Using structural restrictions to achieve theoretical consistency in benefit transfers

Environmental and Resource Economics

Volumn 69, Issue 3, 2018, Pages 529-553

  Newbold, Stephen C ^a   Walsh, Patrick J ^b   Massey, D Matthew ^a   Hewitt, Julie ^a  

^a U S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY   (United States)

^b LANDCARE RESEARCH   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Benefit transfer; Meta analysis; Non market valuation; Water quality

Indexed keywords

FUNCTION EVALUATION; QUALITY CONTROL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SURFACE WATERS; WATER QUALITY;

BENEFIT TRANSFER; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS; META ANALYSIS; NON-LINEAR LEAST SQUARES; NON-MARKET VALUATION; STATED-PREFERENCE STUDIES; STRUCTURAL RESTRICTIONS; WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS;

TRANSFER FUNCTIONS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; META-ANALYSIS; SURFACE WATER; TRANSFER FUNCTION; VALUATION; WATER QUALITY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 85043572881     PISSN: 09246460     EISSN: 15731502     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-017-0209-5     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Alvarez S, Asci S, Vorotnikova E (2016) Valuing the potential benefits of water quality improvements in watersheds affected by non-point source pollution. Water 8:112. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8040112
2. 2 emissions using province-level information. J Environ Econ Manag 55:229–247
3. Bergstrom JC, Taylor LO (2006) Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: theory and practice. Ecol Econ 60:351–360
4. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, Rothstein HR (2009) A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Res Synth Method 1:97–111
5. Boyd J, Krupnick A (2013) Using ecological production theory to define and select environmental commodities for nonmarket valuation. Agric Resour Econ Rev 42(1):1–32
6. Breiman L (1992) The little bootstrap and other methods for dimensionality selection in regression: X-fixed prediction error. J Am Stat Assoc 87(419):738–754
7. Cameron AC, Miller DL (2015) A practitioner’s guide to cluster-robust inference. J Hum Resour 50(2):317–372
8. Carson RT, Mitchell RC (1993) The value of clean water: the public’s willingness to pay for boatable, fishable, and swimmable quality water. Water Resour Res 29(7):2445–2454
9. Carson RT, Groves T (2007) Incentive and informational properties of preference questions. Environ Res Econ 37:181–210
10. Cooper H, Hedges LV, Valentine JC (eds) (2009) The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis, 2nd edn. Russell Sage Foundation, New York
11. Desvousges W, Mathews K, Train K (2015) An adding-up test on contingent valuations of river and lake quality. Land Econ 91(3):556–571
12. Diamond P (1996) Testing the internal consistency of contingent valuation surveys. J Environ Econ Manag 30:337–347
13. Efron B (1979) Bootstrap methods: another look at the jackknife. Ann Stat 7(1):1–26
14. Efron B (2003) Second thoughts on the bootstrap. Stat Sci 18(2):135–140
15. Eom Y-S, Larson DM (2006) Improving environmental valuation estimates through consistent use of revealed and stated preference information. J Environ Econ Manag 52:501–516
16. Gilboa I (2009) Theory of decision under uncertainty. Cambridge University Press, New York
17. Griffiths C, Klemick H, Massey M, Moore C, Newbold S, Simpson D, Walsh P, Wheeler W (2012) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency valuation of surface water quality improvements. Rev Environ Econ Policy 6(1):130–146
18. Haab TC, Interis MG, Petrolia DR, Whitehead JC (2013) From hopeless to curious? Thoughts on Hausman’s ”Dubious to hopeless” critique of contingent valuation. Appl Econ Perspect Policy 35(4):593–612
19. Haessel W (1978) Measuring goodness of fit in linear and nonlinear models. South Econ J 44(3):648–652
20. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2009) The elements of statistical leaning: data mining, inference, and prediction, 2nd edn. http://statweb.stanford.edu/~tibs/ElemStatLearn/index.html
21. Hausman JA (1981) Exact consumer’s surplus and deadweight loss. Am Econ Rev 71(4):662–676
22. Heberlein TA, Wilson MA, Bishop RC, Schaeffer NC (2005) Rethinking the scope test as a criterion for validity in contingent valuation. J Environ Econ Manag 50:1–22
23. Hedges LV, Tipton E, Johnson MC (2010) Robust variance estimation in meta-regression with dependent effect size estimates. Res Synth Method 1:39–65
24. Horowitz JL (2003) The bootstrap in econometrics. Stat Sci 18(2):211–218
25. Horowitz JK, McConnell KE (2003) Willingness to accept, willingness to pay and the income effect. J Econ Behav Organ 51:537–545
26. Hsu S-L (2011) The accidental postmodernists: a new era of skepticism in environmental policy. Vermont Law Rev 39:27–88
