IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eep/report/rr1999121.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Water Quality Improvements: A Contingent Valuation Study of The Chao Phraya River

Author

Listed:
  • Churai Tapvong

    (School of Economics Sukhothai Thammathirat OpenUniversity)

  • Jittapatr Kruavan

    (School of Economics Sukhothai Thammathirat OpenUniversity)

Abstract

In recent years, environmental degradation has become an increasing concern in Thailand. Of the environmental problems and challenges facing the Kingdom, water pollution is one of the most serious. Among the rivers in Thailand, the Chao Phraya River is the most contaminated. Recently, the Pollution Control Department (1997) reported that the levels of dissolved oxygen in the lower reaches of the Chao Phraya River have been close to zero since 1990, and that by the year 2000, the "King's River" may well be "dead". The finality of this observation is not just an academic hyperbole: so reduced is the level of dissolved oxygen in the lower reaches of the Chao Phraya River that most aquatic life find it impossible to survive. Water, once a "free good", is becoming increasingly scarce and therefore, valuable. But because water is still regarded and used as a free good, there are distortions in the pricing of environmental quality - so-called "market failures". The general failure to price water and maintenance of water quality - or at least to price it accurately - has led to widespread problems of water pollution in the Chao Phraya River.

Suggested Citation

  • Churai Tapvong & Jittapatr Kruavan, 1999. "Water Quality Improvements: A Contingent Valuation Study of The Chao Phraya River," EEPSEA Research Report rr1999121, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Dec 1999.
    • Handle: RePEc:eep:report:rr1999121
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.eepsea.org/pub/rr/10536135510ACF23D.pdf
    File Function: First version, 1999
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Bishop, Richard C. & Heberlein, Thomas A., 1979. "Measuring Values Of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," 1979 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, Pullman, Washington 277818, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tran Huu Tuan & Henrik Lindhjem, 2008. "Meta-analysis of nature conservation values in Asia & Oceania: Data heterogeneity and benefit transfer issues," EEPSEA Research Report rr2008072, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Jul 2008.
    2. Jin Jianjun, 2008. "Economic Valuation of Black-faced Spoonbill Conservation in Macao," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper tp200801t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Jan 2008.
    3. Patricia Silva & Stefano Pagiola, 2005. "A Review of the Valuation of Environmental Costs and Benefits in World Bank Projects," Others 0502007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Ojeda, Monica Ilija & Mayer, Alex S. & Solomon, Barry D., 2008. "Economic valuation of environmental services sustained by water flows in the Yaqui River Delta," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 155-166, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    2. Bernard Ruffieux & Anne Rozan & Stéphane Robin, 2008. "Mesurer les préférences du consommateur pour orienter les décisions des pouvoirs publics : l'apport de la méthode expérimentale," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 182(1), pages 113-127.
    3. Veisten, Knut, 2007. "Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 204-232, April.
    4. Heberlein, Thomas A. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Bishop, Richard C. & Schaeffer, Nora C., 2001. "Rethinking the Scope Test as a Criterion for Validity in Contingent Valuation," Western Region Archives 321695, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    5. 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.
    6. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    7. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Oliver Froer, 2003. "Using Stated Preference Methods for Biodiversity Valuation. A critical analysis," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 217/2003, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
    9. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    10. Marjainé, Szerényi Zsuzsanna, 2001. "A természeti erőforrások pénzbeli értékelése [Monetary valuation of natural resources]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 114-129.
    11. Larson, Douglas M. & Loomis, John B. & Chien, Yu-Lan, 1993. "Combining Behavioral and Conversational Approaches To Value Amenities: An Application to Gray Whale Population Enhancement," 1993 Annual Meeting, August 1-4, Orlando, Florida 271404, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    12. Richard Bennett & Douglas Larson, 1996. "Contingent Valuation Of The Perceived Benefits Of Farm Animal Welfare Legislation: An Exploratory Survey," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1‐4), pages 224-235, January.
    13. Lopez-Becerra, E.I. & Alcon, F., 2021. "Social desirability bias in the environmental economic valuation: An inferred valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    14. Neil B. Niman, 1995. "Picking Winners And Losers In The Global Technology Race," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 13(3), pages 77-87, July.
    15. François Bonnieux & Philippe Le Goffe & Dominique Vermersch, 1995. "La méthode d'évaluation contingente : application à la qualité des eaux littorales," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 117(1), pages 89-106.
    16. Langford, Ian H. & Bateman, Ian J., 1996. "Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 265-267, December.
    17. 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.
    18. Bromley, Daniel W., 1995. "Property rights and natural resource damage assessments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 129-135, August.
    19. Carlsson, Fredrik & Daruvala, Dinky & Jaldell, Henrik, 2008. "Do you do what you say or do you do what you say others do?," Working Papers in Economics 309, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    20. Roland Menges & Carsten Schroeder & Stefan Traub, 2005. "Altruism, Warm Glow and the Willingness-to-Donate for Green Electricity: An Artefactual Field Experiment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(4), pages 431-458, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Water quality; Thailand;

    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:eep:report:rr1999121. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Arief Anshory yusuf (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eepsesg.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.