16.7 References
ist among some who are well informed about economic theory and methods. The economic approach
values environmental resources in terms of their
perceived value to humans. Yet we live in a world
of great uncertainty and limited information about
how environmental amenities interact with one another and about humanity's reliance on ecosystems.
Probability distributions can be assigned and measures of risk can be calculated to help to describe
the effects of uncertainty on the values of ecosystems. However, extreme caution should be used
whenever using valuation information in decision
making that would compromise a rare ecosystem
in a way that is potentially irreversible.
16.7 References
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. £Con. Manage. 32(1):65-84.
Arrow, K; Solow, R; Portney, P. R; Leamer, E. E.; Radner, R; Schuman, H. 1993. Report of the NOAA Panel
on contingent valuation. Federal Register 58:46014614.
AERE (Association of Environmental and Resource Economics). 1992. Benefits transfer: procedures, problems, and research needs. Workshop proceedings.
Snowbird, Utah, June 3-5, 1992.
Atkinson, S. E.; Crocker, T. D.; Shore, J. F. 1992.
Bayesian exchangeability, benefit transfer, and research efficiency. Water Resour. Res. 28(3):715-722.
Bergstrom, J. C. 1996. Current status of benefits transfer in the U.S.: a review. Faculty Series 96-9. Atlanta,
GA: Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia.
Boxall, P. C. 1995. The economic value of lotteryrationed recreational hunting. Can. J. Agr. Econ.
43(1):119-31.
Boxall, P. C.; Adamowicz, W. L.; Swait, J.; Williams,
M.; Louviere, J. 1996. A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation. Ecol. Econ.
18(3):243-253.
Boyle, K. J.; Bergstrom, J. C. 1992. Benefit transfer studies: myths, pragmatism, and idealism. Water Resour.
Res. 28(3):657-663.
Boyle, K. J.; Poe, G. L.; Bergstrom, J. C. 1994. What do
we know about groundwater values? Preliminary implications from a meta analysis of contingent valuation studies. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 76(5):1055-1061.
Braden, J. B.; Kolstad, C. D., editors. 1991. Measuring
the demand for environmental quality. New York: ElsevierlNorth-Holland.
Brookshire, D. S.; Neill, H. R. 1992. Benefit transfers:
conceptual and empirical issues. Water Resour. Res.
28(3):651-655.
Brown, J. M; Rosen, H. S. 1982. On the estimation of
243
structural hedonic price models. Econometrica 50(3):
765-768.
Carson, R T.; Wright, J.; Carson, N.; Alberini A.; Flores, N. 1993. A bibliography of contingent valuation
studies and papers. La Jolla, CA: Natural Resource
Damage Assessment, Inc.
Caulkins, P.; Bishop, R c.; Bouwes, N. W. 1986. The
travel cost model for lake recreation: a comparison of
two methods for incorporating site quality and substitution effects. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 68(2):291-297.
Cropper, M. L.; Arriaga-Salinas, A. S. 1980. Inner-city
wage differentials and the value of air quality. J. Urban £Con. 8(3):236-254.
Cummings, R G.; Brookshire, D. S.; Schulze, W. D.
1986. Valuing environmental goods: an assessment of
the contingent valuation method. Totowa, NJ: Rowan
and Allanheld.
Desvousges, W. H.; Naughton, M. c.; Parsons, G. R
1992. Benefit transfer: conceptual problems in estimating water quality benefits using existing studies.
Water Resour. Res. 28(3):675-683.
Desvousges, W. H.; Johnson, F. R; Banzhaf, H. S. 1999.
Environmental policy analysis with limited information: principles and applications of the transfer
method. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Diamond, P. A. 1996. Testing the internal consistency of
contingent valuation surveys. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 30:337-347.
Downing, M.; Ozuma, T. 1996. Testing the reliability of
the benefit transfer approach. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 30(5):316-322.
Englin, J.; Mendelsohn, R 1991. A hedonic travel cost
analysis for valuation of multiple components of site
quality: the recreational value of forest management.
J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 21(3):275-290.
Environment Canada. 1998. Environmental valuation
reference inventory. A Web-based tool (http:www.
evri.ec.gc.ca/EVRII).
Freeman, A. M. 1993. The measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc. 1995. Economic evaluation of environmental impacts: a workbook. Prepared
for the Asian Development Bank. Boulder, CO: Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc.
Hardin, G.; Baden, J., editors. 1977. Managing the commons. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Hausman, J. A., editor. 1993. Contingent valuation: a
critical assessment. Amsterdam: ElsevierlNorthHolland.
Heimlich, R E.; Wiebe, K. D.; Claassen, R.; Gadsby, D.;
House, R M. 1998. Wetlands and agriculture: private
interests and public benefits. Agriculture Economic
Report No. 765. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. Agric.,
Resour. Econ. Div., Econ. Res. Servo
Hoehn, J. P.; Berger, M. C.; Blomquist, G. C. 1987. A
hedonic model of interregional wages, rents and
amenity values. J. Reg. Sci. 27(4):605-620.
