Environmental value transfer: State of the art and future prospects

Ecological Economics

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 137-152

  Brouwer, Roy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Environmental valuation; Protocol; Reliability; Validity; Value transfer

Indexed keywords

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; FUTURE PROSPECT; PROJECT ASSESSMENT;

EID: 0033976071     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00070-1     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Aldred J. Existence value, moral commitments and in-kind valuation. Foster J. Valuing Nature? Ethics, Economics and the Environment. 1997;155-169 Routledge, London.
2. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E.E., Radner R., Schuman H. Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. Fed. Reg. 58(10):1993;4601-4614.
3. Bateman, I.J., Brainard, J.S., Lovett, A.A., 1995. Modelling woodland recreation demand using geographical information systems: a benefits transfer study. Global Environmental Change Working Paper 95-06, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE), University College London and University of East Anglia, Norwich.
4. Bergland, O., Magnussen, K., Navrud, S., 1995. Benefit transfer: testing for accuracy and reliability. Discussion Paper, #D-03/1995, Department of Economics and Social Sciences, Agricultural University of Norway.
5. Blamey, R.K., 1995. Citizens, consumers and contingent valuation: an investigation into respondent behaviour. Ph.D. Thesis, Australian National University.
6. Boyle K.J., Bergstrom J.C. Benefit transfer studies: myths, pragmatism, and idealism. Water Resour. Res. 28(3):1992;675-683.
7. Brisson, I., Pearce, D.W., 1995. Benefits transfer for disamenity from waste disposal. Global Environmental Change Working Paper WM 95-06, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE), University College London and University of East Anglia, Norwich.
8. Brouwer R., Spaninks F.A. The validity of environmental benefits transfer: further empirical testing. Environ. Resour. Econ. 14(1):1999;95-117.
9. Brouwer, R., Langford, I.H., Bateman, I.J., Crowards, T.C., Turner, R.K., 1997. A meta-analysis of wetland contingent valuation studies. Global Environmental Change Working Paper 97-20, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE), University College London and University of East Anglia, Norwich.
10. Brouwer R., Powe N., Turner R.K., Bateman I.J., Langford I.H. Public attitudes to contingent valuation and public consultation. Environ. Values. 8(3):1999;337-359.
11. Brown T.C., Slovic P. Effects of context on economic measures of value. Peterson G.L., Driver B.L., Gregory R. Amenity Resource Valuation: Integrating Economics and Other Disciplines. 1988;Venture, Philadelphia State College.
12. Burgess J., Clark J., Harrison C.M. Respondents' evaluations of a CV survey: a case study based on an economic valuation of the Wildlife Enhancement Scheme, Pevensey Levels in East Sussex. Area. 30(1):1998;19-27.
13. Carson R.T., Flores N.E., Martin K.M., Wright J.L. Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods. Land Econ. 72:1996;80-99.
14. Carson R.T., Hanemann W.M., Kopp R.J., Krosnick J.A., Mitchell R.C., Presser S., Ruud P.A., Smith V.K., Conaway M., Martin K. Temporal reliability of estimates from contingent valuation. Land Econ. 73(2):1997;151-163.
15. Costanza R., d'Arge R., de Groot R., Farber S., Grasso M., Hannon B., Limburg K., Naeem S., O'Neill R.V., Paruelo J., Raskin R.G., Sutton P., van den Belt M. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature. 387:1997;253-260.
16. Cummings R.G., Brookshire D.S., Schulze W.D. Valuing Environmental Goods: An Assessment of the Contingent Valuation Method. 1986;Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa.
17. Desvousges W.H., Naughton M.C., Parsons G.R. Benefit transfer: conceptual problems in estimating water quality benefits using existing studies. Water Resour. Res. 28(3):1992;675-683.
18. Downing M., Ozuna T. Jr Testing the reliability of the benefit function transfer approach. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 30:1996;316-322.
19. Edgeworth F.Y. Mathematical Psychics: An Essay on the Application of Mathematics to the Moral Sciences. Reprint of economic classics, 1967. 1881;Augustus M. Kelley, New York.
20. Fischhoff B., Furby L. Measuring values: a conceptual framework for interpreting transactions with special reference to contingent valuation of visibility. J. Risk Uncertainty. 1:1988;147-184.
