IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/201302250800001050.html

How much is clean water worth? Valuing water quality improvement using a meta analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Ge, Jiaqi
  • Kling, Catherine L.
  • Herriges, Joseph A.

Abstract

This paper has developed and estimated a valuation model for water quality improvement. After reviewing more than 100 studies, we set up a data set that has 332 valuations from 38 distinct studies. Based on the data set, we estimate a linear valuation model, which can then be used to predict the mean willingness to pay by households living in a given region for water quality improvement at a given site. For instance, the willingness to pay by a typical household living in the state of Iowa for a water quality increase from 40 to 50 (out of 100) at a one-square-mile aquatic site, like Iowa's Spirit Lake, is predicted to be $137.52. The valuation model developed in this paper is particularly convenient when we want to evaluate the benefit of a project that aims at improving water quality, but a primary study is too costly or time consuming.

Suggested Citation

  • Ge, Jiaqi & Kling, Catherine L. & Herriges, Joseph A., 2013. "How much is clean water worth? Valuing water quality improvement using a meta analysis," ISU General Staff Papers 201302250800001050, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201302250800001050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/d5b135a9-8e7e-4072-b173-c5f452b713f7/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Reynaud, Arnaud & Lanzanova, Denis, 2017. "A Global Meta-Analysis of the Value of Ecosystem Services Provided by Lakes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 184-194.
    2. Dennis Guignet & Matthew T. Heberling & Michael Papenfus & Olivia Griot, 2022. "Property Values, Water Quality, and Benefit Transfer: A Nationwide Meta-analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 98(2), pages 191-218.
    3. Choi, Dong Soon & Ready, Richard, 2021. "Measuring benefits from spatially-explicit surface water quality improvements: The roles of distance, scope, scale, and size," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    4. Hyun No Kim, 2021. "Economic Evaluation of Water Resource Management in South Korea Based on Benefit–Cost Analysis," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, April.
    5. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf, 2018. "How are Scope and Adding up Relevant for Benefits Transfer?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(3), pages 483-502, March.
    6. Heather Klemick & Charles Griffiths & Dennis Guignet & Patrick Walsh, 2018. "Improving Water Quality in an Iconic Estuary: An Internal Meta-analysis of Property Value Impacts Around the Chesapeake Bay," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(2), pages 265-292, February.
    7. Klemick, Heather & Griffiths, Charles & Guignet, Dennis & Walsh, Patrick, 2015. "Explaining Variation in the Value of Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Using Internal Meta-analysis," National Center for Environmental Economics-NCEE Working Papers 280927, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    8. Francesco Jacopo Pintus, 2023. "Valuing drinking water quality after a PFAS contamination event: results from a meta-analysis benefit transfer," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0308, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    9. Wolf, David & Klaiber, H. Allen, 2017. "Bloom and bust: Toxic algae's impact on nearby property values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 209-221.
    10. repec:isu:genstf:201501010800005583 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Ureta, J. Carl & Motallebi, Marzieh & Vassalos, Michael & Seagle, Steven & Baldwin, Robert, 2022. "Estimating residents' WTP for ecosystem services improvement in a payments for ecosystem services (PES) program: A choice experiment approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).

    More about this item

    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:isu:genstf:201302250800001050. 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: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.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.