Can contingent valuation resolve the "adding-up problem" in environmental impact assessment?

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

Volumn 26, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 570-585

  Bruce, Christopher ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

"Adding up" problem; Contingent valuation; Environmental impact assessment

Indexed keywords

CONSUMER PRODUCTS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; CUSTOMER SATISFACTION; NUMERICAL METHODS;

"ADDING-UP" PROBLEM; CONTINGENT VALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT;

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;

CONTINGENT VALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT;

EID: 33745661189     PISSN: 01959255     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eiar.2006.04.003     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Adamowicz W., and Boxall P. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. Am J Agric Econ 80 (1998) 64-75
2. Bruce, C., forthcoming. Modeling the environmental collaboration process: a deductive approach. Ecol Econ.
3. Carson R., and Mitchell R. Sequencing and nesting in contingent valuation surveys. J Environ Econ Manage 28 (1995) 155-173
4. Clark B.D., Chapman K., Bisset R., and Wathern P. Environmental impact assessment. In: Lovejoy D. (Ed). Land-use and landscape planning (1979), Leonard Hill, Glasgow 53-87
5. Dom A. Environmental impact assessment of road and rail infrastructure. In: Petts J. (Ed). Handbook of environmental impact assessment vol. 2 (1999), Blackwell, Oxford 331-350
6. Eduljee G. Environmental impact assessment and waste management. In: Petts J. (Ed). Handbook of environmental impact assessment vol. 2 (1999), Blackwell, Oxford 300-330
7. Frederick S., and Fischhoff B. Scope (in)sensitivity in elicited valuations. Risk Decis Policy 3 (1998) 109-123
8. Glasson J., Therivel R., and Chadwick A. Introduction to environmental impact assessment. second ed. (1999), UCL Press, London
9. In: Hausman J. (Ed). Contingent valuation: a critical assessment (1993), North-Holland, New York
10. Holmes T., and Adamowicz W. Attribute-based methods. In: Champ P., Boyle K., and Brown T. (Eds). A primer on nonmarket valuation (2003), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston
11. Jain R.K., Urban L.V., Stacey G.S., Balbach H.E., and Webb M.D. Environmental Assessment. second ed. (2002), McGraw-Hill, New York
12. Jakobsson K., and Dragun A. Contingent valuation and endangered species: methodological issues and applications (1996), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK
13. Kemp M., and Maxwell C. Exploring a budget context for contingent valuation estimates. In: Hausman J. (Ed). Contingent valuation: a critical assessment (1993), North Holland Press, New York 217-270
14. Léon C., Vázquez-Polo F.J., and González R.L. Elicitation of expert opinion in benefit transfer of environmental goods. Environ Resour Econ 26 (2003) 199-210
15. Leopold LB., Clarke F.E., Hanshaw B.B., and Balsley J.R. A procedure for evaluating environmental impact. Circular vol. 645 (1971), US Geological Survey, Washington, DC
16. Montgomery C., Brown Jr. G., and Adams D. The marginal cost of species preservation: the northern spotted owl. J Environ Econ Manage 26 (1994) 111-128
17. Muthke T., and Holm-Mueller K. National and international benefit transfer testing with a rigorous test procedure. Environ Resour Econ 29 (2004) 323-336
18. Opaluch J., Swallow S., Weaver T., Wessells C., and Wichelns D. Evaluating impacts from noxious facilities: including public preferences in current siting mechanisms. J Environ Econ Manage 24 (1993) 41-59
19. Partidario M. Strategic environmental assessment-principles and potential. In: Petts J. (Ed). Handbook of environmental impact assessment vol. 2 (1999), Blackwell, Oxford 60-73
20. Petts J. Environmental impact assessment versus other environmental management decision tools. In: Petts J. (Ed). Handbook of environmental impact assessment vol. 1 (1999), Blackwell, Oxford 33-59
21. Petts J. Public participation and environmental impact assessment. In: Petts J. (Ed). Handbook of environmental impact assessment vol. 2 (1999), Blackwell, Oxford 145-177
22. Powe N.A., and Bateman I.J. Ordering effects in 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' contingent valuation designs. Ecol Econ 45 (2003) 255-270
23. In: Pritzker D., and Dalton D. (Eds). Negotiated rulemaking source book (1995), Office of the Chairman, Administrative Conference of the United States, Washington, DC
24. Ready R., Navrud S., Day B., Dubourg R., Machado F., Mourato S., et al. Benefit transfers in Europe: how reliable are transfers between countries?. Environ Resour Econ 29 (2004) 67-82
25. Richer J. Willingness to pay for desert protection. Contemp Econ Policy 13 (1995) 93-104
26. Rose S., and Chapman D. Timber harvest adjacency economies, hunting, species protection, and old growth value: seeking the dynamic optimum. Ecol Econ 44 (2003) 325-344
27. Venkatachalam L. The contingent valuation method: a review. Environ Impact Asses Rev 24 (2004) 89-124
28. Wondolleck J., and Yaffee S. Making collaboration work (2000), Island Press, Washington, DC