Economic Valuation of Beach Quality Improvements: Comparing Incremental Attribute Values Estimated from Two Stated Preference Valuation Methods

Coastal Management

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 75-86

  Loomis, John ^a   Santiago, Luis ^b  

^a Department of Environmental and Radiological Health Sciences   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PUERTO RICO   (Puerto Rico)

Author keywords

beach recreation; choice experiments; contingent valuation method; non market valuation

Indexed keywords

ATTRIBUTE VALUES; BEACH RECREATIONS; CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTINGENT VALUATION METHODS; ECONOMIC VALUATION; ECONOMIC VALUES; NON-MARKET VALUATION; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; QUALITY REGULATION; STATED PREFERENCES; VALUATION METHODS; WATER CLARITY;

COMMERCE; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; EXPERIMENTS; WATER QUALITY;

BEACHES;

BEACH; COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT; CONTINGENT VALUATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; MAINTENANCE; RECREATIONAL DEVELOPMENT; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; SHORELINE; WATER QUALITY;

EID: 84872412001     PISSN: 08920753     EISSN: 15210421     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08920753.2012.749754     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Adamowicz, W., Swait, J., Boxall, P., Louviere, J. and Williams, M. 1996. A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation. Ecological Economics, 18: 243-253.
2. Adamowicz, W., Boxall, P., Williams, M. and Louviere, J. 1998. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: Choice experiments and contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80: 64-75.
3. Adamowicz, W., Dupont, D., Krupnick, A. and Zhang, J. 2011. Valuation of cancer and microbial disease risk reductions in municipal drinking water: An analysis of risk context using multiple valuation methods. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 61: 213-226.
4. Ariza, E., Ballester, R., Rigall-I-Torrent, R., Saló, A., Roca, E., Villares, M., Jiménez, J. and Sardá, R. 2012. On the relationship between quality, users' perception and economic valuation in NW Mediterranean beaches. Coastal Management, 63: 55-66.
5. Beharry-Borg, N. and Scarpa, R. 2010. Valuing quality changes in Caribbean coastal waters for heterogenous beach visitors. Ecological Economics, 69: 1124-1139.
6. Boxall, P., Adamowicz, V., Swait, J., Williams, M. and Louviere, J. 1996. A comparison of state preference methods for environmental valuation. Ecological Economics, 18: 243-253.
7. Boyle, K., Welsh, M. and Bishop, R. 1993. The role of question order and respondent experience in contingent valuation studies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 25: S80-S99.
8. Carson, R. and Groves, T. 2007. Incentive and information properties of preference questions. Environmental and Resource Economics, 37: 181-210.
9. Christie, M. and Azevedo, C. 2009. Testing the consistency between standard contingent valuation, repeated contingent valuation and choice experiments. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 60: 154-170.
10. Crompton, J. 2010. Measuring the economic impact of parks and recreation services. Research Series. National Parks and Recreation Association. NRPA.org or www.sehn.org/.../Crompton%20Research%20Paper-Final-150dpi.pdf (accessed November 8, 2012)
11. Fieller, E. 1932. The distribution of the index in a normal bivariate population. Biometrika, 24: 428-440.
12. Freeman, M. 2003. The measurement of environmental and resource values., Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.
13. Haefele, M. and Loomis, J. 2001. Improving statistical efficiency and testing robustness of conjoint marginal valuations. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 83: 1321-1327.
14. Houston, J. 1996. International tourism and US beaches. Shore and Beach, 64(2): 3-4.
15. Jin, J., Wang, Z. and Ran, S. 2006. Comparison of contingent valuation and choice experiment in solid waste management programs in Macao. Ecological Economics, 57: 430-441.
16. Johnston, R., Segerson, K., Schultz, E., Besedin, E. and Ramachandran, M. 2011. Indices of biotic integrity in stated preference valuation of aquatic ecosystem services. Ecological Economics, 70: 1946-1956.
17. Loomis, J. and Walsh, R. 1997. Recreation economic decisions: Comparing benefits and costs, 2nd ed., State College, PA: Venture Publishing Inc.
18. Loomis, J. and Ng, K. 2012. Comparing economic values of trout anglers and nontrout anglers in Colorado's stocked public reservoirs. North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 32: 202-210.
19. Miller, M. 1993. The rise of coastal and marine tourism. Special Issue on Ecotourism in Marine and Coastal Areas. Ocean and Coastal Management, 21(3): 183-199.
20. Mogas, J., Riera, P. and Brey, R. 2009. Combining contingent valuation and choice experiments: A forestry application in Spain. Environmental and Resource Economics, 43: 535-551.
21. Pereira, L., Jiménez, J., Medeiros, C. and Da Costa, R. 2003. The influence of the environmental status of Casa Caiada and Rio Doce beaches (NE-Brazil) on beach users. Ocean & Coastal Management, 46: 1011-1030.
22. Poor, J., Boyle, K., Taylor, L. and Bouchard, R. 2001. Objective versus subjective measures of water clarity in hedonic property value models. Land Economics, 77(4): 482-493.
23. Roca, E., Riera, C., Villares, M., Fragell, R. and Junyent, R. 2008. A combined assessment of beach occupancy and public perceptions of beach quality: A case study in the Costa Brava, Spain. Coastal Management, 51: 839-846.
24. Schroeder, K. 2011. Analysis of fiscal options available to the parks and recreation departments of West Sacramento during a period of economic contraction, Sacramento, CA: California State University, Sacramento. MS Thesis
25. Stevens, T., Belkner, R., Dennis, D., Kittredge, D. and Willis, C. 2000. Comparison of contingent valuation and conjoint analysisin ecosystem management. Ecological Economics, 32: 63-74.
26. Storrier, K. and McGlashan, D. 2006. Development and management of a coastal trashcampaign: The voluntary coastal partnership approach. Marine Policy, 30: 189-196.