Modeling Distance Decay Within Valuation Meta-Analysis

Environmental and Resource Economics

Volumn 72, Issue 3, 2019, Pages 657-690

  Johnston, Robert J ^a   Besedin, Elena Y ^b   Holland, Benedict M ^c  

^a CLARK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ICF INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^c ABT ASSOCIATES   (United States)

Author keywords

Benefit transfer; Benefits transfer; Meta regression model; Non market valuation; Nonuse value; Proximity; Spatial; Water quality; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; WATER QUALITY;

BENEFIT TRANSFER; BENEFITS TRANSFER; NON-MARKET VALUATION; NONUSE VALUE; PROXIMITY; REGRESSION MODEL; SPATIAL; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

QUALITY CONTROL;

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING; LITERATURE REVIEW; META-ANALYSIS; NUMERICAL MODEL; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; VALUATION; WATER QUALITY; WELFARE ECONOMICS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 85040912854     PISSN: 09246460     EISSN: 15731502     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-018-0218-z     Document Type: Article

References (143)

1. Abbasi T (2012) Water quality indices. Elsevier, Amsterdam
2. Abildtrup J, Garcia S, Olsen SB, Stenger A (2013) Spatial preference heterogeneity in forest recreation. Ecol Econ 92:67–77
3. Adamowicz W, Swait J, Boxall 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 Manag 32(1):65–84
4. Aiken RA (1985) Public benefits of environmental protection in Colorado. Masters Thesis, Colorado State University
5. Anderson GD, Edwards SF (1986) Protecting Rhode Island’s coastal salt ponds: an economic assessment of downzoning. Coast Zone Manag 14(1/2):67–91
6. Banzhaf HS, Burtraw D, Evans D, Krupnick A (2006) Valuation of natural resource improvements in the Adirondacks. Land Econ 82(3):445–464
7. Banzhaf HS, Burtraw D, Chung S, Evans DA, Krupnik A, Siikamaki J (2011) Valuation of ecosystem services in the southern Appalachian Mountains. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists (AERE)
8. Bateman I, Langford I (1997) Non-users’ willingness to pay for a national park: an application and critique of the contingent valuation method. Reg Stud 31(6):571–582
9. Bateman IJ, Day BH, Georgiou S, Lake I (2006) The aggregation of environmental benefit values: welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP. Ecol Econ 60(2):450–460
10. Bateman I, Mace G, Fezzi C, Atkinson G, Turner K (2011a) Economic analysis for ecosystem service assessments. Environ Resour Econ 48(2):177–218
11. Bateman IJ, Brouwer R, Ferrini S, Schaafsma M, Barton DN, Dubgaard A, Haslet B, Hime S, Liekens I, Navrud S (2011b) Making benefit transfers work: deriving and testing principles for value transfers for similar and dissimilar sites using a case study of the non-market benefits of water quality improvements across Europe. Environ Resour Econ 50(3):365–387
12. Bergstrom JC, Taylor LO (2006) Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: theory and practice. Ecol Econ 60(2):351–360
13. Bockstael NE, McConnell KE, Strand IE (1988) Benefits from improvements in Chesapeake Bay water quality. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland
14. Bockstael NE, McConnell KE, Strand IE (1989) Measuring the benefits of improvements in water quality: the Chesapeake Bay. Mar Resour Econ 6(1):1–18
15. Bonner MR, Han D, Nie J, Rogerson P, Vena JE, Freudenheim JL (2003) Positional accuracy of geocoded addresses in epidemiologic research. Epidemiology 14(4):408–412
16. Borisova T, Collins A, D’Souza G, Benson M, Wolfe ML, Benham B (2008) A benefit-cost analysis of total maximum daily load implementation. J Am Water Resour Assoc 44(4):1009–1023
17. Boyle KJ, Parmeter CF, Boehlert BB, Paterson RW (2013) Due diligence in meta-analyses to support benefit transfers. Environ Resour Econ 55(3):357–386
18. Boyle KJ, Kaul S, Parmeter CF (2015) Meta-analysis: econometric advances and new perspectives towards data synthesis and robustness, chapter 17. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Springer, Dordrecht
19. Brander LM, Florax RJGM, Vermaat J (2006) The empirics of wetland valuation: a comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature. Environ Resour Econ 33:223–250
20. Brander L, van Beukering P, Cesar H (2007) The recreational value of coral reefs: a meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 63(1):209–218
