Author
Listed:
- Hill, Ryan
- Moore, Chris
- Doyle, Jessie
- Leibowitz, Scott G.
- Ringold, Paul
- Rashleigh, Brenda
Abstract
The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) uses a water quality index (WQI) to estimate the benefits of proposed regulations. However, the existing WQI focuses mainly on metrics related to human use values, such as recreation, and fails to capture aspects important to nonuse values of aquatic ecosystems, such as existence values. Here, we identify an appropriate index of biological health for use in stated preference (SP) surveys that seek to quantify the nonuse value of streams and lakes anywhere within the conterminous US (CONUS). We used a literature review and focus groups to evaluate two aquatic indices that are regularly reported by the EPA’s National Aquatic Resources Surveys: (1) multimetric indices (MMIs) and (2) the observed-to-expected ratio of taxonomic composition (O/E). Focus group participants had difficulty interpreting the meaning of a hypothetical 5-point change in MMI values on a 100-point scale in response to changes in water or habitat quality. This difficulty arose because a 5-point change can occur due to many unique combinations of the individual metrics that compose an MMI. In contrast, participants found it easier to interpret loss in native taxa (O/E) as an index of biological condition. We chose the O/E index because of this superior interpretability when assessed against MMIs. In addition to index selection, we modeled and interpolated the values of O/E to 1.1 million stream segments and 297,071 lakes across the CONUS to provide data for SP studies at any scope or scale, from local watersheds to the entire lower 48 states. As part of this effort, we also modeled and interpolated the areas of streams (m2) to place them in the same unit as lakes to describe the quantity of resources affected by policy scenarios. Focus groups found comparisons of management scenarios easier to interpret when aquatic resources were placed into the same units and especially when presented as percentages of area. Finally, we discuss future work to link O/E with water quality and habitat models that will allow us to forecast changes in the metric resulting from regulatory action.
Suggested Citation
Handle:
RePEc:ags:nceewp:307891
DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.307891
Download full text from publisher
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:ags:nceewp:307891. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nepgvus.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.