. Step 3: Design of an institutional arrangement that creates drivers for stakeholders based on the generation of economic gains. Four types of institutional processes are of main importance: The establishment of an organisation that enables decision making processes (participation of stakeholders and regulated use of formal costs-benefit approaches, Public Private Partnerships); The development of clear policy and regulation, with rules in a project plan to create space for the river; The release of resources like cash flows, labour and machines; The use of a suitable mix of juridical, economical and social policy instruments. If financial instruments like subsidies and levies are possible, they can go together with the accounting practices at macro and micro level, which enables interaction with stakeholders. As a result stakeholders can be informed about the impact of the regional plans on their costs and benefits. This does not necessarily have to be in the form of a formal cost benefit analyses. Through answering the questions in step 1, (policy setting) the gains and losses are identified and quantified in economic terms in the decision making process. Decisionmakers should decide on how these economic costs and benefits are to be integrated into the decision making process. It is suggested that the following approaches/tools are to be applied: The use of Societal Cost Benefit Analyses (SCBA) with explicit valuation of social and ecological gains and losses: the economic value is calculated by using a valuation technique the participants of a decision making process accepts. Clearly there are differences among a decision-making process which values may be expressed in monetary terms and which not. The use of Societal Cost Benefit Analyses by presenting only those gains and losses represented by market prices. Those gains and losses that are not integrated into the SCBA should be identified and integrated into the rules of the allocation game. Hereby some weights can explicitly be given to certain aspects of the value of water systems. For example, strict safety norms and quality standards of drinking water. Participation of stakeholders in the decision making process that integrates their economic gains and losses as stakes into the assessment of plans. . The stakeholders may present their own accounting formats for performing their cost-benefit analyses (so-called private cost-benefit analyses). Step 2 (design of measurements) shows that river management and regional planning can enhance the integration of economic drivers by creating policy instruments that integrate the economic drivers into decision making processes based on regulatory push factors (such as levies paid by stakeholders who enjoy some functions of the river) and or creation of financial stimuli (creation of markets for attributes of the regional planning approach such as floating houses, increased market value of housing, revenues of concessions for fishery or drinking water concessions). Step 3 considers the institutional embedding of the drivers. The following case study explores which economic drivers exist for new water management approaches related to spatial development. How these economic values are distributed among the different participants of the decision making process and integrated into the decision making process. This three-step guideline contributes to analysing if economic drivers are strong enough to push forward the concept ‘Room to River’ into the implementation of practical water management projects. Afterwards the development of institutional arrangements is mentioned that may increase the role of these economic drivers. 6. Case The Island of Brienenoord Within the concept ‘Room for the River’ many different types of specific projects and measures are developed. In this case study a project is presented that combines different functions of an area within the riverbed. After describing the background situation of the area and making a stakeholder analysis, we apply the earlier presented three step-model, developed for capturing the total value of a planned project to stimulate implementation. History and physical, social and ecological effects of regional planning Originally the island was a sandy dune that came to the surface of the river and was artificially heightened in the 19th century to become an island. The 21 hectare island was bought by the baron of Brienen in 1847, who started a salmon fishery on it because the main fish market, Kralingseveer, was just on the other side of the river. The year 1880 was the peak of the Rhine salmon fishery with around 100.000 salmon traded in Kralingseveer alone.The highest point of the island was built to keep the horses that were used for transporting the fishing nets. During the economical crisis of the 1930’s, the island was hired by two institutions that helped the unhealthy people of the packed labour district in the south of Rotterdam. In the second world war, the Germans accepted small private gardens for food production and those stayed ever since. On the east point, the south pillar of the Van Brienenoord bridge has been built. This is also the place where natural processes resulted i n a (small) marshy area with willows, reed and sandy beaches. Since 1989 most of the island is public space and earmarked as an area for further urban development. Project plan and measures In 1993 the World Wide Fund for nature published a new view on the wetlands in the Rotterdam (WNF, 1993). The island of Brienenoord is considered highly potential for nature development along the river and within the city. In 2000 the municipality signed an agreement (covenant) with