IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_10307.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Value of Information in Water Quality Monitoring and Management

Author

Listed:
  • Amelie Luhede
  • Houda Yaqine
  • Reza Bahmanbijari
  • Michael Römer
  • Thorsten Upmann

Abstract

Environmental managers face substantial uncertainty when deciding on management actions. To reduce this uncertainty prior to decision-making, collecting new data may help arrive at more informed decisions. Whether any resulting improvement in the decision will outweigh the cost of collecting the data, and thus make investing in the acquisition of the information worthwhile, is an intricate question. The concept of the value of information (VoI) is a convenient tool to address this problem. We use the VoI framework to analyse a decision problem in water quality management. Based on real-world monitoring data, we calculate the VoI of monitoring nitrogen, which is used as an indicator of the ecological state of water body. We find that the VoI is significant in our case and we further investigate the dependency of the VoI in a similar setting on the management cost, the assumed value of a good state and on the level of uncertainty regarding the ecological state. In addition, we observe a negative relation between the relative management cost and the prior probability that maximises VoI. These insights may help decide on information acquisition in the presence of substantial uncertainties and sparse data.

Suggested Citation

  • Amelie Luhede & Houda Yaqine & Reza Bahmanbijari & Michael Römer & Thorsten Upmann, 2023. "The Value of Information in Water Quality Monitoring and Management," CESifo Working Paper Series 10307, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_10307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp10307.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Clark, Colin W. & Kirkwood, Geoffrey P., 1986. "On uncertain renewable resource stocks: Optimal harvest policies and the value of stock surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 235-244, September.
    2. Johnson, Fred A. & Smith, Brian J. & Bonneau, Mathieu & Martin, Julien & Romagosa, Christina & Mazzotti, Frank & Waddle, Hardin & Reed, Robert N. & Eckles, Jennifer Kettevrlin & Vitt, Laurie J., 2017. "Expert Elicitation, Uncertainty, and the Value of Information in Controlling Invasive Species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 83-90.
    3. Williams, Byron K. & Eaton, Mitchell J. & Breininger, David R., 2011. "Adaptive resource management and the value of information," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(18), pages 3429-3436.
    4. Hirshleifer, J & Riley, John G, 1979. "The Analytics of Uncertainty and Information-An Expository Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 1375-1421, December.
    5. Venus, Terese E. & Sauer, Johannes, 2022. "Certainty pays off: The public's value of environmental monitoring," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    6. Pannell, David J. & Glenn, Nicole A., 2000. "A framework for the economic evaluation and selection of sustainability indicators in agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 135-149, April.
    7. Fumie Yokota & Kimberly M. Thompson, 2004. "Value of Information Analysis in Environmental Health Risk Management Decisions: Past, Present, and Future," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 635-650, June.
    8. Shortle, James S. & Sung, Hwansoo, 2005. "The Value of Sample Information for Water Quality Management," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19139, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    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. Luhede, Amelie & Yaqine, Houda & Bahmanbijari, Reza & Römer, Michael & Upmann, Thorsten, 2024. "The value of information in water quality monitoring and management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    2. Brownson, Katherine & Fowler, Laurie, 2020. "Evaluating how we evaluate success: Monitoring, evaluation and adaptive management in Payments for Watershed Services programs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    3. Kling, David M. & Sanchirico, James N. & Fackler, Paul L., 2017. "Optimal monitoring and control under state uncertainty: Application to lionfish management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 223-245.
    4. Venus, Terese E. & Sauer, Johannes, 2022. "Certainty pays off: The public's value of environmental monitoring," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Jeffrey, Scott R. & Pannell, David J., 2013. "Economics of Prioritising Environmental Research: An Expected Value of Partial Perfect Information (EVPPI) Framework," Working Papers 144944, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    6. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    7. Xiaoyi Liu & Jonghyun Lee & Peter Kitanidis & Jack Parker & Ungtae Kim, 2012. "Value of Information as a Context-Specific Measure of Uncertainty in Groundwater Remediation," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(6), pages 1513-1535, April.
    8. Amanda P. Rehr & Mitchell J. Small & Paul S. Fischbeck & Patricia Bradley & William S. Fisher, 2014. "The role of scientific studies in building consensus in environmental decision making: a coral reef example," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 60-87, March.
    9. Francisco Alcalá & Miguel González‐Maestre, 2012. "Artistic Creation and Intellectual Property: A Professional Career Approach," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 633-672, September.
    10. Agnieszka Wojewódzka-Wiewiórska & Anna Kłoczko-Gajewska & Piotr Sulewski, 2019. "Between the Social and Economic Dimensions of Sustainability in Rural Areas—In Search of Farmers’ Quality of Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    11. Nicky Welton & A. E. Ades, 2012. "Research Decisions In The Face Of Heterogeneity: What Can A New Study Tell Us?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(10), pages 1196-1200, October.
    12. Kan Shao & Mitchell J. Small, 2011. "Potential Uncertainty Reduction in Model‐Averaged Benchmark Dose Estimates Informed by an Additional Dose Study," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1561-1575, October.
    13. Farnaz Pourzand & Mohammad Bakhshoodeh, 2014. "Technical effici ency and agricultural sustainability–technology gap of maize producers in Fars province of Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 671-688, June.
    14. Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2010. "Performance payments: A new strategy to conserve large carnivores in the tropics?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 405-412, December.
    15. Pasquale Schiraldi, 2006. "Second-Hand Markets and Collusion by Manufacturers of Semidurable Goods," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2006-028, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    16. Shamsheer Haq & Ismet Boz, 2020. "Measuring environmental, economic, and social sustainability index of tea farms in Rize Province, Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 2545-2567, March.
    17. Da Rocha, José María & Gutiérrez Huerta, María José, 2010. "Endogenous fisheries management in a stochastic model: Why do fishery agencies use TAC," DFAEII Working Papers 1988-088X, University of the Basque Country - Department of Foundations of Economic Analysis II.
    18. Singh, Rajesh & Weninger, Quinn & Doyle, Matthew, 2006. "Fisheries management with stock growth uncertainty and costly capital adjustment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 582-599, September.
    19. Luis Eeckhoudt & Christian Gollier & Giovanni Immordino, 2001. "How Diagnostic Tests Affect Prevention: a Cost-Benefit Analysis," CSEF Working Papers 53, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    20. Newbold, Stephen C. & Johnston, Robert J., 2020. "Valuing non-market valuation studies using meta-analysis: A demonstration using estimates of willingness-to-pay for water quality improvements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    value of information; decision analysis; uncertainty; environmental management; monitoring;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C11 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Bayesian Analysis: General
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_10307. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.