IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecoprv/ecop_0249-4744_1995_num_117_1_5716.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

La méthode d'évaluation contingente : application à la qualité des eaux littorales

Author

Listed:
  • François Bonnieux
  • Philippe Le Goffe
  • Dominique Vermersch

Abstract

[ger] Die Methode der Kontingenzanalyse: eine Anwendung auf die Qualität der Küstengewässer, . von François Bonnieux, Philippe Le Goffe, Dominique Vermesch.. . Es wird an den historischen Kontext erinnert, in dem die Méthode der Kontingenzanalyse entwickelt wurde, wobei die treibende Kraft der Nachfrage durch die Behörden sowie der Aktionen gegen die Verantwortlichen von Umweltschäden hervorgehoben wird. Die Anwendung dieser Méthode wird zunächst in einem allgemeinen Rahmen diskutiert, wobei das Interesse dem Begriff des hypothetischen Szenarios mit den sich daraus ergebenden Verzerrungen und den Techniken der Präferenzoffenbarungen gilt. Danach wird die Méthode anhand einer Fallstudie, und zwar über die Verbesserung der Qualität der Küstengewässer veranschaulicht. Hierbei stützt man sich auf das Beispiel der Reede von Brest und auf die Ergebnisse einer Erhebung, die bei 607 Personen im Sommer 1993 durchgeführt wurde. Zwei Szenarien werden untersucht; das erste betrifft die Verbesserung der Gewässerqualität und das zweite den Schutz des Ökosystems in der Reede vor der Eutrophierung. Mit der Zahlung eines Beitrages für die Gewässerqualität wären 75% der befragten Personen und für das Ökosystem 49% einverstanden. Für jedes Gut ist ein Tobit-Modell über die Zahlungsbereitschaft erstellt worden. Die bedeutendsten erklärenden Variablen sind das Geschlecht, das Einkommen, der Ausbildungsgrad oder der Beruf, die Sensibilität für Umweltfragen, die Einstellung gegenüber der Wasserqualität und das Betreiben von Freizeittätigkeiten. [eng] The Contingent Evaluation Method Used to Assess the Quality of Coastal Waters, . by François Bonnieux, Philippe Le Goffe and Dominique Vermesch.. . This article reviews the historical context surrounding the development of the contingent evaluation method by highlighting the driving force of central government demand and action taken against those responsible for environmental damage. The use of the method is discussed initially from a general standpoint, based on the hypothetical scenario notion with its consequent biases and on preference disclosing techniques. The method is then illustrated by a case study of coastal water quality improvement. This study uses the example of Brest harbour and the results of a summer 1993 survey of 607 people. Two scenarios are considered. The first concerns improving the purity of the water and the second the protection of the harbour's ecosystem against eutrophication. Of those surveyed, 75% said that they would be prepared to pay for purity and 49% for the ecosystem. A Tobit model of agreement to pay is drawn up for each item. The most significant explanatory variables are gender, income, educational level or profession, environmental awareness, the perception of water quality and the practice of leisure activities. [fre] La méthode d 'évaluation contingente : application à la qualité des eaux littorales, . par François Bonnieux, Philippe Le Goffe, Dominique Vermesch.. . Le contexte historique dans lequel a été développé la méthode d'évaluation contingente est rappelé, en insistant sur le rôle moteur de la demande des administrations et des actions contre les responsables de dommages à l'environnement. La mise en œuvre de la méthode est tout d'abord discutée sur un plan général, en s'intéressant à la notion de scénario hypothétique avec les biais qui en découlent et aux techniques de révélation des préférences. Puis elle est illustrée à partir d'une étude de cas, celui de l'amélioration de la qualité des eaux littorales. On s'appuie ici sur l'exemple de la rade de Brest et sur les résultats d'une enquête conduite auprès de 607 personnes pendant l'été 1993. Deux scénarios sont étudiés, le premier concerne l'amélioration de la salubrité des eaux et le second la préservation de l'écosystème de la rade l'eutrophisation. 75 % des enquêtes accepteraient de payer pour la salubrité, et 49 % pour l'écosystème. Pour chaque bien on a réalisé une modélisation Tobit du consentement à payer. Les variables explicatives les plus significatives sont : le sexe, le revenu, le niveau d'études ou la profession, la sensibilité environnementale, la perception de la qualité de l'eau et la pratique d'activités récréatives. [spa] El método de evaluación contingente : aplicación a la calidad de las aguas litorales, . por François Bonnieux, Philippe Le Goffe, Dominique Vermesch.. . Se recuerda el contexto histórico dentro del cual ha sido ideado el método de evaluación contingente insistiendo en el papel motor de la demanda de las administraciones y de las acciones contra los responsables de los daños al medio ambiente. Ante todo se discute la puesta en práctica del método desde una óptica general, interesándose en la noción de caso hipotético con los sesgos consecuentes y en las técnicas de revelación de las preferencias. Luego se le ilustra a partir de un estudio de caso específico, el de la mejora de la calidad de las aguas litorales. Se respalda aquí con el ejemplo de la rada de Brest y se fundamenta con los resultados de una encuesta llevada a cabo ante 607 personas durante el verano de 1993. Se examinan dos casos, el primero se refiere a la mejora de la salubridad de las aguas y el segundo, la preservación del ecosistema de la rada, contra el fenómeno de deterioración del medio marino. El 75% de los encuestados aceptarían pagar por la salubridad, y el 49% por el ecosistema. Para cada bien se ha realizado una modelización Tobit del consentimiento a pagar. Las variables explicativas más significativas son : el sexo, el ingreso, el nivel de estudios o la profesión, la sensibilidad medioambiental, la percepción de la calidad del agua y la práctica de actividades recreativas.

Suggested Citation

  • François Bonnieux & Philippe Le Goffe & Dominique Vermersch, 1995. "La méthode d'évaluation contingente : application à la qualité des eaux littorales," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 117(1), pages 89-106.
  • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_1995_num_117_1_5716
    DOI: 10.3406/ecop.1995.5716
    Note: DOI:10.3406/ecop.1995.5716
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/ecop.1995.5716
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/ecop_0249-4744_1995_num_117_1_5716
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/ecop.1995.5716?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sellar, Christine & Chavas, Jean-Paul & Stoll, John R., 1986. "Specification of the logit model: The case of valuation of nonmarket goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 382-390, December.
    2. Johansson,Per-Olov, 1987. "The Economic Theory and Measurement of Environmental Benefits," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521348102.
    3. Stephen D. Reiling & Kevin J. Boyle & Marcia L. Phillips & Mark W. Anderson, 1990. "Temporal Reliability of Contingent Values," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 66(2), pages 128-134.
    4. Douglas D. Davis & Charles A. Holt, 1992. "Introduction to Experimental Economics," Introductory Chapters, in: Experimental Economics, Princeton University Press.
    5. Kevin J. Boyle & Richard C. Bishop & Michael P. Welsh, 1985. "Starting Point Bias in Contingent Valuation Bidding Games," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(2), pages 188-194.
    6. Randall, Alan & Stoll, John R, 1980. "Consumer's Surplus in Commodity Space," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 449-455, June.
    7. Brookshire, David S, et al, 1982. "Valuing Public Goods: A Comparison of Survey and Hedonic Approaches," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 165-177, March.
    8. S. V. Ciriacy-Wantrup, 1947. "Capital Returns from Soil-Conservation Practices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4_Part_II), pages 1181-1196.
    9. Loomis, John B., 1990. "Comparative reliability of the dichotomous choice and open-ended contingent valuation techniques," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 78-85, January.
    10. Bishop, Richard C. & Heberlein, Thomas A., 1979. "Measuring Values Of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," 1979 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, Pullman, Washington 277818, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Thayer, Mark A., 1981. "Contingent valuation techniques for assessing environmental impacts: Further evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 27-44, March.
    13. Edwards, Steven F., 1988. "Option prices for groundwater protection," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 475-487, December.
    14. Hanemann, W., 1994. "Contingent Valuation and Economics," CUDARE Working Papers 198636, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    15. Brookshire, David S. & Ives, Berry C. & Schulze, William D., 1976. "The valuation of aesthetic preferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 325-346, December.
    16. Hanemann, W Michael, 1991. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept: How Much Can They Differ?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 635-647, June.
    17. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    18. Rowe, Robert D. & D'Arge, Ralph C. & Brookshire, David S., 1980. "An experiment on the economic value of visibility," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 1-19, March.
    19. Randall, Alan & Ives, Berry & Eastman, Clyde, 1974. "Bidding games for valuation of aesthetic environmental improvements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 132-149, August.
    20. Richard C. Bishop & Thomas A. Heberlein, 1979. "Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(5), pages 926-930.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Voltaire, Louinord, 2012. "Effet d’une taxe et d’un droit d’entrée sur les consentements à payer des touristes pour de nouvelles réserves naturelles dans le golfe du Morbihan," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 92(02), pages 183-209, October.
    2. El Aida, Kawtar & El Kadiri, Mounir & Mourji, Fouzi, 2015. "The demand for health microinsurance services: assessment of the contribution effort using microeconomic data," MPRA Paper 68470, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Bernard Ruffieux & Anne Rozan & Stéphane Robin, 2008. "Mesurer les préférences du consommateur pour orienter les décisions des pouvoirs publics : l'apport de la méthode expérimentale," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 182(1), pages 113-127.
    4. Lucinio Júdez & Rosario de Andrés & Carlos Pérez Hugalde & Elvira Urzainqui & Miguel Ibáñez, 1998. "Évaluation contingente de l’usage récréatif d’une réserve naturelle humide," Post-Print hal-01200908, HAL.
    5. Francois Bonnieux, 1995. "La mesure de la valeur de l'eau et de ses usages," Post-Print hal-01594078, HAL.
    6. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.
    7. Júdez, Lucinio & de Andrés, Rosario & Pérez Hugalde, Carlos & Urzainqui, Elvira & Ibáñez, Miguel, 1998. "Évaluation contingente de l’usage récréatif d’une réserve naturelle humide," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 48.
    8. Bouchrika Ali & Terzi Chokri & Mhadhbi Khalil & El Ammari Anis, 2017. "The Qualitative Model Provides to the Creation of a Hypothetical Water Market in Tunisia," International Journal of Environmental Sciences & Natural Resources, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 1(4), pages 96-105, February.
    9. François Bonnieux & Pierre Rainelli, 2002. "Évaluation des dommages des marées noires : une illustration à partir du cas de l’Erika et des pertes d’agrément des résidents," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 357(1), pages 173-187.
    10. Ali, Bouchrika & FakhriI, Issaoui & Habib, Jouber, 2014. "Evaluation of the Utility Function of an Environmental asset: Contingent valuation Method (CVM)," MPRA Paper 60421, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Lucinio Júdez & de Rosario Andrés & Carlos Pérez Hugalde & Elvira Urzainqui & Miguel Ibáñez, 1998. "Évaluation contingente de l’usage récréatif d’une réserve naturelle humide," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 48, pages 37-60.

    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. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    2. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Bowker, J. M. & MacDonald, H. F., 1992. "An Economic Analysis of Localized Pollution: Rendering Emissions in a Residential Setting," 1992 Annual Meeting, August 9-12, Baltimore, Maryland 271381, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Smith, V. Kerry, 2000. "JEEM and Non-market Valuation: 1974-1998," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 351-374, May.
    5. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    6. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    7. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    8. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    10. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    11. Sagoff, M., 1998. "Aggregation and deliberation in valuing environmental public goods:: A look beyond contingent pricing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 213-230, February.
    12. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    13. Bergstrom, John C. & Dillman, B. L. & Stoll, John R., 1985. "Public Environmental Amenity Benefits of Private Land: The Case of Prime Agricultural Land," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 139-149, July.
    14. Green, Donald & Jacowitz, Karen E. & Kahneman, Daniel & McFadden, Daniel, 1998. "Referendum contingent valuation, anchoring, and willingness to pay for public goods," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 85-116, June.
    15. Darla Hatton MacDonald & Mark Morrison & Mary Barnes, 2010. "Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept Compensation for Changes in Urban Water Customer Service Standards," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 24(12), pages 3145-3158, September.
    16. Clive L Spash, 2008. "The Contingent Valuation Method: Retrospect and Prospect," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-04, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    17. Lopez-Becerra, E.I. & Alcon, F., 2021. "Social desirability bias in the environmental economic valuation: An inferred valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    18. John K. Horowitz & Kenneth E. McConnell & James J. Murphy, 2013. "Behavioral foundations of environmental economics and valuation," Chapters, in: John A. List & Michael K. Price (ed.), Handbook on Experimental Economics and the Environment, chapter 4, pages 115-156, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Tanguay, Mark & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Boxall, Peter C., 1995. "An Economic Evaluation of Woodland Caribou Conservation Programs in Northwestern Saskatchewan," Project Report Series 24039, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    20. Talwar, Shagorika, 1995. "An evaluation of statistical efficiency and bias trade-off involved with the use of follow-up questioning in the contingent valuation of environmental amenities," ISU General Staff Papers 1995010108000018160, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    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:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_1995_num_117_1_5716. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/ecop .

    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.