16. Effects of the alternatives
The alternatives are based on the earlier defined scenario
Zero alternative
(no investment; autonomous development)
| Criterion | Value |
| Total income | 459 MUlc |
| Income per head of population | 432 Ulc |
| Number of jobs | 227,000 |
| Employment rate | 53.4% |
| E-coli bacteria | 1,486 |
| Heavy metal | 1,120 |
| Phosphates | 1,330 |
| Mangrove area | 17,760 |
Alternatives 1 and 2 are based on objectives that aim at good employment rates, agriculture and fisheries, and income generation.
Alternative
1: Tourism and mining
| Sector | Investment (MUlc) |
| Mining | 67 |
| Tourism | 50 |
| Fisheries | 150 |
| Agriculture | 150 |
| Aquaculture | 201 |
| Waste water treatment | 150 |
| Tailing treatment | 32 |
| Criterion | Value |
| Total income | 579 MUlc |
| Income per head of population | 545 Ulc |
| Number of jobs | 410,000 |
| Employment rate | 96.6% |
| E-coli bacteria | 0 |
| Heavy metal | 0 |
| Phosphates | 5,335 |
| Mangrove area | 22,367 |
Alternative
2: Fisheries, agriculture and aquaculture
| Sector | Investment (MUlc) |
| Mining | 0 |
| Tourism | 0 |
| Fisheries | 175 |
| Agriculture | 254 |
| Aquaculture | 208 |
| Waste water treatment | 158 |
| Tailing treatment | 5 |
| Criterion | Value |
| Total income | 561 MUlc |
| Income per head of population | 528 Ulc |
| Number of jobs | 428,000 |
| Employment rate | 100.8% |
| E-coli bacteria | 0 |
| Heavy metal | 0 |
| Phosphates | 6,788 |
| Mangrove area | 22,620 |
Alternatives 3 and 4 are based on objectives that aim at rise in income, industrial development and stable employment rate on the short and the long term.
Alternative
3: Short term (2010)
| Sector | Investment (MUlc) |
| Mining | 450 |
| Tourism | 0 |
| Fisheries | 0 |
| Agriculture | 0 |
| Aquaculture | 115 |
| Waste water treatment | 25 |
| Tailing treatment | 210 |
| Criterion | Value |
| Total income | 556 MUlc |
| Income per head of population | 652 Ulc |
| Number of jobs | 325,000 |
| Employment rate | 95.3% |
| E-coli bacteria | 1056 |
| Heavy metal | 0 |
| Phosphates | 2,330 |
| Mangrove area | 20,590 |
Alternative
4: Long term (2040)
| Sector | Investment (MUlc) |
| Mining | 450 |
| Tourism | 0 |
| Fisheries | 0 |
| Agriculture | 0 |
| Aquaculture | 115 |
| Waste water treatment | 25 |
| Tailing treatment | 210 |
| Criterion | Value |
| Total income | 900 MUlc |
| Income per head of population | 607 Ulc |
| Number of jobs | 467,000 |
| Employment rate | 78,7% |
| E-coli bacteria | 1,446 |
| Heavy metal | 2,320 |
| Phosphates | 2,780 |
| Mangrove area | 9,773 |
No! The B/C ratio only uses information that is expressed in monetary terms: MUlc's. So, only information from the judgement parameter "Total Income" could be used, whereas information from the other judgement parameters (income per head, number of jobs, employment rate, E-coli, heavy metal, phosphate, mangrove area) would be neglected completely. A decision, based on the B/C ration can therefore only be relevant for a decision maker who would be solely interested in the "Total Income". Such a decision maker can be considered as non-existing.
[Questions phase 4] [Questions phase 5]