Valuation of species and nature conservation in Asia and Oceania: A meta-analysis

Environmental Economics and Policy Studies

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 1-22

  Lindhjem, Henrik ^a   Tuan, Tran Huu ^b  

^a NORWEGIAN INSTITUTE FOR NATURE RESEARCH   (Norway)

^b HUE UNIVERSITY   (Viet Nam)

Author keywords

Asia; Biodiversity; Meta analysis; Oceania; Valuation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855899245     PISSN: 1432847X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10018-011-0019-x     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Bandara R, Tisdell C (2005) Changing Abundance of Elephants and Willingness to Pay for their Conservation. J Environ Manag 76: 47-59.
2. Barrio M, Loureiro M (2010) A meta-analysis of contingent valuation forest studies. Ecol Econ 69: 1023-1030.
3. Bateman IJ, Jones AP (2003) Contrasting conventional with multi-level modeling approaches to meta-analysis: expectation consistency in UK woodland recreation values. Land Econ 79: 235-258.
4. Bateman IJ, Carson RT, Day B, Hanemann WM, Hanley N, Hett T, Jones-Lee M, Loomes G, Mourato S, Ozdemiroglu E, Pearce DW, Sugden R, Swanson T (2002) Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: a manual. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham.
5. Bergstrom JC, Taylor LO (2006) Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: theory and practice. Ecol Econ 60: 351-360.
6. Brander LM, Florax RJGM, Verrmaat JE (2006) The empirics of wetland valuation: a comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature. Environ Resour Econ 33: 223-250.
7. Brander LM, van Beukering P, Cesar H (2007) The recreational value of coral reefs: a meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 63: 209-218.
8. Carson RT, Flores NE, Martin KM, Wright JL (1996) Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods. Land Econ 72: 80-99.
9. Champ PA, Flores NE, Brown TC, Chivers J (2002) Contingent valuation and incentives. Land Econ 78: 591-604.
10. Desvousges WH, Johnson FR, Banzhaf HS (1998) Environmental policy analysis with limited information: principles and applications of the transfer method. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
11. Engel S (2002) Benefit function transfer versus meta-analysis as policy-making tools: a comparison. In: Florax RJGM, Nijkamp P, Willis KG (eds) Comparative environmental economic assessment. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 133-153.
12. Freeman AMI (2003) The measurement of environmental and resource values. Resource for the Future Press, Washington.
13. Fromm O (2000) Ecological structure and functions of biodiversity as elements of its total economic value. Environ Resour Econ 16: 303-328.
14. Glass GV, McGaw B, Smith ML (1981) Meta-analysis in social research. Sage, Beverly Hills.
15. Hoehn JP (2006) Methods to address selection effects in the meta regression and transfer of ecosystem values. Ecol Econ 60: 389-398.
16. Jacobsen JB, Hanley N (2009) Are there income effects on global willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation. Environ Resour Econ 43: 137-160.
17. Jacobsen JB, Boiesen JH, Thorsen BJ, Strange N (2008) What's in a name? The use of quantitative measures versus 'Iconised' species when valuing biodiversity. Environ Resour Econ 39: 247-263.
18. Jianjun J, Zhishi W, Xuemin L (2008) Valuing black-faced spoonbill conservation in Macao: A policy and contingent valuation study. Ecol Econ 68: 328-335.
19. Johnston RJ, Besedin EY, Iovanna R, Miller CJ, Wardwell RF, Ranson MH (2005) Systematic variation in willingness to pay for aquatic resource improvements and implications for benefit transfer: a meta-analysis. Can J Agric Econ 53: 221-248.
20. Johnston RJ, Besedin EY, Ranson MH (2006) Characterizing the effects of valuation methodology in function-based benefits transfer. Ecol Econ 60: 407-419.
21. Kriström B, Riera P (1996) Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one? Environ Resour Econ 7: 45-55.
