Testing Choice Experiment for Benefit Transfer
AbstractBenefit transfer is a cost-effective method for estimating the value of environmental goods that relies on information obtained in previous studies. The multi-attribute approach of choice experiment should provide advantages in terms of benefit transfer allowing differences in environmental improvements between sites as well as differences in socio-economic and attitude characteristics between respondent populations. Furthermore, choice experiment allows the estimation of implicit prices and the welfare change for many scenarios. If the transferability of these values is confirmed, that would be good news for benefit transfer practitioners. This paper investigates the capability of choice experiment method to be used in environmental benefit transfer.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by European Association of Agricultural Economists in its series 2005 International Congress, August 23-27, 2005, Copenhagen, Denmark with number 24747.
Date of creation: 2005
Date of revision:
choice experiment; benefit transfer; soil erosion; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods; Q30;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- Q30 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Richard Ready & Ståle Navrud & Brett Day & Richard Dubourg & Fernando Machado & Susana Mourato & Frank Spanninks & Maria Rodriquez, 2004. "Benefit Transfer in Europe: How Reliable Are Transfers between Countries?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(1), pages 67-82, September.
- Mark Morrison & Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey & Jordan Louviere, 2002. "Choice Modeling and Tests of Benefit Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(1), pages 161-170.
- Anne Rozan, 2004. "Benefit Transfer: A Comparison of WTP for Air Quality between France and Germany," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(3), pages 295-306, November.
- Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-19, November.
- Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132.
- I.J. Bateman & A.P. Jones & A.A. Lovett & I.R. Lake & B.H. Day, 2002. "Applying Geographical Information Systems (GIS) to Environmental and Resource Economics," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 219-269, June.
- Ram Shrestha & John Loomis, 2003. "Meta-Analytic Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Economic Values: Testing Out-of-Sample Convergent Validity," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(1), pages 79-100, May.
- Brouwer, Roy, 2000. "Environmental value transfer: state of the art and future prospects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 137-152, January.
- Thilo Muthke & Karin Holm-mueller, 2004. "National and International Benefit Transfer Testing with a Rigorous Test Procedure," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(3), pages 323-336, November.
- Gregory L. Poe & Michael P. Welsh & Patricia A. Champ, 1997. "Measuring the Difference in Mean Willingness to Pay When Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Responses Are Not Independent," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 255-267.
- V. Smith & Subhrendu Pattanayak, 2002. "Is Meta-Analysis a Noah's Ark for Non-Market Valuation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 271-296, June.
- Downing, Mark & Ozuna, Teofilo Jr., 1996. "Testing the Reliability of the Benefit Function Transfer Approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 316-322, May.
- Kirchhoff, Stefanie & Colby, Bonnie G. & LaFrance, Jeffrey T., 1997. "Evaluating the Performance of Benefit Transfer: An Empirical Inquiry," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 75-93, May.
- Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, October.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral 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: (AgEcon Search).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.