21. Fishbein M., Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behaviour: An Introduction to Theory and Research. 1975;Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
22. Hanley, N., Wright, R.E., Adamowicz, V., 1998. Using choice experiments to value the environment. Environmental and Resource Economics, Special Issue Frontiers of Environmental & Resource Economics: Testing the Theories, 11(3-4), 413-428.
23. Jacobs M. Environmental valuation, deliberative democracy and public decision-making institutions. Foster J. Valuing Nature? Ethics, Economics and the Environment. 1997;211-231 Routledge, London.
24. Kask S.B., Shogren J.F. Benefit transfer protocol for long-term health risk valuation: a case of surface water contamination. Water Resour. Res. 30(10):1994;2813-2823.
25. Kirchhoff S., Colby B.G., LaFrance J.T. Evaluating the performance of benefit transfer: an empirical inquiry. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 33:1997;75-93.
26. Levi I. Hard Choices. 1986;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
27. Loomis J.B. Test-retest reliability of the contingent valuation method: A comparison of general population and visitor responses. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 71(1):1989;76-84.
28. Loomis J.B. The evolution of a more rigorous approach to benefit transfer: benefit function transfer. Water Resour. Res. 28(3):1992;701-705.
29. Loomis J.B., Roach B., Ward F., Ready R. Testing transferability of recreation demand models across regions: a study of corps of engineer reservoirs. Water Resour. Res. 31(3):1995;721-730.
30. Lovett A.A., Brainard J.S., Bateman I.J. Improving benefit transfer demand functions: a GIS approach. J. Environ. Manage. 51:1997;373-389.
31. Luken R.A., Johnson F.R., Kibler V. Benefits and costs of pulp and paper effluent controls under the Clean Water Act. Water Resour. Res. 28(3):1992;665-674.
32. O'Neill J. Value pluralism, incommensurability and institutions. Foster J. Valuing Nature? Ethics, Economics and the Environment. 1997;75-88 Routledge, pp, New York.
33. Parsons G.R., Kealy M.J. Benefits transfer in a random utility model of recreation. Water Resour. Res. 30(8):1994;2477-2484.
34. Pearce D.W., Whittington D., Georgiou S. Project and Policy Appraisal: Integrating Economics and Environment. 1994;OECD, Paris.
35. Perry R.B. General Theory of Value. 1950;Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
36. Rawls J. A Theory of Justice. 1971;Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
37. Rescher N. Introduction to Value Theory. 1975;Prentice-Hall, London.
38. Sagoff M. The Economy of the Earth. 1988;Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
39. Schkade D.A., Payne J.W. How people respond to contingent valuation questions: a verbal protocol analysis of willingness to pay for an environmental regulation. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 26:1994;88-109.
40. Smith V.K., Huang J.C. Hedonic models and air pollution: twenty-five years and counting. Environ. Resour. Econ. 3:1993;381-394.
41. Smith V.K., Huang J.C. Can markets value air quality? A meta-analysis of hedonic property value models. J. Political Econ. 103(1):1995;209-227.
42. Smith V.K., Kaoru Y. What have we learned since Hotelling's letter? A meta-analysis. Econ. Lett. 32:1990;267-272.
43. Smith V.K., Osborne L. Do contingent valuation estimates pass a 'scope' test? A meta-analysis. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 31:1996;287-301.
44. Sturtevant L.A., Johnson F.R., Desvousges W.H. A Meta-analysis of Recreational Fishing. 1995;Triangle Economic Research, Durham, NC.
45. Turner R.K. Cost-benefit analysis: a critique. Omega. 7:1978;411-419.
46. Vadnjal D., O'Connor M. What is the value of Rangitoto Island? Environ. Values. 3:1994;369-390.
47. van den Bergh J.C.J.M., Button K.J., Nijkamp P., Pepping G.C. Meta-Analysis in Environmental Economics. 1997;Kluwer, Dordrecht.
48. Vatn, A., Bromley, D.W., 1995. Choices without prices without apologies. In: Bromley, D.W. (Ed.), The Handbook of Environmental Economics. Blackwell Handbooks in Economics, Cambridge, MA, pp. 3-25.
49. Walsh R.G., Johnson D.M., McKean J.R. Benefit transfer of outdoor recreation demand studies, 1968-1988. Water Resour. Res. 28(3):1992;707-713.
50. Willis K.G., Garrod G.D. The ultimate test. Measuring the benefits of ESAs. Whitby M. Incentives for Countryside Management; The Case of Environmentally Sensitive Areas. 1994;179-217 CAB International, Wallingford.
51. Wolf, F.M., 1986. Meta-Analysis. Quantitative Methods for Research Synthesis. Sage University Paper 07-059. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences.