IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v32y2012i12p2113-2132.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Value of Environmental Information without Control of Subsequent Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Detlof von Winterfeldt
  • Robert Kavet
  • Stephen Peck
  • Mayank Mohan
  • Gordon Hazen

Abstract

The standard value of information approach of decision analysis assumes that the individual or agency that collects the information is also in control of the subsequent decisions based on the information. We refer to this situation as the “value of information with control (VOI‐C).” This paradigm leads to powerful results, for example, that the value of information cannot be negative and that it is zero, when the information cannot change subsequent decisions. In many real world situations, however, the agency collecting the information is different from the one that makes the decision on the basis of that information. For example, an environmental research group may contemplate to fund a study that can affect an environmental policy decision that is made by a regulatory organization. In this two‐agency formulation, the information‐acquiring agency has to decide, whether an investment in research is worthwhile, while not being in control of the subsequent decision. We refer to this situation as “value of information without control (VOI‐NC).” In this article, we present a framework for the VOI‐NC and illustrate it with an example of a specific problem of determining the value of a research program on the health effects of power‐frequency electromagnetic fields. We first compare the VOI‐C approach with the VOI‐NC approach. We show that the VOI‐NC can be negative, but that with high‐quality research (low probabilities of errors of type I and II) it is positive. We also demonstrate, both in the example and in more general mathematical terms, that the VOI‐NC for environmental studies breaks down into a sum of the VOI‐NC due to the possible reduction of environmental impacts and the VOI‐NC due to the reduction of policy costs, with each component being positive for low environmental impacts and high‐quality research. Interesting results include that the environmental and cost components of the VOI‐NC move in opposite directions as a function of the probability of environmental impacts and that VOI‐NC can be positive, even though the probability of environmental impacts is zero or one.

Suggested Citation

  • Detlof von Winterfeldt & Robert Kavet & Stephen Peck & Mayank Mohan & Gordon Hazen, 2012. "The Value of Environmental Information without Control of Subsequent Decisions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(12), pages 2113-2132, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:12:p:2113-2132
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01828.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01828.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01828.x?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. Davis, James H., 1992. "Some compelling intuitions about group consensus decisions, theoretical and empirical research, and interpersonal aggregation phenomena: Selected examples 1950-1990," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 3-38, June.
    2. Sander Greenland & Leeka Kheifets, 2006. "Leukemia Attributable to Residential Magnetic Fields: Results from Analyses Allowing for Study Biases," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(2), pages 471-482, April.
    3. Detlof Von Winterfeldt & Thomas Eppel & John Adams & Raymond Neutra & Vincent DelPizzo, 2004. "Managing Potential Health Risks from Electric Powerlines: A Decision Analysis Caught in Controversy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 1487-1502, December.
    4. Peck, Stephen C & Richels, Richard G, 1987. "The Value of Information to the Acidic Deposition Debates," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 5(2), pages 205-217, April.
    5. 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.
    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. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    2. Zou, Guang & Faber, Michael Havbro & González, Arturo & Banisoleiman, Kian, 2021. "Computing the value of information from periodic testing in holistic decision making under uncertainty," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).
    3. Mitchell J. Small & Ümit Güvenç & Michael L. DeKay, 2014. "When Can Scientific Studies Promote Consensus Among Conflicting Stakeholders?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(11), pages 1978-1994, November.

    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. L. Kheifets & J. Sahl & R. Shimkhada & M. Repacholi, 2006. "Epidemiologic Data and Standards: Response to Kundi," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 583-584, June.
    2. Fankhauser, Samuel & Hepburn, Cameron, 2010. "Designing carbon markets. Part I: Carbon markets in time," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4363-4370, August.
    3. Frans P. Vries & Nick Hanley, 2016. "Incentive-Based Policy Design for Pollution Control and Biodiversity Conservation: A Review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 63(4), pages 687-702, April.
    4. Armin Schmutzler, 1996. "Pollution control with imperfectly observable emissions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(3), pages 251-262, April.
    5. Inés Macho-Stadler, 2008. "Environmental regulation: choice of instruments under imperfect compliance," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, March.
    6. Don Fullerton & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2002. "Environmental Controls, Scarcity Rents, and Pre-existing Distortions," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 26, pages 504-522, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Ritter, Hendrik & Zimmermann, Karl, 2019. "Cap-and-Trade Policy vs. Carbon Taxation: Of Leakage and Linkage," EconStor Preprints 197796, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    8. Sam Fankhauser & Cameron Hepburn, 2009. "Carbon markets in space and time," GRI Working Papers 3, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    9. Ertac, Seda & Gurdal, Mehmet Y., 2012. "Deciding to decide: Gender, leadership and risk-taking in groups," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 24-30.
    10. Wolfgang Keller & Arik Levinson, 1999. "Environmental Compliance Costs and Foreign Direct Investment Inflows to U.S. States," NBER Working Papers 7369, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Cinzia Di Novi, 2007. "An Economic Evaluation of Life-Style and Air-pollution-related Damages: Results from the BRFSS," JEPS Working Papers 07-001, JEPS.
    12. Managi, Shunsuke & Opaluch, James J. & Jin, Di & Grigalunas, Thomas A., 2006. "Stochastic frontier analysis of total factor productivity in the offshore oil and gas industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 204-215, November.
    13. Bonacina, Monica & Gulli`, Francesco, 2007. "Electricity pricing under "carbon emissions trading": A dominant firm with competitive fringe model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(8), pages 4200-4220, August.
    14. Quintano, Claudio & Mazzocchi, Paolo & Rocca, Antonella, 2021. "Evaluation of the eco-efficiency of territorial districts with seaport economic activities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    15. Oliver Fromm, 2000. "Ecological Structure and Functions of Biodiversity as Elements of Its Total Economic Value," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 16(3), pages 303-328, July.
    16. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2006. "Environmental Morale and Motivation," CREMA Working Paper Series 2006-17, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    17. Don Fullerton & Inkee Hong & Gilbert E. Metcalf, 2001. "A Tax on Output of the Polluting Industry Is Not a Tax on Pollution: The Importance of Hitting the Target," NBER Chapters, in: Behavioral and Distributional Effects of Environmental Policy, pages 13-44, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Shouqiang Wang & Peng Sun & Francis de Véricourt, 2016. "Inducing Environmental Disclosures: A Dynamic Mechanism Design Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 371-389, April.
    19. Brita Bye & Karine Nyborg, 1999. "The Welfare Effects of Carbon Policies: Grandfathered Quotas versus Differentiated Taxes," Discussion Papers 261, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    20. Jeanneaux, Philippe & Latruffe, Laure, 2016. "Modelling pollution-generating technologies in performance benchmarking: Recent developments, limits and future prospects in the nonparametric frameworkAuthor-Name: Dakpo, K. Hervé," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 347-359.

    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:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:12:p:2113-2132. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.