WWF to develop an integrated plan for a combination of building and nature. At the east side, under and around the bridge pillar, a fresh water tidal system could be developed and be combined with recreation facilities. The area already has a function for nature education and educative hiking trips; since 2000 ‘wild’ cattle is freely grazing the terrain. At the west side, near to the small connecting bridge, a hotel is planned. Based on this covenant architect company Waardenburg draw a plan that was presented on 14 February 2002 in the community council. One day earlier, on February 13th, WWF retreated from the covenant because, as it states, the plan leaves not enough space for nature and its further development. According to the plan a 180 rooms hotel complex with conference facilities and around 55 expensive apartments should be built on the west side of the island Although the project (the master plan) was not realized in total, a number of separate measures were realized. In practice, discussions may arise which measures were generated in the scope of the master plan and which measures were initiated as a result of other initiatives. Still, as long as they support the mission and realization of the master plan they may be considered. In this respect typical examples are to be listed in the area of infrastructures (roads, bridges, etc.) and nature development. Some specific measures of the master plan are: Construction of a hotel and its facilities; Reconstruction of bridge; Quay (transportation of visitors and temporary stay of boats for the commercial transportation in front of the isle); Nature friendly development of the river bank with reed and willows (planting of willows, reed, †¦). Three step-model In order to create the institutional arrangements that can contribute to capturing the total value of the project, the earlier presented three step-model has been applied. After formalizing the rules within the project (step 1), the gains and losses are identified and quantified in economic terms in the decision making process. Decision-makers should decide on how the economic costs and benefits are to be integrated into the decision making process. It is suggested that the total economic gains should be identified which may be accounted for in the decision-making process that proceeds to the implementation of the project or only some parts of the project. In practice the original plan may not be implemented but only parts of the project (eg. specific measures) may be realized. This is in fact the case with the Island of Brienenoord. It is assumed that project alternatives are assessed and that only cost-effective alternatives will be implemented (step 2). The next step, design of institutional arrangements (step 3) has never been executed here. The case study should have been followed up with an analysis of the institutional arrangements that embed the economic drivers in the decision-making process. Total economic value, economic and financial drivers In order to obtain understanding of the economic drivers behind the project, a formal cost benefit statement according to the procedure designed by the Dutch research agency STOWA (see www.mkbainderegio.nl) has been arranged. Herewith the separate costs and benefit items could be identified in a cost-benefit framework with accounting rules and the integration of institutions in a public-private partnership. This explicit way of presenting the outcome of a societal cost benefit analyses indicates that the proposed project (Brienenoord plan) results in a welfare increase of 21 million Euros. Despite this net gain at a macro level, the project was not implemented. Only some minor parts of the master plan are realised (building of a small bridge and a quay for recreational boating). Major parts of the plan were rejected because of the institutional arrangements related to the financing of the projects (potential hotel owner should cover the financial risks) and the processes of permits related to: spatial planning; exploitation of hotel and other recreational and nature development of the area; temporary storage of dangerous gasses (in boats) along the island. The arguments for individual stakeholders to retreat from the plan were: WWF: expected extra nature value is too low. Inhabitants of nearby houses (directed located at river): the 70 meter high hotel will take away the river view. Real estate developer: Potential financial risks in a period of economic recession. Before the project is to be implemented, a number of conflicts among stakeholders need to be solved. This would imply far-reaching and probably unrealistic institutional redesigns. The case study shows that institutional design is needed at the level of individual stakeholders (the rules that define a project as financial acceptable or not). These rules are embedded in a context that imposes these financial thresholds. Also, the decision to express ecological values in monetary terms or not, can be perceived differently among stakeholders. These perceptions may even change in time for one stakeholder. Besides, conflicting interests among the stakeholders may hinder the implementation of the plan, reflecting a distributional issue of the costs and benefits. Institutional re-design can only overcome this hindrance with enough political power to overrule one or more stakeholders, with or without financial compensation for those who face the costs of the plan. 7. Conclusions and Recommendations Economic drivers can be found in macro- (welfare) and micro- (cash flow) level and can be divided into implicit and explicit values. Economic drivers that manifest themselves as cash flows