Using Direct Questioning To Value The Existence Benefits Of Preserved Natural Areas
A major limitation to the effectiveness of benefit-cost analyses of proposals involving natural ecosystems is the assertion of existence demand. Not only has confusion arisen regarding its exact definition but little has been done to establish its magnitude. Existence benefits are defined and an empirical study of the value a sample of Canberra residents places on the continued provision of the existence benefits of a particular ecosystem, Nadgee Nature Reserve, is outlined. It is concluded that while the measurement technique employed, the direct questioning of respondents, may be subject to a problem of response bias, it is capable of providing a reasonable estimate of these existence benefits. The average existence value per Canberra adult is at least $20, that is $2 per annum in perpetuity given a 10 per cent real interest rate.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 28 (1984)
Issue (Month): 2-3 (08-12)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: AARES Central Office Manager, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra ACT 0200|
Phone: 0409 032 338
Web page: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8489
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://ordering.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/subs.asp?ref=1467-8489&doi=10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8489|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- 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.
- 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.
- Philip A. Meyer, 1979. "Publicly Vested Values for Fish and Wildlife: Criteria in Economic Welfare and Interface with the Law," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(2), pages 223-235.
- 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.