IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/36405.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Benefits transfer: conceptual problems in estimating water quality benefits using existing studies

Author

Listed:
  • Desvouges, William H.
  • Naughton, Michael C.
  • Parsons, George R.

Abstract

The Environmental Protection Agency has used existing studies to estimate the benefits of environmental improvements associated with several regulatory proposals The problems encountered in using existing studies to measure the benefits of water quality improvements are investigated in this paper. We propose criteria for selecting transfer studies and present a case study of a transfer. Our research indicates that although benefit transfer may offer promise, the fact that existing studies were not designed for transfer places severe limitations on the current effectiveness of transfer. Suggestions for future research are presented to address these limitations.

Suggested Citation

  • Desvouges, William H. & Naughton, Michael C. & Parsons, George R., 1992. "Benefits transfer: conceptual problems in estimating water quality benefits using existing studies," MPRA Paper 36405, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:36405
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/36405/1/MPRA_paper_36405.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/37464/1/MPRA_paper_37464.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/37465/3/MPRA_paper_37465.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/45028/3/MPRA_paper_37465.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. M. Bowker & John R. Stoll, 1988. "Use of Dichotomous Choice Nonmarket Methods to Value the Whooping Crane Resource," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 70(2), pages 372-381.
    2. Brookshire, David S, et al, 1982. "Valuing Public Goods: A Comparison of Survey and Hedonic Approaches," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 165-177, March.
    3. Brown, Gardner M, Jr & Mendelsohn, Robert, 1984. "The Hedonic Travel Cost Method," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 66(3), pages 427-433, August.
    4. Sellar, Christine & Chavas, Jean-Paul & Stoll, John R., 1986. "Specification of the logit model: The case of valuation of nonmarket goods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 382-390, December.
    5. V. Kerry Smith & William H. Desvousges & Ann Fisher, 1986. "A Comparison of Direct and Indirect Methods for Estimating Environmental Benefits," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 68(2), pages 280-290.
    6. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    7. V. Kerry Smith & Yoshiaki Kaoru, 1990. "Signals or Noise? Explaining the Variation in Recreation Benefit Estimates," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 419-433.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Benefits transfer; economics; nonmarket valuation;

    JEL classification:

    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q25 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Water

    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:pra:mprapa:36405. 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: (Joachim Winter) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.