IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Benefit Transfer for Environmental Improvements in Coastal Areas: General vs. Specific Models




In this study, we used choice experiment data to analyze the accuracy of benefit transfer (BT) between two case study areas in Sweden for attributes relevant to the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive and special consideration zones in marine areas. The accuracy and reliability of a BT based on a model including only easily available socioeconomic information is similar to the accuracy of a BT based on a model that gives the best statistical fit, but requires time-consuming data collection. Further, the former model has almost as good a fit as the latter. The BT error varies significantly across the attributes, regardless of which model is used. The results are inconclusive as to whether socioeconomic adjustments improve transfer or not.

Suggested Citation

  • Östberg, Katarina & Håkansson, Cecilia & Hasselström, Linus & Bostedt, Göran, 2011. "Benefit Transfer for Environmental Improvements in Coastal Areas: General vs. Specific Models," CERE Working Papers 2011:2, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:slucer:2011_002

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no


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

    Cited by:

    1. Kinell, Gerda & Söderqvist, Tore & Elmgren, Ragnar & Walve, Jacob & Franzén, Frida, 2012. "Cost-Benefit Analysis in a Framework of Stakeholder Involvement and Integrated Coastal Zone Modeling," CERE Working Papers 2012:1, CERE - the Center for Environmental and Resource Economics.

    More about this item


    Choice experiments; Benefits transfer; Water Framework Directive;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:hhs:slucer:2011_002. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Mona Bonta Bergman (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.