Comparison of Results of Cost-effectiveness Analysis (CEA) and Sequential Binary Integer Programming (BIP-SEQ) Methods
| Conservation Benefit | Acres | Parcels Selected | Program Expenditures ($) | Savings of BIP-SEQ over CEA, Benefits ($) | Savings of BIP-SEQ over CEA, Acres ($) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEA 2007 | 93,218 | 1,691 | 33 | 7,697,528 | — | — |
| BIP-SEQ 2007 | 93,956 | 1,670 | 30 | 7,783,642 | 83,220 | −141,036 |
| CEA 2008 | 116,578 | 1,770 | 28 | 10,175,255 | — | — |
| BIP-SEQ 2008 | 122,878 | 1,880 | 29 | 10,725,157 | 710,410 | 738,758 |
| CEA 2009 | 42,667 | 596 | 13 | 3,490,259 | — | — |
| BIP-SEQ 2009 | 43,744 | 568 | 10 | 3,560,051 | 121,446 | − 188,047 |
| CEA (total) | 252,463 | 4,057 | 74 | 21,363,042 | — | — |
| BIP-SEQ (total) | 260,578 | 4,118 | 68 | 22,068,850 | 915,076 | 409,675 |
| Difference between BIP-SEQ and CEA (%) | 8,115 (3.2%) | 61 (1.5%) | −6 (-8.1%) | 705,808 (3.3%) | (4.3%)a | (1.9%)a |
↵a Percentage difference in savings in comparison to CEA (total).