IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jenpmg/v42y1999i3p425-436.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benefits Transfer and Low Flow Alleviation: What Lessons for Environmental Valuation in the UK?

Author

Listed:
  • Dominic Moran

Abstract

Use of environmental valuation and benefits transfer in a recent legal ruling in the UK between Thames Water Utilities and the Environment Agency over water abstraction costs appeared to set an unfortunate precedent. In the first attempt to fulfil its statutory duties, the Agency was thwarted in its use and interpretation of non-market valuation techniques, in particular, the vexed issue of how to aggregate the results of valuation studies in original sites or those to where values might be transferred. The ruling has broader implications for water pricing and resource development by the industry. Far from being a blow for either cost-benefit analysis or environmental valuation, the decision highlights some of the research imperatives for the derivation of non-market values by economists and their translation for use in government decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Dominic Moran, 1999. "Benefits Transfer and Low Flow Alleviation: What Lessons for Environmental Valuation in the UK?," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 425-436.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jenpmg:v:42:y:1999:i:3:p:425-436
    DOI: 10.1080/09640569911172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09640569911172
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09640569911172?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.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. I.J. Bateman & A.P. Jones & A.A. Lovett & I.R. Lake & B.H. Day, 2002. "Applying Geographical Information Systems (GIS) to Environmental and Resource Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 219-269, June.
    2. Wronka, T.C. & Thiele, H., 2001. "Transfer von Umweltgüterbewertungen: Möglichkeiten, Grenzen und empirsiche Evidenz," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 37.
    3. Nick Hanley & Carol A. Salt & Mike Wilson & Meara Culligan‐Dunsmore, 2001. "Evaluating alternative “countermeasures” against food contamination resulting from nuclear accidents," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 92-109, May.
    4. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Georgiou, Stavros & Lake, Iain, 2006. "The aggregation of environmental benefit values: Welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 450-460, December.
    5. van der Horst, Dan, 2006. "Spatial cost-benefit thinking in multi-functional forestry; towards a framework for spatial targeting of policy interventions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 171-180, August.
    6. Moore, Rebecca & Provencher, Bill & Bishop, Richard C., 2009. "Valuing a Spatially Variable Environmental Resource: Reducing Non-Point Source Pollution in Green Bay, WI," Staff Papers 92235, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    7. Rebecca Moore & Bill Provencher & Richard C. Bishop, 2011. "Valuing a Spatially Variable Environmental Resource: Reducing Non-Point-Source Pollution in Green Bay, Wisconsin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(1), pages 45-59.
    8. Basil M. H. Sharp, 2001. "Sustainable Development: Environment and Economic Framework Integration," Treasury Working Paper Series 01/27, New Zealand Treasury.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:jenpmg:v:42:y:1999:i:3:p:425-436. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CJEP20 .

    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.