IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/17527_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Legal obstacles for contingent valuation methods in environmental litigation

In: Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods

Author

Listed:
  • Brian D. Israel
  • Jean Martin
  • Kelly Smith Fayne
  • Lauren Daniel

Abstract

Despite myriad methodological shortcomings, some economists continue to advocate for the use of contingent valuation (CV) and other survey methods to estimate non-use values of natural resources. Federal regulatory agencies also continue to explore these methodologies, although both the OPA and CERCLA regulations strongly disfavor their application, and no court has actually relied upon a CV or a similar study to determine the value of natural resource damages. Indeed, several courts have refused to admit CV studies into evidence, ruling that the studies were not an accurate or reliable measure of actual loss. The better and more reliable approach for valuing natural resource loss, from both a legal and policy perspective, is based on the cost of projects needed to repair, replace, or return injured natural resources to baseline conditions where practicable, and compensate for the temporary or interim loss of resources until restoration is complete.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian D. Israel & Jean Martin & Kelly Smith Fayne & Lauren Daniel, 2017. "Legal obstacles for contingent valuation methods in environmental litigation," Chapters, in: Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train (ed.), Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods, chapter 11, pages 292-306, Edward Elgar Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:17527_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781786434685.00017.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economics and Finance; Environment;

    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:elg:eechap:17527_11. 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: Darrel McCalla (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.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.