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

A comparison of compensating surplus and budget reallocation with opportunity costs specified

  • Mark Morrison
  • Darla Hatton MacDonald
Registered author(s):

    The use of most nonmarket valuation techniques is predicated on respondents paying additional amounts of money for increased provision of a public good. However, in many circumstances this may not be appropriate. Treaty rights or the capacity of a government to raise and collect taxes in the context of a developing country may preclude the introduction of new taxes. Alternatively, there may be settings where respondents reject the notion of an additional payment and a different approach to estimating nonmarket values is needed. This article demonstrates a methodology for estimating compensating budget reallocation, which is the amount of expenditure on other public goods that respondents are willing to forego for the government to provide more of another public good. One of the main contributions of this article is a demonstration of how to improve the specification of the opportunity costs of budget reallocations. Second, using choice modelling for the estimation of budget reallocations is compared with the standard approach of estimating compensating surplus. The two approaches produce aggregate results that are of a similar magnitude, however the relative importance of the environmental attributes differs. We also investigate the similarity of value estimates across income groups, and similar to Swallow and McGonagle (2006), we find that budget reallocations produce a different set of preferences for lower income earners.

    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.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    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.

    Article provided by Taylor & Francis Journals in its journal Applied Economics.

    Volume (Year): 43 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 30 ()
    Pages: 4677-4688

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:43:y:2011:i:30:p:4677-4688
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    Order Information: Web:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    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:taf:applec:v:43:y:2011:i:30:p:4677-4688. 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: (Michael McNulty)

    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.