Evaluating the performance of benefit transfer: An empirical inquiry

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 75-93

  Kirchhoff, Stefanie ^a   Colby, Bonnie G ^b   LaFrance, Jeffrey T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031148767     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jeem.1996.0981     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. 1. K. J. Boyle, M. P. Welsh, and R. C. Bishop, The role of question order and respondent experience in contingent valuation studies, J. Environ. Econom. Management 25, 5-80 (1993).
2. 2. K. J. Boyle and J. C. Bergstrom, Benefit transfer studies: Myths, pragmatism, and idealism, Water Resour. Res. 28, 657-663 (1992).
3. 3. T. A. Cameron and D. D. Huppert, OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data, J. Environ. Econom. Management 17, 230-246 (1989).
4. 4. J. C. Cooper, A comparison of approaches to calculating confidence intervals for benefit measures from dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys, Land Econom. 70, 111-122 (1994).
5. 5. W. H. Desvousges, M. C. Naughton, and G. R. Parsons, Benefit transfer: Conceptual problems in estimating water quality benefits using existing studies, Water Resour. Res. 28, 675-683 (1992).
6. 6. M. Downing and T. Ozuna, Jr., "Testing the Reliability of the Benefit Function Transfer Approach," Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN (1994).
7. 7. J. M. Halstead, B. E. Lindsay, and C. M. Brown, Use of the tobit model in contingent valuation: Experimental evidence from the Pemigewasset Wilderness Area, J. Environ. Management 33, 79-89 (1991).
8. 8. J. L. Jordan and A. E. Elnagheeb, Consequences of using different question formats in contingent valuation, Land Econom. 70, 97-110 (1994a).
9. 9. J. L. Jordan and A. E. Elnagheeb, Differences in contingent valuation estimates from referendum and checklist questions, J. Agric. Resour. Econom. 19, 115-128 (1994b).
10. 10. A. J. Krupnick, Benefit transfers and valuation of environmental improvements, Resources Winter (1993).
11. 11. J. Loomis, The evolution of a more rigorous approach to benefit transfer: Benefit function transfer, Water Resour. Res. 28, 701-705 (1992).
12. 12. R. C. Mitchell and R. T. Carson, "Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method," Resources for the Future, Washington, DC (1989).
13. 13. E. R. Morey, What is consumer surplus per day of use, when is it a constant independent of the number of days of use, and what does it tell us about consumer's surplus? J. Environ. Econom. Management 26, 257-270 (1994).
14. 14. J. J. Opaluch and M. J. Mazzotta, Fundamental issues in benefit transfer and natural resource damage assessment, in "Benefits Transfer: Procedures, Problems, and Research Needs," Workshop Proceedings, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, Snowbird, UT, June (1992).
15. 15. V. K. Smith, On separating defensible benefit transfers from smoke and mirrors, Water Resour. Res. 28, 685-694 (1992).