IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Valuing a multistate river: the case of the River Murray

  • Darla Hatton MacDonald
  • Mark D. Morrison
  • John M. Rose
  • Kevin J. Boyle

The River Murray and the Coorong in Australia have been in a state of decline. With the prospect of extended droughts and shifts in inflows due to climate change, difficult choices loom. The options include halting the decline, triage of some assets along the River or staying with the declining river system. To support decision-making, a survey was designed to elicit willingness to pay for improvements in environmental quality. Over 3000 Australians responded to this survey. The study focuses on key River Murray environmental quality indicators: the frequency of bird breeding along the River Murray, increasing native fish populations in the River Murray, increasing the area of healthy vegetation along the River Murray, and restoring water bird habitat in the Coorong. State/Territory models were jointly estimated using a panel multinomial logit error-components model. Willingness to pay estimates for improvements in environmental quality were calculated for the River Murray and the Coorong. Respondents were found to be willing to pay most for the Coorong and to improve waterbird breeding frequency. Respondents from the Australian Capital Territory were found to have significantly higher willingness to pay whereas those in Victoria had a significantly lower willingness to pay than respondents in other states.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Article provided by Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society in its journal Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics.

Volume (Year): 55 (2011)
Issue (Month): 3 (07)
Pages: 374-392

in new window

Handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:55:y:2011:i:3:p:374-392
Contact details of provider: Postal: AARES Central Office Manager, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra ACT 0200
Phone: 0409 032 338
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

Order Information: Web:

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.:

as in new window
  1. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
  2. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene & Francesco Marangon, 2008. "Using Flexible Taste Distributions to Value Collective Reputation for Environmentally Friendly Production Methods," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 56(2), pages 145-162, 06.
  3. Mark Morrison & Thomas Brown, 2009. "Testing the Effectiveness of Certainty Scales, Cheap Talk, and Dissonance-Minimization in Reducing Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(3), pages 307-326, November.
  4. Young, Michael D. & McColl, James C., 2009. "Double trouble: the importance of accounting for and defining water entitlements consistent with hydrological realities," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(1), March.
  5. Elisabet Rutstrom & Glenn Harrison & Melonie Williams & Morten Lau, 2002. "Estimating individual discount rates in denmark: A field experiment," Artefactual Field Experiments 00062, The Field Experiments Website.
  6. Morrison, Mark, 2000. "Aggregation Biases in Stated Preference Studies," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 215-30, June.
  7. Kent F. Kovacs & Douglas M. Larson, 2008. "Identifying Individual Discount Rates and Valuing Public Open Space with Stated-Preference Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(2), pages 209-224.
  8. Shane Frederick & George Loewenstein & Ted O'Donoghue, 2002. "Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(2), pages 351-401, June.
  9. Bennett, Jeffrey W. & Morrison, Mark & Blamey, Russell K., 1998. "Testing the validity of responses to contingent valuation questioning," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 42(2), June.
  10. Morten Mørkbak & Tove Christensen & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen, 2010. "Choke Price Bias in Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(4), pages 537-551, April.
  11. Stephane Hess & John Rose, 2009. "Should Reference Alternatives in Pivot Design SC Surveys be Treated Differently?," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 297-317, March.
  12. Robert Johnston, 2007. "Choice experiments, site similarity and benefits transfer," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(3), pages 331-351, November.
  13. John List & Michael Taylor & Paramita Sinha, 2006. "Using choice experiments to value non-market goods and services: Evidence from field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00278, The Field Experiments Website.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:55:y:2011:i:3:p:374-392. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.