Intertemporal Valuation of River Restoration

Environmental and Resource Economics

Volumn 54, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 41-61

  Meyer, Andrew ^a  

^a OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Discounting; Intertemporal choice; Non market valuation; Water pollution

Indexed keywords

RIVERS; WATER POLLUTION; WATERSHEDS;

DISCOUNTING; DISCRETE CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; ECONOMETRIC MODEL; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS; INTER-TEMPORAL CHOICES; NON-MARKET VALUATION; RIVER RESTORATION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

RIVER POLLUTION;

CLEANUP; ECONOMETRICS; ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION; NUMERICAL MODEL; RIVER BASIN; VALUATION; WATER POLLUTION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

MINNESOTA; MINNESOTA BASIN; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84872826705     PISSN: 09246460     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-012-9580-4     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Alberini A, Chiabai A (2007) Discount rates in risk versus money and money versus money tradeoffs. Risk Anal 27: 483-498.
2. Alberini A, Cropper M, Krupnick A, Simon NB (2006) Willingness to pay for mortality risk reductions: does latency matter?. J Risk Uncertain 32: 231-245.
3. Alberini A, Scasny M (2011) Context and the vsl: evidence from a stated preference study in Italy and the Czech Republic. Environ Resour Econ 49: 511-538.
4. Alberini A, Tonin S, Turvani M, Chiabai A (2007) Paying for permanence: public preferences for contaminated site cleanup. J Risk Uncertain 34: 155-178.
5. Balogh SJ, Meyer ML, Johnson DK (1997) Mercury and suspended sediment loadings in the lower Minnesota River. Environ Sci Technol 31: 198-202. http://pubs. acs. org/doi/pdf/10. 1021/es960327t.
6. Bond CA, Cullen KG, Larson DM (2009) Joint estimation of discount rates and willingness to pay for public goods. Ecol Econ 68: 2751-2759.
7. Cairns J, van der Pol M (2000) Valuing future private and social benefits: the discounted utility model versus hyperbolic discounting models. J Econ Psychol 21: 191-205.
8. Center MRBD (2007) Minnesota River Basin data center. Available at http://mrbdc. mnsu. edu/.
9. Collins A, Rosenberger R, Fletcher J (2005) The economic value of stream restoration. Water resources research 41 NU: citation no. W02017; TR: CS0507258.
10. Daly A, Hess S, Train K (2012) Assuring finite moments for willingness to pay in random coefficient models. Transportation 39: 19-31.
11. Farber S, Griner B (2000) Valuing watershed quality improvements using conjoint analysis. Ecol Econ 34: 63-76.
12. Fennessy MS, Cronk JK (1997) The effectiveness and restoration potential of riparian ecotones for the management of nonpoint source pollution, particularly nitrate. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 27: 285-317. http://www. tandfonline. com/doi/pdf/10. 1080/10643389709388502.
13. Flores NE, Shafran A (2007) What we know about valuing ecosystem improvements and restoration. Working paper. Department of Economics, University of Colorado, Boulder.
14. Hanley N, Adamowicz W, Wright RE (2005) Price vector effects in choice experiments: an empirical test. Resour Energy Econ 27: 227-234.
15. Harvey CM (1986) Value functions for infinite-period planning. Manag Sci 32: 1123-1139.
16. Hensher DA, Rose JM, Greene WH (2005) Applied choice analysis: a primer. Cambridge University Press, New York.
17. Herrnstein R (1981) Self-control as response strength. Quantification of steady-state operant behavior. Elsevier/North-Holland, New York, pp 3-20.
18. Holmes TP, Adamowicz WL (2003) A primer on nonmarket valuation: attribute-based methods. Economics of non-market goods and resources, vol 3, Southern Research Station, US Forest Service, pp 171-219.
19. Keller LR, Strazzera E (2002) Examining predictive accuracy among discounting models. J Risk Uncertain 24: 143-160.
20. Kovacs KF, Larson DM (2008) Identifying individual discount rates and valuing public open space with stated-preference models. Land Econ 84: 209-224.
21. Laibson D (1997) Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Q J Econ 112: 443-477.
22. Magat WA (2000) An iterative choice approach to valuing clean lakes, rivers, and streams. J Risk Uncertain 21: 7-43.
23. Mazur JE (1987) An adjustment procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. Quantitative analysis of behaviour: the effect of delay and intervening events on reinforcement value. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 55-73.
24. Meyer AG (2012) Estimating discount factors for public and private goods and testing competing discounting hypotheses. SSRN eLibrary.
25. MPCA, Water quality standards. Available at http://www. pca. state. mn. us/index. php/water/water-monitoring-and-reporting/water-quality-and-pollutants/water-quality-standards. html.
26. Page MRBI (2008) Minnesota River Basin information page. Department of Soil, Water, and Climate, University of Minnesota. Available at http://www. soils. umn. edu/research/mn-river/.
27. Phelps ES, Pollak RA (1968) On second-best national saving and game-equilibrium growth. Rev Econ Stud 35: 185-199.
28. Rheinberger CM (2011) A mixed logit approach to study preferences for safety on alpine roads. Environ Resour Econ 49: 121-146.
29. Smith VK, Desvousges WH (1986) Measuring water quality benefits. Kluwer, Boston.
30. Train KE (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY.
31. US EPA (2008) Monitoring and assessing water quality. Available at http://www. epa. gov/305b/.
32. Viscusi WK, Huber J, Bell J (2008) Estimating discount rates for environmental quality from utility-based choice experiments. J Risk Uncertain 37: 199-220. RX: 850816 (on 24 May 2010).
33. Weitzman ML (2001) Gamma discounting. Am Econ Rev 91: 260-271.
34. Weitzman ML (2010) Risk-adjusted gamma discounting. J Environ Econ Manag 60: 1-13.
35. Whitmore GA, Cavadias GS (1974) Experimental determination of community preferences for water quality-cost alternatives. Decis Sci 5: 614-631.
36. Wilson MA, Carpenter SR (1999) Economic valuation of freshwater ecosystem services in the united states: 1971-1997. Ecol Appl 9: 772-783.