22. Lindhjem H (2007) 20 years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: a meta-analysis. J Forest Econ 12: 251-277.
23. Lindhjem H, Navrud S (2008) How reliable are meta-analyses for international benefit transfers? Ecol Econ 66: 425-435.
24. Lindhjem H, Navrud S (2009) Asking for individual or household willingness to pay for environmental goods: implication for aggregate welfare measures. Environmental and resource economics 43: 11-29.
25. Lindhjem H, Navrud S (2011a) Are Internet surveys an alternative to face-to-face interviews in contingent valuation? Ecol Econ 70: 1628-1637.
26. Lindhjem H, Navrud S (2011b) Using Internet in Stated Preference Surveys: a review and comparison of survey modes. Int Rev Environ Resour Econ (Forthcoming).
27. Metrick A, Weitzman ML (1996) Patterns of behavior in endangered species preservation. Land Econ 72: 1-16.
28. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Synthesis report. Island Press, Washington.
29. Moeltner K, Boyle K, Paterson RW (2007) Meta-analysis and benefit transfer for resource valuation-addressing classical challenges with Bayesian modeling. J Environ Econ Manag 53: 250-269.
30. Navrud S, Ready R (eds) (2007) Environmental value transfer: issues and methods. Springer.
31. Nelson JP, Kennedy PE (2009) The use (and Abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: an assessment. Environ Resour Econ 42: 345-377.
32. Pearce D (2005) Economists and biodiversity conservation: what can we contribute?. EAERE, Bremen.
33. Ready R, Navrud S (2006) International benefit transfer: methods and validity tests. Ecol Econ 60: 429-434.
34. Richardson L, Loomis J (2009) The total economic value of threatened, endangered and rare species: an updated meta-analysis. Ecol Econs 68: 1535-1548.
35. Rosenberger RS, Johnston RJ (2009) Selection effects in meta-analysis and benefit transfer: avoiding unintended consequences. Land Econ 85: 410-428.
36. Rosenberger R, Loomis J (2000a) Panel stratification in meta-analysis of economic studies: an investigation of its effects in the recreation valuation literature. J Agric Appl Econ 32: 131-149.
37. Rosenberger RS, Loomis JB (2000b) Using meta-analysis for benefit transfer: in-sample convergent validity tests of an outdoor recreation database. Water Resour Res 36: 1097-1107.
38. Schläpfer F (2006) Survey protocol and income effects in the contingent valuation of public goods: a meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 57: 415-429.
39. Shrestha RK, Loomis JB (2003) Meta-analytic benefit transfer of outdoor recreation economic values: testing out-of-sample convergent validity. Environ Resour Econ 25: 79-100.
40. Smith VK, Pattanayak SK (2002) Is meta-analysis a Noah's Ark for non-market valuation? Environ Resour Econ 22: 271-296.
41. Stanley TD, Jarrel SD (2005) Meta-regression analysis: a quantitative method of literature surveys. J Econ Surveys 19: 299-308.
42. Stapler RW, Johnston RJ (2009) Meta-analysis, benefit transfer, and methodological covariates: implications for transfer error. Environ Resour Econ 42: 227-246.
43. Tuan TH, Lindhjem H (2009) Meta-analysis of nature conservation values in Asia and Oceania: data heterogeneity and benefit transfer issues. In: Lindhjem H (ed) Methodological issues in meta-analysis, benefit transfer and environmental valuation. PhD Thesis. Department of Economics and Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Norwegian.
44. USEPA (2006) Report of the EPA work group on VSL meta-analysis, report NCEE-0494. National Center for Environmental Economics, EPA, Washington.
45. van Houtven G, Powers J, Pattanayak SK (2007) Valuing water quality improvements using meta-analysis: is the glass half-full or half-empty for national policy analysis? Resour Energy Econ 29: 206-228.
46. Wiser R (2007) Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy: a comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles. Ecol Econ 62: 419-432.
47. Zandersen M, Tol RSJ (2009) A meta-analysis of forest recreation values in Europe. J Forest Econ 15: 109-130.