21. Brander LM, Bräuer I, Gerdes H, Ghermandi A, Kuik O, Markandya A, Navrud S, Nunes PA, Schaafsma M, Vos H, Wagtendonk A (2012a) Using meta-analysis and GIS for value transfer and scaling up: valuing climate change induced losses of European wetlands. Environ Resour Econ 52(3):395–413
22. Brander LM, Wagtendonk AJ, Hussain SS, McVittie A, Verburg PH, de Groot RS, van der Ploeg S (2012b) Ecosystem service values for mangroves in Southeast Asia: a meta-analysis and value transfer application. Ecosyst Serv 1(1):62–69
23. Brander LM, Eppink FV, Schägner P, van Beukering PJH, Wagtendonk A (2015) GIS-based mapping of ecosystem services: the case of coral reefs, chapter 20. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Springer, Dordrecht
24. Brouwer R, Langford IH, Bateman IJ, Turner RK (1999) A meta-analysis of wetland contingent valuation studies. Reg Environ Change 1(1):47–57
25. Brouwer R, Martín-Ortega J, Berbel J (2010) Spatial preference heterogeneity: a choice experiment. Land Econ 86(3):552–568
26. Cameron TA, Huppert DD (1989) OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data. J Environ Econ Manag 17:230–246
27. Campbell D, Scarpa R, Hutchinson WG (2008) Assessing the spatial dependence of welfare estimates obtained from discrete choice experiments. Lett Spat Resour Sci 1:117–126
28. Campbell D, Hutchinson WG, Scarpa R (2009) Using choice experiments to explore the spatial distribution of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements. Environ Plan A 41(1):97–111
29. Carson RT, Hanemann WM, Kopp RJ, Krosnick JA, Mitchell RC, Presser S, Ruud PA, Smith VK (1994) Prospective interim lost use value due to DDT and PCB contamination in the Southern California Bight, vol 2. Report to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Produced by Natural Resources Damage Assessment Inc., LA Jolla, CA
30. Clonts HA, Malone JW (1990) Preservation attitudes and consumer surplus in free flowing rivers. In: Vining J (ed) Social science and natural resource recreation management. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 301–317
31. Collins AR, Rosenberger RS (2007) Protest adjustments in the valuation of watershed restoration using payment card data. Agric Resour Econ Rev 36(2):321–335
32. Collins AR, Rosenberger RS, Fletcher JJ (2009) Valuing the restoration of acidic streams in the Appalachian Region: a stated choice method. In: Thurstone HW, Heberling MT, Schrecongost A (eds) Environmental economics for watershed restoration. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 29–52
33. Colombo S, Hanley N (2008) How can we reduce the errors from benefits transfer? An investigation using the choice experiment method. Land Econ 84(1):128–147
34. Concu GB (2009) Measuring environmental externality spillovers through choice modelling. Environ Plan A 41(1):199–212
35. Corrigan JR, Kling CL, Zhao J (2009) Willingness to pay and the cost of commitment: an empirical specification and test. Environ Resour Econ 40:285–298
36. Croke K, Fabian RG, Brenniman G (1986–1987) Estimating the value of improved water quality in an urban river system. J Environ Syst 16(1):13–24
37. Czajkowski M, Budziński W, Campbell D, Giergiczny M, Hanley N (2016) Spatial heterogeneity of willingness to pay for forest management. Environ Resour Econ. 10.1007/s10640-016-0044-0
38. Desvousges WH, Smith VK, Fisher A (1987) Option price estimates for water quality improvements: a contingent valuation study for the Monongahela River. J Environ Econ Manag 14:248–267
39. De Valck J, Broekx S, Liekens I, Aertsens J, Vranken L (2017) Testing the influence of substitute sites in nature valuation by using spatial discounting factors. Environ Resour Econ 66(1):17–43
40. De Zoysa ADN (1995) A benefit evaluation of programs to enhance groundwater quality, surface water quality and wetland habitat in Northwest Ohio. Dissertation, Ohio State University
41. Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2014) Internet, phone, mail and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method. Wiley, Hoboken
42. Downstream Strategies LLC (2008) An economic benefit analysis for abandoned mine drainage remediation in the west branch Susquehanna River Watershed, Pennsylvania. Prepared for Trout Unlimited
43. Farber S, Griner B (2000) Using conjoint analysis to value ecosystem change. Environ Sci Technol 34(8):1407–1412
