Contingent valuation, net marginal benefits, and the scale of riparian ecosystem restoration

Ecological Economics

Volumn 49, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 19-30

  Holmes, Thomas P ^a   Bergstrom, John C ^b   Huszar, Eric ^c   Kask, Susan B ^d   Orr III, Fritz ^e  

^a USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^c UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE   (United States)

^d WARREN WILSON COLLEGE   (United States)

^e Rabun Gap Nacoochee School   (United States)

Author keywords

Complements in valuation; Contingent valuation; Riparian restoration; Super additivity

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS; RESTORATION ECOLOGY; RIPARIAN VEGETATION;

LITTLE TENNESSEE RIVER; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

RIPARIA;

EID: 2442602299     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.10.015     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Balmford A., Bruner A., Cooper P., Costanza R., Farber S., Green R.E., Jenkins M., Jefferiss P., Jessamy V., Madden J., Munro K., Myers N., Naeem S., Paavola J., Rayment M., Rossendo S., Roughgarden J., Trumper K., Turner R.K. Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science. 297:2002;950-953
2. Bishop R.C., Heberlein T.A. Measuring values of extra-market goods: are indirect measures biased? Am. J. Agric. Econ. 61:1979;926-930
3. Bockstael N.E., Freeman A.M. III, Kopp R.J., Portney P.R., Smith V.K. On measuring economic values for nature. Environ. Sci. Technol. 34:2000;1384-1389
4. Greene W. Econometric Analysis. 2000;Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ
5. Hailu A., Adamowicz W.L., Boxall P.C. Complements, substitutes, budget constraints and valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 16:2000;51-68
6. Hanemann W.M. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 66:1984;332-341
7. Hanemann W.M. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. J. Econ. Perspect. 8:1994;19-43
8. Hanemann W.M., Kanninen B. The statistical analysis of discrete-response CV data. Bateman I.J., Willis K.G. Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the U.S., E.U., and Developing Countries. 1999;Oxford Univ. Press, New York
9. Harrison G.W., Leslie J.C. Must contingent valuation surveys cost so much? J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 31:1996;79-95
10. Hoehn J.P., Lupi F., Kaplowitz M.D. Untying a Lancastrian bundle: valuing ecosystems and ecosystem services for wetland mitigation. J. Environ. Manag. 68:2003;263-272
11. Holmes T.P., Adamowicz W.L. Attribute-based methods. Champ P.A., Boyle K.J., Brown T.C. A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. 2003;Kluwer Academic Publishing, Dordrecht
12. Holmes T.P., Kramer R.A. An independent sample test of yea-saying and starting point bias in dichotomous-choice contingent valuation. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 28:1995;121-132
13. Hsiao C. Analysis of Panel Data. 1986;Cambridge Univ. Press, New York
14. Karr J.R., Chu E.W. Restoring Life in Running Waters - Better Biological Monitoring. 1999;Island Press, Washington, DC
15. Limburg K.E., O'Neill R.V., Costanza R., Farber S. Complex systems and valuation. Ecol. Econ. 41:2002;409-420
16. Loomis J., Kent P., Strange L., Fausch K., Covich A. Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey. Ecol. Econ. 33:2000;103-117
17. Madden P. A generalization of Hicksian q substitutes and complements with application to demand rationing. Econometrica. 59:1991;1497-1508
18. Magat W., Huber J., Viscusi W.K., Bell J. An iterative choice approach to valuing clean lakes, rivers, and streams. J. Risk Uncertain. 21:2000;7-43
19. Turner R.K. The place of economic values in environmental valuation. Bateman I.J., Willis K.G. Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the U.S., E.U., and Developing Countries. 1999;Oxford Univ. Press, New York
20. Turner, R.K., Paavola, J., Cooper, P., Farber, S., Jessamy, V., Georgiou, S., 2002. Valuing Nature - Lessons Learned and Future Research Directions. CSERGE Working Paper EDM 02-05, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
21. United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1994. National Water Quality Inventory, 1992 Report to Congress, EPA 841-R-94-001.
22. Wear D.N., Bolstad P. Land-use changes in Southern Appalachian landscapes: spatial analysis and forecast evaluation. Ecosystems. 1:1998;575-594
23. Wilson M.A., Carpenter S.R. Economic valuation of freshwater ecosystem services in the United States: 1971-1997. Ecol. Appl. 9:1999;772-794
24. Zhongmin X., Guodong C., Zhiqiang Z., Zhiyong S., Loomis J. Applying contingent valuation in China to measure the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Ejina region. Ecol. Econ. 44:2003;345-358