theoretically are also reflected at a macro level. However, by far not all macro economic drivers are presented as cash-flows at a micro level. This integration of macro economic drivers needs to be integrated into the decision-making process by policy makers who want to stimulate projects with a significant macro economic added value and that are expected to be realized or at least accepted by non-governmental actors (such as individual project planners, households or companies). This integration can take place by means of participation. Each participant can push forward its own perceived added value or loss of value the project implies to him or her. The presented case study shows that if parties can express their costs and benefits, this does not guarantee that a project with a net macro economic added value will succeed. The distribution and differences of the perceived uncertainties about the costs and benefits may hinder the implementation of a project. Again, this added value does not necessary mean a cash flow related to this benefit. Additional rules of the game may integrate these values and express their perceived significance to decision-makers. Most extremely, certain values can be safeguarded by compliance to strict legal rules. However, the case study shows that conflicting values and distribution of values and costs may not always be overcome by institutional (re-)design. Increase the transparency in standardized costs and benefits (arrangements that for example create a website at the level of water board; (see STOWA, www.mkbainderegio.nl); Mobilize a project developer for realization of housing and recreational values (facilitate and speed-up the process of permitting); Scan relevancy of recreational value increase and mobilize potential benefits (hotels, restaurants, etc.) through arrangements that communicate to the often unknown (potential) stakeholders of rivers; Mobilize stakeholders with positive side effects with respect to health and ecological values: involve national government and down stream stakeholders in public-private partnerships (agriculture house owners, local communities and water boards, recreation sector). To identify these stakeholders a societal CBA can be performed with an orientation at the total river basin. 8. References Borrini-Feyerabend, G., M. Pimbert, M. T. Farvar, A. Kothari, and Y. Renard (2004). Sharing Power. Learning by doing in co-management of natural resources throughout the 25 world. IIED, and IUCN/ CEESP/ CMWG, Cenesta: Tehran. (iucn.org/themes/ceesp/Publications/sharingpower.htm#download). Bouma, J.J., and H.L.F. Saeijs (2000) Eco-centric cost-benefit analysis for hydraulic engineering in river basins, in: Smits, A.J.M., P.H. Nienhuis, and Leuven, R.S.E.W. (2000) New Approaches to River Management, Leiden: Backhuys Publishers. Broekhoven, S. van, S. Hogewoning, E. Mohan, K. Sakamornsinguan, M. Sonnen (2006), Water Management and Industrial Ecology, Rotterdam: ESM-Erasmus University Rotterdam. Chloupkova, J., G.L.H. Svendsen, and G.T. Svendsen (2003). ‘Building and destroying social capital: The case of cooperative movements in Poland and Denmark’, Agriculture and Human Values 20: 241-252. De Groot, W.T. (2008), The Joint Planning Approach, website Freude am Fluss project, freudeamfluss.eu. (01-10-2008)Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit. De Groot, W.T., and H.J.R. Lenders (2006). Emergent principles for river management. Hydrobiologia 565: 348-366, Springer. FaF (2008) Freude am Fluss, website Freude am Fluss project www.freudeamfluss.eu, (01-10-2008) Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit. Gunderson, L.H., and C.S. Holling (eds), Panarchy. Washington: Island Press. Hajer, M.A., and H. Wagenaar (eds), (2003). Deliberative Policy Analysis; Understanding Governance in the Network Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science 162: 1243-1248. Holling, C.S., and L.H. Gunderson (2002). Resilience and Adaptive Cycles. In Klaveren, S. van, and A. Oostdijk (2002) Verkennend Belevingswaardenonderzoek Ruimte voor de Rivier, , Leiden: Research voor Beleid. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons. New York: Cambridge University Press. Ostrom, E. (2007) A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. PNAS Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1004, 15181- 15187, Washington: USNAS. Smits, A.J.M., P.H. Nienhuis, and Leuven, R.S.E.W. (2000) New Approaches to River Management, Leiden: Backhuys Publishers. Stowa (2008) Stichting Toegepast Onderzoek Waterbeheer, MKBA in de regio, www.mkbainderegio.nl, Utrecht: Stowa. Van Ast, J.A., and S.P. Boot (2003) Participation in European Water Policy, Phys. Chem. Earth, Vol. 28, 2003, pp. 555-562. Van Ast, J.A., J.J. Bouma, and K.D. Schuyt, (2008) Economic drivers for ‘Room for the River’, supporting document Joint Planning Approach, Freude am Fluss, Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit. Van der Zaag, , P., and H.H.G. Savenije, (2006) Water as an economic good: the value of pricing and the failure of markets, Value of Water Research Report Series, no. 19, Delft: UNESCO-IHE. Williamson, O. E., and S. E. Masten (1999). The Economics of Transaction costs. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Wilson, D.C., R.J. Nielsen, and P. Degnbol (2003). The fisheries co-management experience. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. WMO (2006) World Meteorological Organisation The Dublin statement on water sustainable development, wmo.ch/web/homs/documents/english/icwedece.html (19-01-2008) WNF (1992) Wereld Natuur Fonds, Levende rivieren, Zeist: WNF.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)