44. García-Pelayo R (2005) Distribution of distance in the spheroid. J Phys A Math Gen 38:3475–3482
45. Georgiou S, Bateman I, Cole M, Hadley D (2000) Contingent ranking and valuation of river water quality improvements: testing for scope sensitivity, ordering and distance decay effects. CSERGE working paper GEC 2000–18, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, University of East Anglia and University College London, Norwich, UK
46. Ghermandi A (2015) Benefits of coastal recreation in Europe: identifying trade-offs and priority regions for sustainable management. J Environ Manag 152:218–229
47. Ghermandi A, Nunes PALD (2013) A global map of coastal recreation values: results from a spatially explicit meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 86(1):1–15
48. Ghermandi A, van den Bergh JCJM, Brander LM, de Groot HLF, Nunes PALD (2010) Values of natural and human-made wetlands: a meta-analysis. Water Resour Res 46:W12516. 10.1029/2010WR009071
49. Griffiths C, Klemick H, Massey M, Moore C, Newbold S, Simpson D, Walsh P, Wheeler W (2012) US Environmental Protection Agency valuation of surface water quality improvements. Rev Environ Econ Policy 6(1):130–146
50. Hanley N, Schläpfer F, Spurgeon J (2003) Aggregating the benefits of environmental improvements: distance-decay functions for use and non-use values. J Environ Manag 68:297–304
51. Havránek T (2015) Measuring intertemporal substitution: the importance of method choices and selective reporting. J Eur Econ Assoc 13(6):1180–1204
52. Hayes KM, Tyrell TJ, Anderson G (1992) Estimating the benefits of water quality improvements in the Upper Narragansett Bay. Mar Resour Econ 7:75–85
53. Herriges JA, Shogren JF (1996) Starting point bias in dichotomous choice valuation with follow-up questioning. J Environ Econ Manag 30(1):112–131
54. Hite D (2002) Willingness to pay for water quality improvements: the case of precision application technology. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Auburn University, Auburn
55. Holland BM, Johnston RJ (2017) Optimized quantity-within-distance models of spatial welfare heterogeneity. J Environ Econ Manag 85:110–129
56. Huang JC, Haab TC, Whitehead JC (1997) Willingness to pay for quality improvements: should revealed and stated preference data be combined? J Environ Econ Manag 34(3):240–255
57. Irvin S, Haab T, Hitzhusen FJ (2007) Estimating willingness to pay for additional protection of Ohio surface waters: contingent valuation of water quality. In: Hitzhusen FJ (ed) Economic valuation of river systems. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 35–51
58. Johnston RJ, Duke JM (2009) Willingness to pay for land preservation across states and jurisdictional scale: implications for benefit transfer. Land Econ 85(2):217–237
59. Johnston RJ, Moeltner K (2014) Meta-modeling and benefit transfer: the empirical relevance of source consistency in welfare measures. Environ Resour Econ 59(3):337–361
60. Johnston RJ, Ramachandran M (2014) Modeling spatial patchiness and hot spots in stated preference willingness to pay. Environ Resour Econ 59(3):363–387
61. Johnston RJ, Rosenberger RS (2010) Methods, trends and controversies in contemporary benefit transfer. J Econ Surv 24:479–510
62. Johnston RJ, Swallow SK, Weaver TF (1999) Estimating willingness to pay and resource tradeoffs with different payment mechanisms: an evaluation of a funding guarantee for watershed management. J Environ Econ Manag 38:97–120
63. Johnston RJ, Swallow SK, Allen CW, Smith LA (2002) Designing multidimensional environmental programs: assessing tradeoffs and substitution in watershed management plans. Water Resour Res 38(7):1099–1105
64. Johnston RJ, Besedin EY, Wardwell RF (2003) Modeling relationships between use and nonuse values for surface water quality: a meta-analysis. Water Resour Res 39(12):1363–1371
65. Johnston RJ, Besedin EY, Iovanna R, Miller C, Wardwell R, Ranson M (2005) Systematic variation in willingness to pay for aquatic resource improvements and implications for benefit transfer: a meta-analysis. Can J Agric Econ 53(2–3):221–248
66. Johnston RJ, Jarvis D, Wallmo K, Lew D (2015a) Multi-scale spatial pattern in nonuse willingness to pay: applications to threatened and endangered marine species. Land Econ 91(4):739–761
67. Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) (2015b) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Springer, Dordrecht
