IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/enreec/v81y2022i1d10.1007_s10640-021-00623-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Strategy for Benefits Transfer

Author

Listed:
  • V Kerry Smith

    (Arizona State University)

  • W. Douglass Shaw

    (Texas A&M University)

  • Michael P. Welsh

    (Private Consultant)

  • Chris Dixon

    (Abt Associates)

  • Lisa Donald

    (Abt Associates)

Abstract

This paper calls for re-focusing the analysis of existing results to evaluate whether there are stable ratios of use value to total willingness to pay for improvements in different types of environmental resources. The objective is to develop a screening tool to determine if decisions about the assumed number of users versus nonusers of a resource are likely to be important to aggregate benefit measures for changes in the amount or quality of different environmental resources. Four sets of applications involving different aspects of water resources are considered: nutrients in the Neuse River affecting the Albemarle-Pamlico Estuary; nutrients in the Chesapeake Bay; whitewater rafting on the Colorado River; and the Deepwater Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico. The findings suggest a need to add the evaluation of these ratios to the research agenda in benefits transfer.

Suggested Citation

  • V Kerry Smith & W. Douglass Shaw & Michael P. Welsh & Chris Dixon & Lisa Donald, 2022. "A New Strategy for Benefits Transfer," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(1), pages 155-178, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:81:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10640-021-00623-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10640-021-00623-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10640-021-00623-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10640-021-00623-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. English, Eric & von Haefen, Roger H. & Herriges, Joseph & Leggett, Christopher & Lupi, Frank & McConnell, Kenneth & Welsh, Michael & Domanski, Adam & Meade, Norman, 2018. "Estimating the value of lost recreation days from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 26-45.
    2. Kelly C. Bishop & Nicolai V. Kuminoff & H. Spencer Banzhaf & Kevin J. Boyle & Kathrine von Gravenitz & Jaren C. Pope & V. Kerry Smith & Christopher D. Timmins, 2020. "Best Practices for Using Hedonic Property Value Models to Measure Willingness to Pay for Environmental Quality," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(2), pages 260-281.
    3. Balk,Bert M., 2012. "Price and Quantity Index Numbers," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107404960, September.
    4. W. Douglass Shaw, 2002. "Testing the Validity of Contingent Behavior Trip Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(2), pages 401-414.
    5. Johnston, Robert J. & Bauer, Dana Marie, 2020. "Using Meta-Analysis for Large-Scale Ecosystem Service Valuation: Progress, Prospects, and Challenges," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 49(1), pages 23-63, April.
    6. W. Erwin Diewert, 2003. "Hedonic Regressions. A Consumer Theory Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Scanner Data and Price Indexes, pages 317-348, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Charles M. Tiebout, 1956. "A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(5), pages 416-416.
    8. Richard T. Carson & Theodore Groves & John A. List, 2014. "Consequentiality: A Theoretical and Experimental Exploration of a Single Binary Choice," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 171-207.
    9. Whitehead, John C. & Haab, Timothy C. & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2000. "Measuring recreation benefits of quality improvements with revealed and stated behavior data," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 339-354, October.
    10. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Maria L. Loureiro & Ståle Navrud & John Rolfe, 2021. "Guidance to Enhance the Validity and Credibility of Environmental Benefit Transfers," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 575-624, July.
    11. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    12. John A. List & Aart de Zeeuw (ed.), 2002. "Recent Advances in Environmental Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2728.
    13. Moore, Chris & Guignet, Dennis & Dockins, Chris & Maguire, Kelly B. & Simon, Nathalie B., 2018. "Valuing Ecological Improvements in the Chesapeake Bay and the Importance of Ancillary Benefits," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 1-26, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2019. "Reliability and Validity in Nonmarket Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(2), pages 559-582, February.
    2. repec:rre:publsh:v:36:y:2006:i:3:p:362-80 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Kolstoe, Sonja & Naald, Brian Vander & Cohan, Alison, 2022. "A tale of two samples: Understanding WTP differences in the age of social media," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    4. Xie, Lusi & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Kecinski, Maik & Fooks, Jacob R., 2022. "Using economic experiments to assess the validity of stated preference contingent behavior responses," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    5. Shr, Yau-Huo (Jimmy) & Zhang, Wendong, 2024. "Omitted downstream attributes and the benefits of nutrient reductions: Implications for choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    6. Boyce, Christopher & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick, 2019. "Personality and economic choices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 82-100.
    7. Egan, Kevin & Herriges, Joseph, 2006. "Multivariate count data regression models with individual panel data from an on-site sample," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 567-581, September.
    8. Waranan Tantiwat & Christopher Gan & Wei Yang, 2021. "The Estimation of the Willingness to Pay for Air-Quality Improvement in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    9. Lienhoop, Nele & Ansmann, Till, 2011. "Valuing water level changes in reservoirs using two stated preference approaches: An exploration of validity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1250-1258, May.
    10. Trillas, Francesc, 2010. "Electricity and telecoms reforms in the EU: Insights from the economics of federalism," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 66-76, June.
    11. Moukam, Claudiane Yanick & Atewamba, Calvin, 2023. "Incorporating expert knowledge in the estimate of farmers’ opportunity cost of supplying environmental services in rural Cameroon," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 12(3), October.
    12. Bishop, Richard C., 2018. "Warm Glow, Good Feelings, and Contingent Valuation," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 43(3), September.
    13. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2021. "On Adding-Up as a Validity Criterion for Stated-Preference Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(3), pages 587-601, November.
    14. Lloyd-Smith, Patrick & Adamowicz, Wiktor, 2018. "Can stated measures of willingness-to-accept be valid? Evidence from laboratory experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 133-149.
    15. Dennis Guignet & Matthew T. Heberling & Michael Papenfus & Olivia Griot, 2022. "Property Values, Water Quality, and Benefit Transfer: A Nationwide Meta-analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 98(2), pages 191-218.
    16. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Bylicki, Michał & Budziński, Wiktor & Buczyński, Mateusz, 2022. "Valuing externalities of outdoor advertising in an urban setting – the case of Warsaw," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    17. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Introduction to the Political Economy of Environmental Regulations," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-12, Resources for the Future.
    18. Krčál, Ondřej & Peer, Stefanie & Staněk, Rostislav & Karlínová, Bára, 2019. "Real consequences matter: Why hypothetical biases in the valuation of time persist even in controlled lab experiments," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    19. Rolfe, John & Gregg, Daniel, 2012. "Valuing Beach Recreation Across a Regional Area: The Great Barrier Reef in Australia," 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Fremantle, Australia 124433, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    20. Simões, Paula & Barata, Eduardo & Cruz, Luís, 2013. "Joint estimation using revealed and stated preference data: An application using a national forest," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 249-266.
    21. Iversen, Endre Kildal & Dugstad, Anders, 2024. "Spatial dimensions in stated preference valuation: The role of place attachment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:enreec:v:81:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10640-021-00623-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.