Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Citizens' juries: an aid to environmental valuation?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Wendy Kenyon
  • Nick Hanley
  • Ceara Nevin

Abstract

Survey techniques such as contingent valuation have been used extensively by environmental economists to develop an understanding of consumer preferences for environmental goods. On the basis of such techniques, recommendations have been formulated in relation to environmental policy. However, the exposure of weaknesses in this method has led economists to look to other information-gathering approaches which might enhance, and/or complement, environmental valuation. One such approach is that of 'citizens' juries' (CJs). A CJ consists of a small group of people, selected to represent the general public rather than any interest group or sector, which meets to deliberate upon a policy question. This approach may complement traditional approaches to data gathering on public preferences for environmental goods and services by addressing some of the concerns that have been voiced regarding existing methods. First, CJs may be useful in tackling the problem of information provision, and concerns relating to the level of understanding of the respondent. Second, CJs may be a means of addressing the 'citizen value versus consumer value' argument in environmental valuation. Third, CJs may help researchers understand how participants construct their values. Fourth, this approach allows sustainability issues to be addressed explicitly. The authors also discuss a number of problems associated with CJs and conclude with examples from two recent juries on environmental issues which were held in Scotland, and make recommendations on how environmental economists might utilise this tool.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.envplan.com/abstract.cgi?id=c4s
File Function: abstract
Download Restriction: Fulltext access restricted to subscribers, see http://www.envplan.co.uk/C.html for details

File URL: http://www.envplan.com/epc/fulltext/c19/c4s.pdf
File Function: main text
Download Restriction: Fulltext access restricted to subscribers, see http://www.envplan.co.uk/C.html for details

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Pion Ltd, London in its journal Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy.

Volume (Year): 19 (2001)
Issue (Month): 4 (August)
Pages: 557-566

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:pio:envirc:v:19:y:2001:i:4:p:557-566

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.pion.co.uk

Related research

Keywords:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Macmillan, Douglas C. & Philip, Lorna & Hanley, Nick & Alvarez-Farizo, Begona, 2002. "Valuing the non-market benefits of wild goose conservation: a comparison of interview and group based approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 49-59, November.
  2. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2009. "Do EPA administrators recommend environmental policies that citizens want?," Jena Economic Research Papers 2009-057, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
  3. Nobuyuki Ito & Kenji Takeuchi & Koichi Kuriyama & Yasushi Shoji & Takahiro Tsuge & Yohei Mitani, 2008. "The influence of decision-making rules on individual preference for ecological restoration: Evidence from an experimental survey," Discussion Papers 0820, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
  4. Atkinson, Giles D. & Dietz, Simon & Helgeson, Jennifer & Hepburn, Cameron & Sælen, Håkon, 2009. "Siblings, not triplets: social preferences for risk, inequality and time in discounting climate change," Economics Discussion Papers 2009-14, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
  5. Michael Ahlheim & Benchaphun Ekasingh & Oliver Frör & Jirawan Kitchaincharoen & Andreas Neef & Chapika Sangkapitux & Nopasom Sinphurmsukskul, 2007. "Using Citizen Expert Groups in Environmental Valuation - Lessons from a CVM study in Northern Thailand," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 283/2007, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
  6. Alvarez-Farizo, Begona & Hanley, Nick & Barberan, Ramon & Lazaro, Angelina, 2007. "Choice modeling at the "market stall": Individual versus collective interest in environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 743-751, February.
  7. Álvarez-Farizo, Begoña & Gil, José M. & Howard, B.J., 2009. "Impacts from restoration strategies: Assessment through valuation workshops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 787-797, January.
  8. Watson, Verity & Ryan, Mandy, 2007. "Exploring preference anomalies in double bounded contingent valuation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 463-482, May.
  9. Marianne Aasen & Arild Vatn, 2013. "Deliberation on GMOs: A Study of How a Citizens' Jury Affects the Citizens' Attitudes," Environmental Values, White Horse Press, vol. 22(4), pages 461-481, August.
  10. Angelina Lázaro Alquézar & Begoña Álvarez Farizo, 2006. "Prioritisation of patients on waiting lists: a community workshop approach," Documentos de Trabajo dt2006-08, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad de Zaragoza.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pio:envirc:v:19:y:2001:i:4:p:557-566. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Neil Hammond).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.