68. Johnston RJ, Besedin EY, Stapler R (2017a) Enhanced geospatial validity for meta-analysis and environmental benefit transfer: an application to water quality improvements. Environ Resour Econ 68(2):343–375
69. Johnston RJ, Boyle KJ, Adamowicz W, Bennett J, Brouwer R, Cameron TA, Hanemann WM, Hanley N, Ryan M, Scarpa R, Tourangeau R, Vossler CA (2017b) Contemporary guidance for stated preference studies. J Assoc Environ Resour Econ 4(2):319–405
70. Jørgensen SL, Olsen SB, Ladenburg J, Martinsen L, Svenningsen SR, Hasler B (2013) Spatially induced disparities in users’ and non-users’ WTP for water quality improvements—testing the effect of multiple substitutes and distance decay. Ecol Econ 92(1):58–66
71. Kaoru Y (1993) Differentiating use and nonuse values for coastal pond water quality improvements. Environ Resour Econ 3:487–494
72. Lant CL, Roberts RS (1990) Greenbelts in the Cornbelt: riparian wetlands, intrinsic values, and market failure. Environ Plan 22:1375–1388
73. Lant CL, Tobin GA (1989) The economic value of riparian corridors in cornbelt floodplains: a research framework. Prof Geogr 41:337–349
74. Leggett CG, Bockstael NE (2000) Evidence of the effects of water quality on residential land prices. J Environ Econ Manag 39(2):121–144
75. León CJ, Araña JE, de León J, González MM (2016) The economic benefits of reducing the environmental effects of landfills: heterogeneous distance decay effects. Environ Resour Econ 63(1):193–218
76. Lichtkoppler FR, Blaine TW (1999) Environmental awareness and attitudes of Ashtabula County voters concerning the Ashtabula River area of concern: 1996–1997. J Gt Lakes Resour 25:500–514
77. Lindhjem H (2006) 20 years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: a meta-analysis. J For Econ 12:251–277
78. Lindhjem H, Navrud S (2008) How reliable are meta-analyses for international benefit transfers? Ecol Econ 66(2–3):425–435
79. Lindsey G (1994) Market models, protest bids, and outliers in contingent valuation. J Water Resour Plan Manag 12:121–129
80. Lipton D (2004) The value of improved water quality to Chesapeake Bay boaters. Mar Resour Econ 19:265–270
81. Lizin S, Brouwer R, Liekens I, Broeckx S (2016) Accounting for substitution and spatial heterogeneity in a labelled choice experiment. J Environ Manag 181:289–297
82. Londoño LM, Johnston RJ (2012) Enhancing the reliability of benefit transfer over heterogeneous sites: a meta-analysis of international coral reef values. Ecol Econ 78(1):80–89
83. Londoño Cadavid C, Ando AW (2013) Valuing preferences over stormwater management outcomes including improved hydrologic function. Water Resour Res 49:4114–4125
84. Loomis JB (1996) How large is the extent of the market for public goods: evidence from a nationwide contingent valuation survey. Appl Econ 28(7):779–782
85. Loomis JB (2000) Vertically summing public good demand curves: an empirical comparison of economic versus political jurisdictions. Land Econ 76:312–321
86. Loomis JB, Rosenberger RS (2006) Reducing barriers in future benefit transfers: needed improvements in primary study design and reporting. Ecol Econ 60:343–350
87. Lyke AJ (1993) Discrete choice models to value changes in environmental quality: a Great Lakes case study. Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Wisconsin, Madison
88. Martin-Ortega J, Brouwer R, Ojea E, Berbel J (2012) Benefit transfer and spatial heterogeneity of preferences for water quality improvements. J Environ Manag 106:22–29
89. Matthews LG, Homans FR, Easter KW (1999) Reducing phosphorous pollution in the Minnesota river: how much is it worth? Department of Applied Economics, University of Minnesota, Staff Paper
90. Mazzotta MJ (1996) Measuring public values and priorities for natural resources: an application to the Peconic Estuary system. Dissertation submitted to the University of Rhode Island, Kingston
91. McClelland NI (1974) Water quality index application in the Kansas River Basin. EPA-907/9-74-001, US EPA Region VII, Kansas City, MO
92. Meyerhoff J, Boeri M, Hartje V (2014) The value of water quality improvements in the region Berlin-Brandenburg as a function of distance and state residency. Water Resour Econ 5:49–66
93. Mitchell RC, Carson RT (1989) Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
94. Moeltner K, Rosenberger RS (2014) Cross-context benefit transfer: a Bayesian search for information pools. Am J Agric Econ 96(2):469–488
95. Moeltner K, Boyle K, Paterson R (2007) Meta-analysis and benefit-transfer for resource valuation: addressing classical challenges with Bayesian modeling. J Environ Econ Manag 53:250–269
