The case for diminishing marginal existence values

Journal of Environmental Economics and Management

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 324-344

  Rollins, Kimberly ^a   Lyke, Audrey ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH   (Canada)

^b Database Analyst   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; THEORETICAL STUDY; WILDERNESS AREA; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 0032211503     PISSN: 00950696     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jeem.1998.1045     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Alberini A. Efficiency versus bias of willingness-to-pay estimates: bivariate and interval-data models. J. Environ. Econom. Management. 29:1995;169-180.
2. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P., Leamer E., Radner R., Schuman H. Report of NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed. Reg. 58:1993;4601-4614.
3. Bishop R. C., Welsh M. P. Existence values in benefit-cost analysis and damage assessment. Land Econom. 68:1992;405-417.
4. Boyle K. J., Desvousges W. H., Johnson F. R., Dunford R. W., Hudson S. P. An investigation of part-whole biases in contingent-valuation studies. J. Environ. Econom. Management. 27:1994;64-83.
5. Cameron T. A., Quiggen J. Estimation using contingent valuation data from a "dichotomous choice with follow-up" questionnaire. J. Environ. Econom. Management. 27:1994;218-234.
6. Carson R. T. Contingent valuation surveys and tests of insensitivity to scope. Determining the Value of Non-Marketed Goods: Economics, Psychology, and Policy Relevant Aspects of the Contingent Valuation Method. 1997;Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
7. R. T. Carson, W. M. Hanemann, R. J. Kopp, J. A. Krosnick, R. C. Mitchell, S. Presser, P. A. Ruud, V. K. Smith, M. Conaway, K. Martin, Was the NOAA Panel Correct about Contingent Valuation?, Resources for the Future, 1996.
8. Cooper J., Hellerstein D. CVM - A Collection of Dichotomous Choice and Double-Bounded CVM Related Routines. 1994;USDA/NRS/Resources and Technology Division, Washington.
9. Diamond P. A. Testing the internal consistency of contingent valuation surveys. J. Environ. Econom. Management. 30:1996;337-347.
10. Diamond P. A., Hausman J. A. Contingent valuation: Is some number better than no number? J. Econom. Perspectives. 8:Fall 1994;45-64.
11. Diamond P. A., Hausman J. A., Leonard G. K., Deming M. A. Does CV measure preferences? Experimental evidence. Hausman J. A. Contingent Valuation: a Critical Assessment. 1993;North Holland, Amsterdam.
12. Desvousges W. H., Johnson F. R., Dunford R. W., Hudson S. P., Wilson K. N., Boyle K. Measuring natural resource damages with contingent valuation: Tests of validity and reliability. Hausman J. A. Contingent Valuation: a Critical Assessment. 1993;North Holland.
13. C. A. Gunning-Trant, Measuring the Existence Values of National Parks in the Northwest Territories, University of Guelph, 1996.
14. Hanneman M. W., Loomis J. B., Kanninen B. J. Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Amer. J. Agricultural Econom. 73:1991;1255-1263.
15. Kopp R. J. Why existence values should be used in benefit-cost analysis. J. Policy Anal. Management. 11:1992;123-130.
16. Krinsky I., Robb A. L. On approximating the Statistical properties of elasticities. Rev. Econom. Statist. 68:1986;715-719.
17. Loomis J., King M. Comparison of mail and telephone-mail contingent valuation surveys. J. Environ. Econom. Management. 41:1994;309-324.
18. Loomis J., Larson D. Total economic values of increasing gray whale populations: results from a contingent valuation survey of visitors and households. Marine Resource Econom. 9:1994;275-286.
19. Madden P. A generalization of Hicksianq. Econometrica. 59:Sept. 1991;1497-1508.
20. Majid I., Sinden J. A., Randall A. Benefit evaluation of increments to existing systems of public facilities. Land Econom. 59:Nov. 1983;377-392.
21. Mäler K.-G. Environmental Economics: A Theoretical Inquiry. 1974;Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore.
22. McFadden D., Leonard G. K. Issues in the contingent valuation of environmental goods. Hausman J. A. Contingent Valuation: a Critical Assessment. 1993;165-208 North Holland, Amsterdam.
23. Poe G. L., Severance-Lossin E. K., Welsh M. Measuring the difference (XY. Amer. J. Agricultural Econom. 76:Nov. 1994;904-915.
24. D. W. Reaves, R. A. Kramer, T. P. Holmes, Valuing the Endangered Red-Cockaded Woodpecker and Its Habitat: A Comparison of Contingent Valuation Elicitation Techniques and a Test for Embedding, 1994.
25. K. S. Rollins, A. J. Lyke, C. Gunning-Trant, Existence Values of New Parks in the Northwest Territories, 1997.
26. Rosenthal D., Nelson R. Why existence values should not be used in benefit-cost analysis. J. Policy Anal. Management. 11:1992;116-122.
27. W. Schulze, G. McClelland, J. Lazo, Methodological Issues in Using Contingent Valuation to Measure Non-Use Values, 19, 20, 1994.
28. Smith V. K., Osborne L. Do contingent valuation estimates pass a "scope" test? A meta-analysis. J. Environ. Econom. Management. 31:1995;287-301.