IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/eenhrr/0918.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Public values for improved water security for domestic and environmental use

Author

Listed:
  • Jill Windle

    () (Centre for Environmental Management, Central Queensland University, Australia)

  • John Rolfe

    () (Faculty of Business and Informatics, Queensland University, Australia)

  • Roy Brouwer

    (Institute of Environmental Studies (IVM))

Abstract

Metrics for evaluating environmental trade-offs can be developed with varying levels of consistency across case study sites. A key issue is whether standard evaluation experiments can be conducted over multiple sites, or whether experiments have to be tailored to each case study application. To test how useful a consistent approach is, choice modeling (CM) has been used in a number of countries. Choice modeling assess the trade-offs households are prepared to make between water use restrictions, maintaining environmental conditions in waterways, and increased water costs. This research paper reports the results of the Queensland survey. The results show that it is not possible to downplay case study framing issues and that it is not appropriate to standardise applications across case studies that have different characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Jill Windle & John Rolfe & Roy Brouwer, 2009. "Public values for improved water security for domestic and environmental use," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0918, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  • Handle: RePEc:een:eenhrr:0918
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/pdf/EERH_RR18.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin van Bueren & Jeff Bennett, 2004. "Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes -super-," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-32, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    choice modelling; water; environment; framing;

    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:een:eenhrr:0918. 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: (CAP Web Team). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/asanuau.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.