96. Moore R, Williams T, Rodriguez E, Hepinstall-Cymerman J (2013) Using nonmarket valuation to target conservation payments: an example involving Georgia’s private forests. J For 111(4):261–270
97. Morrison M, Bennett JW (2004) Valuing New South Wales rivers for use in benefit transfer. Aust J Agric Resour Econ 48(4):591–611
98. Nelson JP (2015) Meta-analysis: statistical methods, chapter 15. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Springer, Dordrecht
99. Nelson JP, Kennedy PE (2009) The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and resource economics: an assessment. Environ Resour Econ 42(3):345–377
100. Newbold SC, Walsh P, Massy DM, Hewitt J (2018) Using structural restrictions to achieve theoretical consistency in benefit transfers. Environ Resour Econ. 10.1007/s10640-017-0209-5
101. Pate J, Loomis JB (1997) The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California. Ecol Econ 20:199–207
102. Penn J, Hu W, Cox L, Kozloff L (2016) Values for Recreational Beach Quality in Oahu, Hawaii. Mar Resour Econ 31(1):47–62
103. Roberts LA, Leitch JA (1997) Economic valuation of some wetland outputs of Mud Lake. Agricultural Economics Report No. 381, Department of Agricultural Economics, North Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station, North Dakota State University
104. Rolfe J, Windle J (2012) Distance decay functions for iconic assets: assessing national values to protect the health of the Great Barrier Reef in Australia. Environ Resour Econ 53(3):347–365
105. Rolfe J, Brouwer R, Johnston RJ (2015) Meta-analysis: rationale, issues and applications, chapter 16. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Springer, Dordrecht
106. Rosenberger RS, Johnston RJ (2009) Selection effects in meta-analysis and benefit transfer: avoiding unintended consequences. Land Econ 85(3):410–428
107. Rosenberger RS, Loomis JB (2000a) Panel stratification in meta-analysis of economic studies: an investigation of its effects in the recreation valuation literature. J Agric Appl Econ 32(3):459–470
108. 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
109. Rowe RD, Schulze WD, Hurd B, Orr D (1985) Economic assessment of damage related to the Eagle Mine facility. Energy and Resource Consultants Inc, Boulder
110. Sanders LB, Walsh RG, Loomis JB (1990) Toward empirical estimation of the total value of protecting rivers. Water Resour Res 26(7):1345–1357
111. Santos JML (2007) Transferring landscape values: how and how accurately? In: Navrud S, Ready R (eds) Environmental value transfer: issues and methods. Springer, Dordrecht
112. Schaafsma M (2015) Spatial and geographical aspects of benefit transfer, chapter 18. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Springer, Dordrecht
113. Schaafsma M, Brouwer R, Rose J (2012) Directional heterogeneity in WTP models for environmental valuation. Ecol Econ 79(1):21–31
114. Schägner JP, Brander L, Maes J, Hartje V (2013) Mapping ecosystem services’ values: current practice and future prospects. Ecosyst Serv 4:33–46
115. Schulze WD, Rowe RD, Breffle WS, Boyce RR, McClelland GH (1995) Contingent valuation of natural resource damages due to injuries to the Upper Clark Fork River Basin. State of Montana, Natural Resource Damage Litigation Program. Prepared by RCG/Hagler Bailly, Boulder, CO
116. Shrestha RK, Alavalapati JRR (2004) Valuing environmental benefits of silvopasture practice: a case study of the Lake Okeechobee watershed in Florida. Ecol Econ 49:349–359
117. Smith VK, Pattanayak SK (2002) Is meta-analysis a Noah’s Ark for non-market valuation? Environ Resour Econ 22(1–2):271–296
118. Smith VK, Van Houtven G, Pattanayak SK (2002) Benefit transfer via preference calibration: “prudential algebra” for policy. Land Econ 78(1):132–152
119. Stanley TD (2005) Beyond publication bias. J Econ Surv 19(3):309–345
120. Stanley TD (2008) Meta-regression methods for detecting and estimating empirical effects in the presence of publication selection. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 70(1):103–127
121. Stanley TD, Rosenberger RR (2009) Are recreation values systematically underestimated? reducing publication selection bias for benefit transfer. Bull Econ Meta Anal. https://www.hendrix.edu/maer-network/default.aspx?id=15206
122. Stanley TD, Doucouliagos H, Giles M, Heckemeyer JH, Johnston RJ, Laroche P, Nelson JP, Paldam M, Poot J, Pugh G, Rosenberger RS, Rost K (2013) Meta-analysis of economics reporting guidelines. J Econ Surv 27(2):390–394
123. Stapler RW, Johnston RJ (2009) Meta-analysis, benefit transfer, and methodological covariates: implications for transfer error. Environ Resour Econ 42(2):227–246
124. Stumborg BE, Baerenklau KA, Bishop RC (2001) Nonpoint source pollution and present values: a contingent valuation of Lake Mendota. Rev Agric Econ 23(1):120–132
125. Sutherland RJ, Walsh RG (1985) Effect of distance on the preservation value of water quality. Land Econ 61(3):282–290
126. Tait P, Baskaran R, Cullen R, Bicknell K (2012) Nonmarket valuation of water quality: addressing spatially heterogeneous preferences using GIS and a random parameter logit model. Ecol Econ 75:15–21
127. Takatsuka Y (2004) Comparison of the contingent valuation method and the stated choice model for measuring benefits of ecosystem management: a case study of the Clinch River Valley, Tennessee. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Tennessee
128. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (2009) Environmental impact and benefits assessment for final effluent guidelines and standards for the construction and development category. U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC, November 2009, EPA-821-R-09-012
129. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (2010) Economic analysis of final water quality standards for nutrients for lakes and flowing waters in Florida. U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC
130. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (2012) Economic analysis of proposed water quality standards for the State of Florida’s estuaries, coastal waters, and South Florida inland flowing waters. U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC
131. United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) (2015) Benefit and cost analysis for the proposed effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating point source category. U.S. EPA, Office of Water, Office of Science and Technology, Washington, DC, EPA-821-R-15-005
132. Van Houtven G, Powers J, Pattanayak SK (2007) Valuing water quality improvements in the United States using meta-analysis: is the glass half-full or half-empty for national policy analysis? Resour Energy Econ 29(3):206–228
133. Van Houtven G, Mansfield C, Phaneuf DJ, von Haefen R, Milstead B, Kenney MA, Reckhow KH (2014) Combining expert elicitation and stated preference methods to value ecosystem services from improved lake water quality. Ecol Econ 99:40–52
134. Vaughan WJ (1986) The RFF water quality ladder. Appendix B in R.C. Mitchell and R.T. Carson. The use of contingent valuation data for benefit/cost analysis in water pollution control, Final Report. Resources for the Future, Washington DC
135. Walsh JP, Wheeler WJ (2013) Water quality indices and benefit-cost analysis. J Benefit Cost Anal 4(1):81–105
136. Wattage PM (1993) Measuring the benefits of water resource protection from agricultural contamination: results from a contingent valuation study. Ph.D. Dissertation, Forestry, Iowa State University
137. Welle PG (1986) Potential economic impacts of acid deposition: a contingent valuation study of Minnesota. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison
138. Welle PG, Hodgson JB (2011) Property owner’s willingness to pay for water quality improvements: contingent valuation estimates in two central Minnesota watersheds. J Appl Bus Econ 12(1):81–94
139. Wey KA (1990) Social welfare analysis of congestion and water quality of Great Salt Pond, Block Island, Rhode Island. Dissertation, University of Rhode Island
140. Whitehead JC (2006) Improving willingness to pay estimates for quality improvements through joint estimation with quality perceptions. South Econ J 73(1):100–111
141. Whitehead JC, Groothuis PA (1992) Economic benefits of improved water quality: a case study of North Carolina’s Tar-Pamlico River. Rivers 3:170–178
142. Whitehead JC, Blomquist GC, Hoban TJ, Clifford WB (1995) Assessing the validity and reliability of contingent values: a comparison of on-site users, off-site users, and nonusers. J Environ Econ Manag 29:238–251
143. Whittington D, Cassidy G, Amaral D, McClelland E, Wang H, Poulos C (1994) The economic value of improving the environmental quality of Galveston Bay. Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. GBNEP-38, 6/94