Review of nonmarket forest goods and services evaluation methods

Periodicum Biologorum

Volumn 111, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 515-521

  Vuletić, Dijana ^a   Benko, Miroslav ^a   Dubravac, Tomislav ^a   Krajter, Silvija ^a   Novotny, Vladimir ^a   Indir, Krunoslav ^a   Balenović, Ivan ^a  

^a CROATIAN FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Croatia)

Author keywords

Evaluation methods; Forest service based recreation; Nonmarket evaluation methods; Quantification of benefits

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTRIBUTE BASED METHOD; BENEFIT TRANSFER; CHOICE EXPERIMENT; CONTINGENT VALUATION; COST OF ILLNESS; DEFENSIVE BEHAVIOR; EVALUATION RESEARCH; FOREST; HEDONIC PRICING; MANAGEMENT; MANAGER; MARKETING; META ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; POLICY; REVEALED PREFERENCE; SCIENTIST; STATED PREFERENCE; TRAVEL COST;

EID: 77951658720     PISSN: 00315362     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. SIMPSON M, PICHLER V, TYRVÄINEN L, COLLINS K, MARTIN S, STRANGE N, VULETIĆ D 2008 The economics and social values of forests for recreation and nature tourism: A research overview. COST Action E33: Forest for Recreation and Nature Tourism (FORREC). Available at: www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/cost33/ outputs.htm. COST, European Science Foundation.
2. MERLO M, CROITORU L 2005 Valuing Mediterranean Forests. Towards Total Economic Value. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.
3. BATEMAN J 1994 Research Methods for Valuing Environmental Benefits. In: Doubaard A, Bateman I, Merlo M (eds) Identification and Valuation of Public Benefits from Farming and Countryside Stewardship. Wissenschaftsverlag, Vauk, Kiel.
4. TYRVÄINEN L, BUCHECKER M, DEGENHARDT B, VULETIĆ D 2008 Evaluating the economic and social benefits of forest recreation and nature tourism. In: Bell S, Simpson M, Tyrväinen L, Sievanen T, Probstl U (eds) European Forest Recreation and Tourism. Taylor & Francis, London and New York, p 35-63
5. MANSKI C F 2000 Economic Analysis of Social Interactions. Journal of Economic Perspectives 14 (3): 115-136
6. DAVIS RK 1963 Recreation Planning as an Economic Problem. Nat Resour J 3(3): 239-249
7. TYRVÄINEN L 1999 Monetary valuation of urban forest amenities in Finland. Academic dissertation. Finnish Forest Research Institute. Research papers 739: 53-76
8. ALBERINI A, KRUPNICK A 2000 Cost-of-illness and Willingness-to-pay. Estimates of Improved Air Quality: Evidence from Taiwan. Land Econ 76 (1): 37-53
9. DICKIE M, GERKING S 1996 Formation of Risks, Beliefs, Joint Production and Willingness to Pay to Avoid Skin Cancer. The Review of Economics and Statistics 78 (3): 451-464
10. SCHNEEMANN M 1997 A Meta-Analysis of Response Rates to Contingent Valuation Surveys Conducted by Mail. Unpublished M.S. Thesis, University of Maine.
11. MITCHELL R C, CARSON R T 1989 Using Surveys toValue Public Goods: the Contingent Valuation Method. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.
12. SCHUMAN H 1996 The Sensitivity of CV outcomes to CV Survey Methods. In: Bjornstad D, Kahn J (eds). The Contingent Valuation of Environmental Resources: Methodological Issues and Research Needs. Edward Elgan Publishing, Cheltenham, UK.
13. AHEARN M, HELLERSTEIN D, BOYLE K J 2003 Designing a Contingent-Valuation Study to Estimate the Benefits of the Conservation Reserve Program on Grassland Bird Populations. In: Kahn J, Bjornstad D, Alberini A (eds) The Contingent Valuation Handbook Cheltenham. Edward Elger, UK.
14. ADAMOWICZ W, SWAIT J, BOXAL P, LOUVIERE J, WILLIAMS M 1997 Perceptions versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation. J Environ Econ Manage 32 (1): 65-84
15. RAEDA 1983 The Value to Visitors of Improving Visibility at Mesa Verde and Great Smoky National Parks. In: Rowe RD, Chesnut LG (eds) Managing Air Quality and Scenic Resources at National Parks and Wilderness Areas. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.
16. GARROD G D, WILLIS K G 1998 Using Contingent Ranking to Estimate the Loss of Amenity Value for Inland Waterways from Public Utility Service Structures. Environ Resour Econ 12: 241-247
17. LAYTON D F 2000 Random Coefficient Models for Stated Preference Surveys. J Environ Econ Manage 40: 21-36
18. MORRISON M, BOYLE K 2001 Comparative Reliability of Rank and Choice Data in Stated Preference Models. Paper presented at the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economics 2001 Conference, Southampton, UK, June.
19. CARLSSON F, MARTISSON P 2001 Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments? Application to Valuation of the Environment. J Environ Econ Manage 41: 179-192
20. nd Edition). Venture Publishing, State College, PA.
21. PARSONS GR, MASSEY D M, TOMASI T 1999 A Comparison of Welfare Estimates from Four Models for Linking Seasonal Recreational Trips to Multinomial Logit Models of Site Choice. J Environ Econ Manage 38: 143-157
22. PARSONS G R, MASSEY D M 2003 A RUM Model of Beach Recreation. In: Hanely N, Shaw W D, Wright R E, Coleman J C (eds).The New Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
23. MENDELSOHN R, HOF J, PETERSON G, JOHNSON R 1992 Measuring Recreation Values with Multiple Destination Trips. Am J Agric Econ 74: 926-933
24. PARSON G R, WILSON A J 1997 Incidental and Joint Consumption in Recreation Demand. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 26: 1-6
25. CHAMP P A, BOYLE K A, THOMAS C B 2003 A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London, p 1-567
26. TYRVÄINEN L, PAULEIT S, SEELAND K, DE VRIES S 2005 Benefits and uses of urban forests and trees. In: Nilsson K, Randrup T B, Konijnendijk C C (eds) Urban Forests and Trees in Europe: A Reference Book. Springer Verlag, p 81-114
27. ROSENBERGER R S, LOOMIS J B 2001 Benefit transfer of outdoor recreation use values: A technical document supporting the Forest Service Strategic Plan (2000 revision). Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-72. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, p 59
28. www.environent.nsw.gov.au/envalue/StudyCnt.asp
29. www.beijer,kva.se/valuebase.htm
30. www.evri.ca
31. STANLEY T D, JARRELL S B 1989 Meta-regression Analysis: A Quantitative Method of Literature Surveys. Journal of Economic Surveys 3: 161-170
32. SMITH V K, KAORU Y 1990 Signals or Noise? Explaining the Variation in Recreation Benefit Estimates. Am J Agric Econ 72(2): 419-433
33. WALSH R G, JOHNSON D M, MCKEAN J R 1992 Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Demand Studies: 1968-1988. Water Resources Research 28(3): 707-713
34. BROUWER R, SPANINKS F A 1999 The Validity of Environmental Benefit Transfer: Further EmpiricalTesting. Environ Resour Econ 14: 95-117
35. VANDENBERG T P, POE G L, POWELL J R 2001 Assessing the Accuracy of Benefit Transfers: Evidence from a Multi-site Contingent Valuation Study of Groundwater Quality. In: Bergstrom J C, Boyle K J, Poe G L (eds) The Economic Value of Water Quality. Mass: Edward Elgar Publishing.
36. DESVOUSGES W H, JOHNSON F R, SPENCER H S 1998 Environmental Analysis with Limited Information. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham.