Fishbein, 1976) it is this ability to impute a dollar value for non-marketable com-
modities which lends tangible worth to benefit-cost assessment, for the recipients
as well as the instigators of projects. Yet pattern analysts must discern, beyond the
array of fiscal costs and benefits: ‘what’ the communitygains and losses are in
terms of basic-export or residentiary-service jobs and incomes; ‘what’ longer-term
socialcomplexities arise from the completion of, or a pulling away from, a project;
and ‘what’ resourcedepletion and waste disposal burdens are to be left with future
populations.There is a gulf of difference between private enterprise accounting of a project’s
benefit–cost ratio (for the determination of investor benefits), and the community
impact of these externalities and diseconomies which deny anything like all-round
win-win improvements. Box 4.6 sets out the basis for a Benefit-cost prognosisas
an extension to the previously depicted Risk Impact Assessment, and the box 4.4
depiction of input–output patterns. Most assessments of this kind skew away
from balance; witness the early Scott, MacArthur, Newbury (1976) premiss, for
Kenya, that ‘The Green Revolution creates a real opportunity for cattle on feed
grains to produce high value beef for export to sophisticated markets’. Such rec-
ommendations were loaded with unquestioned presumptions – the worthiness of
fiscal gains from the ‘mining’ of Kenya’s soils to produce high-value beef exports,
the neglect of social consequences (for example land confiscation), environmental
consequences (for example ‘dust bowl’ effects of tract farming), and economic con-
sequences (diseconomies for a tribally cultured society)! All of the foregoing
underscores the need to have answers to wider socio-economic and socio-envi-
ronmental considerations, wider, that is, than a project progenitor’s profit-taking
ambition. The assessment panel is expected, on the one hand, to be quite firm and
consistent about the style and content of the base-line studies they require, yet on
the other hand to be sponsor-friendly and generative in attitude. This matter of146 Practice
1 Number of new local jobs directly associated with operation of new
project;
2 Number of new local jobs estimated to be created indirectly as a result of purchases
connected with the operation of new project;
3 Number of new local jobs estimated to be induced by consumer purchases of the new
employees:less
4 Number of local jobs estimated to be eliminated, directly and indirectly, by new project:
(1 to 4 being the estimated number of full-time new jobs created)
5 Number of jobs estimated to be seasonal;
6 Number of jobs estimated to be temporary;
7 Jobs for which current unemployed are qualified;
8 Jobs for which displaced workers would be qualified;
9 Jobs filled by current local residents (rather than newcomers or
commuters)Figure 4.2 Work and jobs checklist