jonmor
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 13:46
|
|
tiompan wrote: "Comparisons are odious ", we know that at the most basic level , at cultural and personal levels it would rarely be considered , Solomon excepted .
That may be so George. In an ideal world, we could all have exactly what each one of us wants. In a not-so-deal world, society has to make comparisons of benefit. If the decision is made not to provide quantifiable comparisons between choices, then society as a whole suffers because it will not always get to appreciate that other, better, choices could have been made.
|
jonmor
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 13:47
|
|
tiompan wrote: See below . the "all" was in reference to the huge number that can't be quantified , any one of which can't be quantified either .
Fair enough George. That's your belief.
|
tiompan
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 13:57
|
|
If you can refute it , that would be great .
|
jonmor
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 13:58
|
|
nigelswift wrote: Come on Jon, ED is right, heritage value is generated in people's hearts and minds. Economists have neither, it's a well known fact.
If that is true, and it could well be that it is a part of the 'heritage value', then that part of the value can be equated to an equivalent financial value (or whatever you choose) using 'well being' assessment criteria. If that value (for whatever might be destroyed) exceeds the costs of the provision of a longer tunnel, the case for the longer tunnel gets stronger. You don't have to use financial comparisons, but it helps.
However 'Heritage' is not quite the same thing as buried archaeological remains of an uncertain history. It may be better to look at all possible valuation criteria and not just the ones that appeal to people interested in archaeology.
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 14:03
|
If the decision is made not to provide quantifiable comparisons between choices, then society as a whole suffers because it will not always get to appreciate that other, better, choices could have been made.....
I understand what you are saying. Yes a unit of comparison would be highly desireable. But since every case is different and every site has a million variables it can't be done.
Heritage choices therefore come from two sources. Attempts to allocate weightings, as suggested by EH/HE Advice notes and Inspectors' cae law - which are good though only broad brush .... and the rather less savoury miasma of vested interests and Govt. overrides for political agenda reasons.
Good luck with producing a common unit of comparison out of that lot!
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 14:11
|
It may be better to look at all possible valuation criteria and not just the ones that appeal to people interested in archaeology.....
But there you go again, trying to measure driver satisfaction (and or journey costs) against love of heritage without explaining how you have found a common unit of value with which to make the comparison!
It can't be done.
|
tiompan
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 14:18
|
You have yet to provide any examples whereby anyone can actually quantify the values . Decisions are taken based on subjective comparisons but there is no agreed method .
Benjamin Harrison odiously suggested two black slaves should be considered the equivalent of one white labourer , when it came to wealth production , he didn't have a problem with method . The vast majority of us do . Does 90 minutes of watching Lionel Messi provide greater nourishment for our souls than the local parish community singing of "Amazing Grace " , or does contemplation of a flat field containing a BA linear cemetery trump Fermat's last theorem ?
|
nigelswift
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 14:26
|
|
tiompan wrote: Does 90 minutes of watching Lionel Messi provide greater nourishment for our souls than the local parish community singing of "Amazing Grace " , or does contemplation of a flat field containing a BA linear cemetery trump Fermat's last theorem ?
LOL !
Piece of cake, given infinite resources.
|
jonmor
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 14:31
|
|
tiompan wrote: If you can refute it , that would be great .
It would be great to continue our chat George. I'll look over the consultation documents first though (after I've cleared the desk of workload), as that's probably a bit more urgent.
|
jonmor
|
Re: Julian Richards gives his view on the tunnel
Feb 22, 2017, 14:35
|
|
nigelswift wrote:
Good luck with producing a common unit of comparison out of that lot!
You may be right: It may not be worth the effort of putting in a holding set of arguments in the current consultation. I'll take a look at it next week.
|
