Investigating distance effects on environmental values: A choice modelling approach

Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics

Volumn 51, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 175-194

  Concu, Giovanni B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

Choice modelling; Geographical distance; Spatial heterogeneity; Stratified sample

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES; ESTIMATION METHOD; MODELING; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 34250347690     PISSN: 1364985X     EISSN: 14678489     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8489.2007.00381.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Anselin, L. (1988). Spatial Econometrics: Methods and Models. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
2. Bateman, I.J. and Langford, I.H. (1997). Non-users' willingness to pay for a national park: An application and critique of the contingent valuation method, Regional Studies 31, 571-582.
3. Bateman, I.J., Lovett, A.A. and Brainard, J.S. (1999). Developing a methodology for benefit transfers using geographical information systems: Modelling demand for woodland recreation, Regional Studies 33, 191-205.
4. Bateman, I.J., Langford, I.H., Nishikawa, N. and Lake, I. (2000). The Axford Debate revisited: A case study illustrating different approaches to the aggregation of benefits data, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 43, 291-302.
5. Beckmann, M.J. (1999). Lectures on Location Theory. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
6. Ben-Akiva, M. and Lerman, S. (1985). Discrete Choice Analysis. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
7. Bennett, J. and Adamowicz, W. (2001). Some fundamentals of environmental choice modelling, in Bennett, J. and Blamey, R. (eds), The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 37-69.
8. Bhat, C.R. (2000). Incorporating observed and unobserved heterogeneity in urban work travel mode choice modelling, Transportation Science 34, 228-238.
9. Boxall, P.C., Adamowicz, W.L., Swait, J., Williams, M. and Louviere, J. (1996). A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation, Ecological Economics 18, 243-253.
10. Breffle, W.S., Morey, E.R. and Lodder, T.S. (1998). Using Contingent Valuation to estimate a neighbourhood's Willingness to Pay to preserve undeveloped urban land, Urban Studies 35, 715-727.
11. Clarke, K.A. and Signorino, C.S. (2003). Discriminating methods: Tests for non nested discrete choice models, University of Rochester. Department of Political Science, Political Methodology Working paper, http://polmeth.wustl.edu/working03.chron.html.
12. Hanink, D.M. (1995). The economic geography in environmental issues: A spatial analytic approach, Progress in Human Geography 19, 372-387.
13. Hanley, N., Schlapfer, F. and Spurgeon, J. (2003). Aggregating benefits of environmental improvements: Distance-decay functions for use and non-use values, Journal of Environmental Management 68, 297-304.
14. Imber, D., Stevenson, G. and Wilks, L. (1991). A contingent valuation survey of the Kakadu Conservation Zone, Resource. Assessment Commission, research paper no.3, February 1991.
15. Jiang, Y., Swallow, S.K. and McGonagle, M.P. (2005). Contest-sensitive benefit transfer using stated choice models: Specification and convergent validity for policy analysis, Environmental and Resource Economics 31, 477-499.
16. Krinsky, I. and Robb, A.L. (1986). On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities, Review of Economics and Statistics 68, 715-719.
17. Loomis, J.B. (1996). How large is the extent of the market for public goods: Evidence from a nationwide Contingent Valuation survey, Applied Economics 28, 779-782.
18. Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A. and Swait, J.D. (2000). Stated Choice Methods. Analysis and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
19. McConnell, K.E. and Strand, I.E. (1981). Measuring the cost of time in recreation demand analysis: An application to sport fishing, American Journal of Agricultural Economics 63, 153-156.
20. Pate, J. and Loomis, J. (1997). The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: A case study of wetlands and salmon in California, Ecological Economics 20, 199-207.
21. Pearson, L.J., Tisdell, C. and Lisle, A.T. (2002). The impact of Noosa National Park on surrounding property values: An application of the Hedonic Price method, Economic Analysis and Policy 32, 155-171.
22. Scotchmer, S. and Thisse, J.F. (1999). Space and value: An outlook and new perspectives, in Kirman, A. and Gerard-Varet, L.A. (eds), Economics Beyond the Millennium. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 152-168.
23. Silberman, J., Gerlowski, D.A. and Williams, N.A. (1992). Estimating existence value for users and nonusers of New Jersey beaches, Land Economics 68, 225-236.
24. Stouffer, S.A. (1940). Intervening opportunities: A theory relating mobility and distance, American Sociological Review 5, 845-867.
25. Sutherland, R.J. and Walsh, R.G. (1985). Effect of distance on the preservation value of water quality, Land Economics 61, 281-291.
26. Van Bueren, M. and Bennett, J. (2004). Toward the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes, Australian Journal of Environmental and Resource Economics 48, 1-32.
27. Vuong, Q.H. (1989). Likelihood ratio tests for model selection and non-nested hypotheses, Econometrica 57, 307-333.