Johnson R L.; Johnson, G. V., editors. 1990. Economic
valuation of natural resources: issues, theory and applications. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
ist among some who are well informed about economic theory and methods. The economic approach
values environmental resources in terms of their
perceived value to humans. Yet we live in a world
of great uncertainty and limited information about
how environmental amenities interact with one another and about humanity's reliance on ecosystems.
Probability distributions can be assigned and measures of risk can be calculated to help to describe
the effects of uncertainty on the values of ecosystems. However, extreme caution should be used
whenever using valuation information in decision
making that would compromise a rare ecosystem
in a way that is potentially irreversible.
16.7 References
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. £Con. Manage. 32(1):65-84.
Arrow, K; Solow, R; Portney, P. R; Leamer, E. E.; Radner, R; Schuman, H. 1993. Report of the NOAA Panel
on contingent valuation. Federal Register 58:46014614.
AERE (Association of Environmental and Resource Economics). 1992. Benefits transfer: procedures, problems, and research needs. Workshop proceedings.
Snowbird, Utah, June 3-5, 1992.
Atkinson, S. E.; Crocker, T. D.; Shore, J. F. 1992.
Bayesian exchangeability, benefit transfer, and research efficiency. Water Resour. Res. 28(3):715-722.
Bergstrom, J. C. 1996. Current status of benefits transfer in the U.S.: a review. Faculty Series 96-9. Atlanta,
GA: Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia.
Boxall, P. C. 1995. The economic value of lotteryrationed recreational hunting. Can. J. Agr. Econ.
43(1):119-31.
Boxall, P. C.; Adamowicz, W. L.; Swait, J.; Williams,
M.; Louviere, J. 1996. A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation. Ecol. Econ.
18(3):243-253.
Boyle, K. J.; Bergstrom, J. C. 1992. Benefit transfer studies: myths, pragmatism, and idealism. Water Resour.
Res. 28(3):657-663.
Boyle, K. J.; Poe, G. L.; Bergstrom, J. C. 1994. What do
we know about groundwater values? Preliminary implications from a meta analysis of contingent valuation studies. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 76(5):1055-1061.
Braden, J. B.; Kolstad, C. D., editors. 1991. Measuring
the demand for environmental quality. New York: ElsevierlNorth-Holland.
Brookshire, D. S.; Neill, H. R. 1992. Benefit transfers:
conceptual and empirical issues. Water Resour. Res.
28(3):651-655.
Brown, J. M; Rosen, H. S. 1982. On the estimation of
243
structural hedonic price models. Econometrica 50(3):
765-768.
Carson, R T.; Wright, J.; Carson, N.; Alberini A.; Flores, N. 1993. A bibliography of contingent valuation
studies and papers. La Jolla, CA: Natural Resource
Damage Assessment, Inc.
Caulkins, P.; Bishop, R c.; Bouwes, N. W. 1986. The
travel cost model for lake recreation: a comparison of
two methods for incorporating site quality and substitution effects. Amer. J. Agr. Econ. 68(2):291-297.
Cropper, M. L.; Arriaga-Salinas, A. S. 1980. Inner-city
wage differentials and the value of air quality. J. Urban £Con. 8(3):236-254.
Cummings, R G.; Brookshire, D. S.; Schulze, W. D.
1986. Valuing environmental goods: an assessment of
the contingent valuation method. Totowa, NJ: Rowan
and Allanheld.
Desvousges, W. H.; Naughton, M. c.; Parsons, G. R
1992. Benefit transfer: conceptual problems in estimating water quality benefits using existing studies.
Water Resour. Res. 28(3):675-683.
Desvousges, W. H.; Johnson, F. R; Banzhaf, H. S. 1999.
Environmental policy analysis with limited information: principles and applications of the transfer
method. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
Diamond, P. A. 1996. Testing the internal consistency of
contingent valuation surveys. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 30:337-347.
Downing, M.; Ozuma, T. 1996. Testing the reliability of
the benefit transfer approach. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 30(5):316-322.
Englin, J.; Mendelsohn, R 1991. A hedonic travel cost
analysis for valuation of multiple components of site
quality: the recreational value of forest management.
J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 21(3):275-290.
Environment Canada. 1998. Environmental valuation
reference inventory. A Web-based tool (http:www.
evri.ec.gc.ca/EVRII).
Freeman, A. M. 1993. The measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc. 1995. Economic evaluation of environmental impacts: a workbook. Prepared
for the Asian Development Bank. Boulder, CO: Hagler Bailly Consulting, Inc.
Hardin, G.; Baden, J., editors. 1977. Managing the commons. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Hausman, J. A., editor. 1993. Contingent valuation: a
critical assessment. Amsterdam: ElsevierlNorthHolland.
Heimlich, R E.; Wiebe, K. D.; Claassen, R.; Gadsby, D.;
House, R M. 1998. Wetlands and agriculture: private
interests and public benefits. Agriculture Economic
Report No. 765. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. Agric.,
Resour. Econ. Div., Econ. Res. Servo
Hoehn, J. P.; Berger, M. C.; Blomquist, G. C. 1987. A
hedonic model of interregional wages, rents and
amenity values. J. Reg. Sci. 27(4):605-620.
Johnson R L.; Johnson, G. V., editors. 1990. Economic
valuation of natural resources: issues, theory and applications. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.