How much are people willing to pay for silence? A contingent valuation study
Despite its major importance in the urban environment, the problem of noise has received little attention from environmental economists. In this paper the economic value of a noise reduction programme is evaluated. The chosen technique is contingent valuation using the recently proposed one and one-half bound question format. This new question format reduces the potential for response bias in multiple bound formats such as the double bound model while maintaining much of its efficiency. Through the estimations it is found that urban residents generally value noise negatively, that is, households are willing to pay for a noise reduction. In particular, it is found that households are willing to pay approximately four euros per decibel per year. A further finding is that interviewees show scope sensitivity; that is, households display a different willingness to pay for different degrees of noise reduction, most are willing to pay more for larger decreases in the level of disturbance from noise.
Volume (Year): 37 (2005)
Issue (Month): 11 ()
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RAEC20|
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.:
- Kanninen Barbara J., 1995. "Bias in Discrete Response Contingent Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 114-125, January.
- 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.
- O'Byrne, Patricia Habuda & Nelson, Jon P. & Seneca, Joseph J., 1985. "Housing values, census estimates, disequilibrium, and the environmental cost of airport noise: A case study of Atlanta," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 169-178, June.
- Joseph C. Cooper & Michael Hanemann & Giovanni Signorello, 2002. "One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 742-750, November.
- Cameron Trudy Ann & Quiggin John, 1994.
"Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up Questionnaire,"
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,
Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 218-234, November.
- Trudy Ann Cameron & John Quiggin, 1992. "Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data From a "Dichotomous Choice with Follow-Up" Questionnaire," UCLA Economics Working Papers 653, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Carson, R.T. & Mitchell, R.C. & Hanemann, W.M. & Kopp, R.J. & Presser, S. & Ruud, P.A., 1992. "A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill," MPRA Paper 6984, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Riccardo Scarpa & Kenneth Willis & Guy Garrod, 2001. "Estimating Benefits for Effective Enforcement of Speed Reduction from Dichotomous-Choice CV," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(4), pages 281-304, December.
- Guy D. Garrod & Riccardo Scarpa & Kenneth G. Willis, 2002. "Estimating the Benefits of Traffic Calming on Through Routes: A Choice Experiment Approach," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 36(2), pages 211-231, May. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)