As described in Section 4.2.1 , the LDC Project led a process in November 2018 to develop a framework for assessing the overall cost effectiveness of the LDC Project . The assessment provides the basis for assessing the suite of actions that have been implemented in the LDC Projects in terms of water quality outcomes ( sediment and particulate nutrients ), costs and feasibility . The intent is to support the development of a business case for continued funding of the most cost-effective solution set beyond the 3 years of the LDC Project , taking into account data from different spatial and temporal scales .
The development of the framework was a collaborative effort between CQUniversity , Griffith University and DAF . The following information is extracted from the project report prepared by Star et al . ( 2019 ). It is important to note that the metric does not fully account for all overarching Program costs and Activity Area costs , including project administration .
Assessing cost-effectiveness is important because projects vary widely by factors such as the amount of pollutant reductions , construction costs , maintenance costs , the time lags until they become effective , the risks of failure , and the number of years for which projects remain effective . A cost effectiveness evaluation summarises the available information to provide a single measure that can then be used to compare the results of different projects . Measures of cost-effectiveness are best assessed in terms of cost incurred per unit of pollutant reduction , rather than per hectare or other farm units , e . g ., $/ tonne of sediment reduced .
Three different tools currently being developed in the LDC Project can contribute to cost-effectiveness evaluations :
1 . The Reef Trust Gully Tool Box ( Wilkinson et al ., 2019 ) which is designed to frame up considerations regarding gully works and explore the characteristics of gully sites and potential remediation actions . This tool provides a guide on predicted sediment savings , to differentiate what gullies and sites are worth working on . It is generally applied to smaller scale projects .
2 . The LDC Landscape Remediation costing structure applied for on-ground site-specific works , completed as the Landscape Remediation Characterisation and Prioritisation projectled by Griffith University ( described above in Section 5.1 ). This tool can ultimately provide a standard structure for capturing the site-specific costs for gully remediation at a project level .
3 . The LDC Cost-effectiveness Tool which considers on-ground works pertaining to the site , the program and engagement costs and costs over the duration of the program and life of project . This framework has drawn on existing frameworks in the Reef space and the European Water Framework Directive for cost-effectiveness .
The cost-effectiveness framework is presented in six key steps to break down the costs and pollutant reduction ( Figure 39 ). Step 1 records key parameters for the program that is being evaluated . As there are several different costs to be captured , they are collected separately in Steps 2 and 3 depending on who is paying . Pollutant outcomes are captured in Step 4 and risks assessed in Step 5 . The cost-effectiveness measure is calculated in Step 6 . While the guide is written to support project staff completing a costeffectiveness analysis for projects under the LDC Project , it is aimed to be more broadly applicable across the GBR catchments . This method has been used to calculate the cost effectiveness estimates presented in Table 3 . This tool calculates the cost effectiveness of water quality improvements , and whilst considered at length , the inclusion of co-benefits such as production , biodiversity and social dimensions remained outside the scope of this tool .
92