Who are resource nonusers and what can they tell us about nonuse values? Decomposing user and nonuser willingness to pay for coastal wetland restoration

Water Resources Research

Volumn 41, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 1-10

  Johnston, Robert J ^a,b   Opaluch, James J ^b,c   Magnusson, Gisele ^b,c   Mazzotta, Marisa J ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA REDUCTION; WETLANDS;

PREFERENCE ANALYSIS; RESOURCE NONUSERS; TRADITIONAL DISTINCTIONS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY (WTP);

WATER RESOURCES;

COASTAL WETLAND; COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 23944462356     PISSN: 00431397     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1029/2004WR003766     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Adamowicz, W., P. Boxall, M. Williams, and J. Louviere (1998), Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: Choice experiments and contingent valuation, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 80, 64-75.
2. Arrow, K., R. Solow, E. Learner, P. Portney, R. Rander, and H. Schuman (1993), Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation, Fed. Regist., 58, 4602-4614.
3. Boyer, T., and S. Polasky (2004), Valuing urban wetlands: A review of non-market valuation studies, Wetlands, 24(4), 744-755.
4. Carson, R. T., N. E. Flores, and R. C. Mitchell (1999), The theory and measurement of passive-use value, in Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries, edited by I. J. Bateman and K. G. Willis, pp. 97-130, Oxford Univ. Press, New York.
5. Croke, K., R. G. Fabian, and G. Brenniman (1986), Estimating the value of improved water quality in an urban river system, J. Environ. Syst., 16(1), 13-24.
6. Cronin, F. J. (1982), Valuing nonmarket goods through contingent markets, Rep. PNL 4255, Pac. Northwest Lab., Richland, Wash.
7. Cummings, R. G., and G. W. Harrison (1995), The measurement and decomposition of nonuse values: A critical review, Environ. Resour. Econ., 5, 225-247.
8. Freeman, A. M., III (2003), The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods, Resour. for the Future, Washington, D. C.
9. Greene, W. H. (2002), NLOGIT version 3.0 reference guide, Econ. Software, Inc., Plainview, N. Y.
10. Greene, W. H. (2003), Econometric Analysis, 5th ed., Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, N. J.
11. Griffiths, C. (2002), The use of benefit-cost analysis in environmental policy making, paper presented at Economic Valuation of Health for Environmental Policy: Assessing Alternative Approaches, Univ. of Cent. Fla., Orlando, 18-19 March.
12. Hanemann, W. M. (1984), Welfare Evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 66, 332-341.
13. Johnston, R. J., G. Magnusson, M. Mazzotta, and J. J. Opaluch (2002), Combining economic and ecological indicators to prioritize salt marsh restoration actions, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 84, 1362-1370.
14. Johnston, R. J., E. Y. Besedin, and R. F. Wardwell (2003a), Modeling relationships between use and nonuse values for surface water quality: A meta-analysis, Water Resour. Res., 39(12), 1363, doi:10.1029/2003WR002649.
15. Johnston, R. J., S. K. Swallow, D. Marie Bauer, and C. M. Anderson (2003b), Preferences for residential development attributes and support for the policy process: Implications for management and conservation of rural landscapes, Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev., 32(1), 65-82.
16. Layton, D. F. (2000), Random coefficient models for stated preference surveys, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 40(1), 21-36.
17. Maddala, G. S. (1983), Limited Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics, Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
18. Mäler, K. G., I. M. Gren, and C. Folke (1994), Multiple use of environmental resources: A household production function approach to valuing natural capital, in Investing in Natural Capital: The Ecological Economics Approach to Sustainability, edited by A. M. Jansson et al., pp. 233-249, Island, Washington, D. C.
19. McConnell, K. E. (1983), Existence and bequest value, in Managing Air Quality and Scenic Resources at National Parks and Wilderness Areas, edited by R. D. Rowe and L. G. Chestnut, pp. 254-264, Westview, Boulder, Colo.
20. McConnell, K. E. (1990), Models for referendum data: The structure of discrete choice models for contingent valuation, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 19(1), 19-34.
21. McFadden, D., and K. Train (2000), Mixed multinomial logit models for discrete responses, J. Appl. Econ., 15(5), 447-470.
22. Mitchell, R. C., and R. T. Carson (1981), An experiment in determining willingness to pay for national water quality improvements, research report, U.S. Environ. Prot. Agency, Washington, D. C.
23. Olsen, D., J. Richards, and R. D. Scott (1991), Existence and Sport values for doubling the size of Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead runs, Rivers, 2, 44-56.
24. Randall, A., and J. R. Stoll (1983), Existence value in a total valuation framework, in Managing Air Quality and Scenic Resources at National Parks and Wilderness Areas, edited by R. D. Rowe and L. G. Chestnut, pp. 265-274, Westview, Boulder, Colo.
25. Schkade, D. A., and J. W. Payne (1994), How people respond to contingent valuation questions: A verbal protocol analysis of willingness to pay for an environmental regulation, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 26(1), 88-109.
26. Train, K. (1998), Recreation demand models with taste differences over people, Land Econ., 74(2), 230-239.
27. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2000a), Guidelines for preparing economic analyses, Rep. EPA 240-R-00-003, Off. of the Admin., Washington, D. C.
28. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2000b), Economic and environmental impact assessment of proposed effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the coal mining industry: Remining and western alkaline subcategories, Rep. EPA 821-B-00-002, Off. of Water, Washington, D. C.
29. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2003a), National pollution discharge elimination system - Proposed Regulations to establish requirements for cooling water intake structures at Phase II existing facilities: Notice of data availability, Fed. Regist., 68, 13,567-13,575.
30. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) (2003b), Economic and environmental benefits analysis document for the final effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the metal products and machinery point source category, Rep. EPA-821-B-03-002, Off. of Water, Washington, D. C.
31. Whitehead, J. C., and G. C. Blomquist (1991), A link between behavior, information, and existence value, Leisure Sci., 13, 97-109.
32. Whitehead, J. C., and P. A. Groothuis (1992), Economic benefits of improved water quality: A case study of North Carolina's Tar Pamlico River, Rivers, 3, 170-178.
33. Whitehead, J. C., G. C. Blomquist, T. J. Hoban, and W. B. Clifford (1995), Assessing the validity and reliability of contingent values: A comparison of on site users, off site users, and non users, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 29(2), 238-251.