IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare08/6026.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Framework For The Economic Evaluation Of Environmental Science

Author

Listed:
  • Kutschukian, Jean-Marc

Abstract

Economists, especially agricultural economists, have undertaken extensive analysis of the gains of technological-based scientific research. This is in stark contrast to the efforts undertaken to understand the economic effects of environmental scientific research. Economic evaluation of environmental science is important because knowledge-based government agencies are regularly required to justify their research expenditure and set clear priorities for their research programmes. This paper addresses the gap in the literature by offering a general framework for evaluating environmental scientific research. The paper is structured around two themes central to appraisals of environmental research: (a) the non-market nature of environmental outcomes; and (b) the pathways to achieve these outcomes. Some of the more important and unique issues addressed include the links between the natural systems being researched, the benefits in terms of resulting goods and services, and their subsequent values, as well as the factors influencing the overall contribution research makes to environmental decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Kutschukian, Jean-Marc, 2008. "A Framework For The Economic Evaluation Of Environmental Science," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 6026, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare08:6026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/6026
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Vincent H. Smith & Philip G. Pardey, 1997. "Sizing Up Social Science Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1530-1533.
    3. David Zilberman & Amir Heiman, 1997. "The Value of Economic Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1539-1544.
    4. Arrow, Kenneth J. & Cropper, Maureen L. & Eads, George C. & Hahn, Robert W. & Lave, Lester B. & Noll, Roger G. & Portney, Paul R. & Russell, Milson & Schmalensee, Richard & Smith, V. Kerry & Stavins, , 1997. "Is there a role for benefit-cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(02), pages 195-221, May.
    5. Robert W. Hahn & Richard L. Schmalensee & Roger Noll & Robert Stavins & Lester B. Lave & George C. Eads & Milton Russell & V. Kerry Smith & Maureen L. Cropper & Paul R. Portney & Kenneth J. Arrow, 1996. "Benefit-Cost Analysis in Environmental, Health, and Safety Regulation," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 51790.
    6. Alston, Julian M. & Wyatt, T. J. & Pardey, Philip G. & Marra, Michele C. & Chan-Kang, Connie, 2000. "A meta-analysis of rates of return to agricultural R & D: ex pede Herculem?," Research reports 113, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. repec:reg:rpubli:98 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Norgaard, Richard B., 1989. "The case for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 37-57, February.
    9. Arrow, Kenneth J & Lind, Robert C, 1970. "Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment Decisions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 364-378, June.
    10. Hahn, Robert W., 2000. "The Impact of Economics on Environmental Policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 375-399, May.
    11. Bromley, Daniel W., 2007. "Environmental regulations and the problem of sustainability: Moving beyond "market failure"," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 676-683, September.
    12. Zvi Griliches, 1958. "Research Costs and Social Returns: Hybrid Corn and Related Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 66, pages 419-419.
    13. R. K. Lindner & F. G. Jarrett, 1978. "Supply Shifts and the Size of Research Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 60(1), pages 48-58.
    14. Tietenberg, T H, 1990. "Economic Instruments for Environmental Regulation," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 17-33, Spring.
    15. Sagoff, M., 1998. "Aggregation and deliberation in valuing environmental public goods:: A look beyond contingent pricing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2-3), pages 213-230, February.
    16. Schimmelpfennig, David E. & Norton, George W., 2000. "What Value Is Agricultural Economics Research?," 2000 Annual meeting, July 30-August 2, Tampa, FL 21773, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. C. Peter Timmer, 1997. "Valuing Social Science Research and Policy Analysis," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1545-1550.
    18. Kilpatrick, Henry E., Jr., 1998. "Some useful methods for measuring the benefits of social science research:," Impact assessments 5, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. George W. Norton & Jeffrey Alwang, 1997. "Measuring the Benefits of Policy Research," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1534-1538.
    20. David E. Schimmelpfennig & George W. Norton, 2003. "What is the Value of Agricultural Economics Research?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(1), pages 81-94.
    21. Willig, Robert D, 1976. "Consumer's Surplus without Apology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(4), pages 589-597, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aare08:6026. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service 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.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.