Estimating willingness to pay for additional protection of Ohio surface waters: Contingent valuation of water quality

Economic Valuation of River Systems

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 35-51

  Irvin, Stephen ^a   Haab, Tim ^a   Hitzhusen, Fred J ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881979489     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (18)

1. Bishop, R., T. Heberlein, and M. Kealy (1983), "Contingent valuation of environmental assets: comparisons with a simulated market," Natural Resources Journal, 23, 619-33.
2. Blamey, R., J. Bennett, and M. Morrison (1999), "Yea-saying in contingent valuation surveys," Land Economics, 75 (3), 126-41.
3. Boman, M., G. Bostedt, and B. Kristrom (1999), "Obtaining welfare bounds in discrete-response valuation studies: a non-parametric approach," Land Economics, 75 (2), 284-94.
4. Brookshire, D. and L. Eubanks (1978), "Contingent valuation and revealing actual demand for public environmental commodities," manuscript, University of Wyoming.
5. Brookshire, D. and A.Randall (1978), "Public policy alternatives, public goods, and contingent valuation mechanisms," paper presented at the Western Economic Association Meeting, Honolulu, Hawaii, March.
6. Brown, T., P. Champ, R. Bishop, and D. McCollum (1996),"Which response format reveals the truth about donations to a public good?" Land Economics, 72 (2), 152-66.
7. Cosslett, S. (1983), "Distribution-free maximum likelihood estimator of the binary choice model," Econometrica, 51 (3), 765-82.
8. Diamond, P. and J. Hausman (1993), "On contingent valuation measurement of nonuse values," in J. Hausman (ed.), Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment, Amsterdam: North-Holland.
9. Haab, T. and K. McConnell (2002), The Econometrics of Non-market Valuation, New Horizons in Environmental Economics Series, Aldershot, UK and Brookfield, US: Edward Elgar.
10. Irvin, S. (2001), "Estimating economic benefits to society from river and stream protection," MS thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.
11. List, J. and C. Gallet (2001), "What experimental protocol influence disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values?" Environmental and Resource Economics, 20, 241-54.
12. McFadden, D. and G. Leonard (1993), "Issues in the contingent valuation of environmental goods: methodologies for data collection and analysis," in J. Hausman (ed.), Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment, Amsterdam: North-Holland.
13. Mitchell, R. and R. Carson (1989), Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method, Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
14. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (1993), "National resource damage assessments under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990," Federal Register, 58 (10), 4601-14.
15. Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2003), "A guide to Ohio's Antidegradation Rule," Division of Surface Water, Columbus, Ohio.
16. Schulze, W. and R. d'Arge (1978), "On the valuation of recreational damages,"paper presented to the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, New York, March.
17. Turnbull, B. (1976), "The empirical distribution function with arbitrarily grouped, censored and truncated data," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society B, 38 (3), 290-95.
18. US Census Bureau (2000), "U.S. Census 2000: Ohio,"Washington, DC. Vaughan, W., C.Russell, D.Rodriguez, and A. Darling (2000), "Cost-benefit analysis based on referendum CV: dealing with uncertainty," Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 126 (6), 351-7.