27. 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
28. Johnston RJ, Thomassin PJ (2010) Willingness to pay for water quality improvements in the United States and Canada: considering possibilities for international meta-analysis and benefit transfer. Agric Resour Econ Rev 39(1):114–131
29. Johnston RJ, Wainger LA (2015) Benefit transfer for ecosystem service valuation: an introduction to theory and methods. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York
30. Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (2015) Introduction to benefit transfer methods. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York
31. Kaul S, Boyle KJ, Kuminoff NV, Parmeter CF, Pope JC (2013) What can we learn from benefit transfer errors? Evidence from 20 years of research on convergent validity. J Environ Econ Manag 66:90–104
32. Kling CL, Phaneuf DJ (2016) How are scope and adding-up relevant for benefit transfer? Paper presented at the workshop benefit transfer: evaluating how close is close enough, 12–13 December, 2016, Washington
33. Kopp RJ, Smith VK (1997) Constructing measures of economic value. In: Kopp RJ, Pommerehne WW, Schwarz N (eds) Determining the value of non-marketed goods: economic, psychological, and policy relevant aspects of contingent valuation methods. Springer, New York
34. Larson DM (1991) Recovering weakly complementary preferences. J Environ Econ Manag 21:97–108
35. Larson DM (1992) Further results on willingness to pay for nonmarket goods. J Environ Econ Manag 23:101–122
36. Mrozek JR, Taylor LO (2002) What determines the value of life? A meta-analysis. J Policy Anal Manag 21(2):253–270
37. Nelson JP (2015) Meta-analysis: statistical methods. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Springer, New York
38. 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
39. Pattanayak S, Smith VK, Van Houtven G (2007) Improving the practice of benefits transfer: a preference calibration approach. In: Navrud S, Ready R (eds) Environmental value transfer: issues and methods. Springer, Dordrecht
40. Phaneuf DJ, Van Houtven G (2015) Structural benefit transfer using Bayesian econometrics. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York
41. Ready R, Navrud S (2005) Benefit transfer—the quick, the dirty, and the ugly? Choices 20(3):195–199
42. Ren S, Lai H, Tong W, Aminzadeh M, Hou X, Lai S (2010) Nonparametric bootstrapping for hierarchical data. J Appl Stat 37(9):1487–1498
43. Rosenberger RS (2016) Benefit transfer validity and reliability. In: Johnston RJ, Rolfe J, Rosenberger RS, Brouwer R (eds) Benefit transfer of environmental and resource values: a guide for researchers and practitioners. Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York
44. Santos Silva JMC, Tenreyro S (2006) The log of gravity. Rev Econ Stat 88(4):641–658
45. Shmueli G (2010) To explain or to predict? Stat Sci 25(3):289–310
46. Smith VK, Van Houtven G, Pattanayak SK (2002) Benefit transfer via preference calibration: “prudential algebra” for policy. Land Econ 78(1):132–152
47. Smith VK, Pattanayak SK, Van Houtven GL (2006) Structural benefit transfer: an example using VSL estimates. Ecol Econ 60:361–371
48. Stanley TD, Doucouliagos H (2015) Neither fixed nor random: weighted least squares meta-analysis. Stat Med 34:2116–2127
49. USEPA (2009) Economic analysis of final effluent limitation guidelines and standards for the construction and development industry. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/construction_development_economic_analysis_2009.pdf
50. USEPA (2013) Benefit and cost analysis for the proposed effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating point source category. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5856
51. USEPA (2015a) Benefit and cost analysis for the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating point source category. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-2238
52. USEPA (2015b) Peer review package for meta-analysis of the willingness-to-pay for water quality improvements. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OW-2009-819-5863
53. Van Houtven G, Pattanayak SK, Patil S, Depro B (2011) Benefits transfer of a third kind: an examination of structural benefits transfer. In: Whitehead J, Haab T, Huang J-C (eds) Preference data for environmental valuation: combining revealed and stated approaches. Routledge, New York
54. 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 29:206–228
55. Vaughan WJ (1986) The water quality ladder. In: Mitchell RC, Carson RT. The use of contingent valuation data for benefit/cost analysis in water pollution control. CR- 810224-02. Washington, DC: Office of policy, planning, and evaluation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Appendix B. http://yosemite.epa.gov/ee/epa/eerm.nsf/vwRepNumLookup/EE-0150?OpenDocument
56. Ye J (1998) On measuring and correcting the effects of data mining and model selection. J Am Stat Assoc 93(441):120–131