IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02306142.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Bénéfices non marchands de la préservation de la rade de Brest

Author

Listed:
  • Philippe Le Goffe

    (Unité d'économie et sociologie rurales de rennes - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique)

Abstract

Brest natural harbour was chosen by the Eurropean Commnunity as a pilot site in respect to improvements in coasta! water quality. The depollution program will be fnanced by the Community, the French Government and the regional authorites. There are two problems tu be resolved in priority : microbe contamination from urban sources and over enrichment in nutrients from agricultural sources. This paper deals with the non-market value which local people give to water quality in the harbour. Our objectives are to improve the knowledge about the demand for natural assets in France, and simultaneously to prepare a cost-benefit analysis which will help decision-making concerning the restoration of the Harbour. In an on site Survey carried out in summer 1993, we realised a contingent valualion for two goods ; l) improved water salubrity, and 2) preservation of the ecosystem against eutrophication (under uncertainty). The corresponding II/TP's were explained using Tobit models. Il/hatever rhe gooLl, the ll/TP reas seen to , ise with revenue, However, whilst the LI/TP "salubrity" was affected by environmental sensibility and lhe awareness of local pollution, it is above all education which affected the l|tTP "ecosystem". On whole, the residents accepted the exercise of contingent valuation and were willing to give important amounts (FF 2 t 5 and FF I 60 on cverage per household per year respectively for goods I and 2). The behayioural differences between both goods and the significance of the II/TP's thus obtained are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Philippe Le Goffe, 1995. "Bénéfices non marchands de la préservation de la rade de Brest," Post-Print hal-02306142, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02306142
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02306142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-02306142/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edwards, Steven F., 1988. "Option prices for groundwater protection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 475-487, December.
    2. Dominique Vermersch & Francois Bonnieux & Pierre Rainelli & . European Association of Environmental And Resource Economists, 1991. "Can we expect abatement of agricultural pollution using economic incentives : the case of intensive livestock farming in France," Post-Print hal-02311396, HAL.
    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. Philippe Le Goffe, 1994. "The benefits of improvements in coastal water quality : the contingent approach as applied to Brest natural harbour," Post-Print hal-02282304, HAL.
    2. Jean-Daniel Rinaudo & Stéphanie Aulong, 2014. "Defining Groundwater Remediation Objectives with Cost-benefit Analysis: Does It Work?," Post-Print hal-00934930, HAL.
    3. Poe, Gregory L. & Bishop, Richard C., 1992. "Measuring the Benefits of Groundwater Protection from Agricultural Contamination: Results from a Two-Stage Contingent Valuation Study," Staff Papers 200549, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    4. Gregory Poe & Richard Bishop, 1999. "Valuing the Incremental Benefits of Groundwater Protection when Exposure Levels are Known," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(3), pages 341-367, April.
    5. David O. Scrogin & Robert P. Berrens, 2003. "Rationed Access and Welfare: The Case of Public Resource Lotteries," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(2), pages 137-148.
    6. Whittington, Dale & Hua Wang, 2000. "Willingness to pay for air quality improvements in Sofia, Bulgaria," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2280, The World Bank.
    7. Roberts, David C. & Boyer, Tracy A. & Lusk, Jayson L., 2008. "Preferences for environmental quality under uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 584-593, July.
    8. Poe, Gregory L. & Boyle, Kevin J. & Bergstrom, John C., 2000. "A Meta Analysis Of Contingent Values For Groundwater Quality In The United States," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21871, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. Stevens, Thomas H. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Willis, Cleve E., 1997. "Conjoint Analysis Of Groundwater Protection Programs," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 26(2), pages 1-8, October.
    10. Chien, Yu-Lan & Larson, Douglas, 1991. "Measuring Supply-Side Option Price: Estimates for Preserving the Northern Spotted owl," WAEA/ WFEA Conference Archive (1929-1995) 321472, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    11. Jon Conrad & Lars Olson, 1992. "The economics of a stock pollutant: Aldicarb on Long Island," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(3), pages 245-258, May.
    12. Schläpfer, Felix & Erickson, Jon D., 2001. "A Biotic Control Perspective on Nitrate Contamination of Groundwater from Agricultural Production," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 113-126, October.
    13. J.-D. Rinaudo & S. Aulong, 2014. "Defining Groundwater Remediation Objectives with Cost-benefit Analysis: Does It Work?," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(1), pages 261-278, January.
    14. Giraldez, Cesareo & Fox, Glenn, 1994. "An Economic Analysis of Groundwater Contamination From Agricultural Nitrate Emissions in Southern Ontario," Department of Agricultural Economics and Business 258811, University of Guelph.
    15. Poe, Gregory L. & Bishop, Richard C., 1992. "Prior Information, General Information, and Specific Information in the Contingent Valuation of Environmental Risks: The Case of Nitrates in Groundwater," Staff Papers 121335, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    16. Nick Hanley & Clive Spash & Lorna Walker, 1995. "Problems in valuing the benefits of biodiversity protection," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(3), pages 249-272, April.
    17. Wang,Hua & Laplante, Benoit & Xun Wu & Meisner, Craig, 2004. "Estimating willingness-to-pay with random valuation models : an application to Lake Sevan, Armenia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3367, The World Bank.
    18. James S. Shortle & Andrew Laughland, 1994. "Impacts Of Taxes To Reduce Agrichemical Use When Farm Policy Is Endogenous," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(1), pages 3-14, January.
    19. John C. Whitehead & George Van Houtven, "undated". "Methods for Valuing the Benefits of the Safe Drinking Water Act: Review and Assessment," Working Papers 9705, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    20. Kim, Hong Jin & Cho, Yongsung, 2002. "Estimating Willingness To Pay For Reduced Copper Contamination In Southwestern Minnesota," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 27(2), pages 1-14, December.

    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:hal:journl:hal-02306142. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.