IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Environmental valuation, ecosystem services and aquatic species

  • Kataria, Mitesh

The thesis consists of an introduction and four articles that can be read independently of each other. The common topic is environmental valuation and cost-benefit analysis. The applications relates to the growing concern of invasive species, and to waterpower externalities. In broad terms, all of the articles relates to water management. Article 1: "A Cost-Benefit analysis of introducing a non-native species: the case of signal crayfish in Sweden", assesses the economic impact of introducing the signal crayfish into a Swedish lake. Two scenarios are set up and compared. The first one assumes that there is no introduction of signal crayfish, so that the noble crayfish is preserved. In the second scenario, the signal crayfish is introduced, which immediately wipes out the entire stock of noble crayfish. The values of noble- and signal crayfish populations are measured as present values of their net future revenues. The values are than compared and net benefit of an introduction is calculated. The result indicate that net benefit of an introduction is positive if the intrinsic growth rate or the carrying capacity of the noble crayfish is below 40 % that of the signal crayfish. Article 2: "Assessing management options for weed control with demanders and non-demanders in a choice experiment", estimates the benefits of having a weed management program for a lake in Sweden, and then compares them with corresponding costs. The policy recommendation from a simple cost-benefit rule is to control the weed at some specific sites of the lake. This paper also suggest how to distinguish those that have a positive WTP for at least one of the attributes (demanders) from those that have zero WTP for all attributes (non-demanders). The advantage of the suggested approach is that it facilitates to more clearly distinguish between conditional and unconditional willingness to pay. The suggested approach could also overcome some of the problems in the literature with negative welfare measures. Article 3: "Assessing transfer errors in the benefit transfer method: An application of invasive weed management using choice experiment", tests the accuracy of transferring benefits of a weed management program from one lake to another using choice experiment. The transfer errors are assessed and the convergent validity hypothesis is tested. Estimating the accuracy of benefit transfer for weed management is policy relevant as there are a number of lakes in Sweden infested with the water weed. The convergent validity was rejected for three out of five welfare estimates with a ten per cent significance level. Article 4: "Willingness to pay for environmental improvements in hydropower regulated rivers", assesses the benefits of environmental improvements along hydropower regulated rivers using choice experiments. Remedial measures that improve the conditions for fish, benthic invertebrates and river-margin vegetation were found to have a significant welfare increasing impact. The results can be of value for the implementation of the Water Framework Directives in Sweden, which aims to reform the use of all surface water and ground water in the member states.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://pub.epsilon.slu.se/1437/
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Economics in its series Department of Economics publications with number 1437.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:sua:ekonwp:1437
Contact details of provider: Postal: Box 7013, 750 07 UPPSALA
Phone: 018-67 1724
Fax: 018-67 3502
Web page: http://www.slu.se/ekonomi

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Kirchhoff, Stefanie & Colby, Bonnie G. & LaFrance, Jeffrey T., 1997. "Evaluating the Performance of Benefit Transfer: An Empirical Inquiry," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 75-93, May.
  2. Peter Martinsson, 2002. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper sp200205t2, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised May 2002.
  3. Hensher, David A., 1997. "A practical approach to identifying the market potential for high speed rail: A case study in the Sydney-Canberra corridor," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 431-446, November.
  4. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria, 2008. "Assessing Management Options for Weed Control with Demanders and Non-Demanders in a Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(3), pages 517-528.
  5. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
  6. Bockstael, N E & McConnell, K E, 1993. "Public Goods as Characteristics of Non-market Commodities," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(420), pages 1244-57, September.
  7. Haab, Timothy C. & McConnell, Kenneth E., 1997. "Referendum Models and Negative Willingness to Pay: Alternative Solutions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 251-270, February.
  8. Willig, Robert D, 1976. "Consumer's Surplus without Apology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(4), pages 589-97, September.
  9. Lovell, Sabrina J. & Stone, Susan F. & Fernandez, Linda, 2006. "The Economic Impacts of Aquatic Invasive Species: A Review of the Literature," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 35(1), April.
  10. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
  11. Kenneth E. Train & Daniel L. McFadden & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 1987. "The Demand for Local Telephone Service: A Fully Discrete Model of Residential Calling Patterns and Service Choices," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 18(1), pages 109-123, Spring.
  12. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 1998. "Referendum Models and Economic Values: Theoretical, Intuitive, and Practical Bounds on Willingness to Pay," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(2), pages 216-229.
  13. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132.
  14. Pimentel, David & Zuniga, Rodolfo & Morrison, Doug, 2005. "Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 273-288, February.
  15. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294.
  16. Robert W. Hahn & Richard L. Schmalensee & Roger Noll & Robert Stavins & Lester B. Lave & George C. Eads & Milton Russell & V. Kerry Smith & Maureen L. Cropper & Paul R. Portney & Kenneth J. Arrow, 1996. "Benefit-Cost Analysis in Environmental, Health, and Safety Regulation," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 51790, 5.
  17. Lee, Bosang, 1999. "Calling Patterns and Usage of Residential Toll Service under Self-Selecting Tariffs," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 45-81, July.
  18. Perrings, Charles, 2005. "Mitigation and adaptation strategies for the control of biological invasions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 315-325, February.
  19. Bhat, Chandra R., 1995. "A heteroscedastic extreme value model of intercity travel mode choice," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 471-483, December.
  20. Mark Morrison & Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey & Jordan Louviere, 2002. "Choice Modeling and Tests of Benefit Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(1), pages 161-170.
  21. Mark Sagoff, 1994. "Should Preferences Count?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 70(2), pages 127-144.
  22. Nick Hanley & Sergio Colombo & Dugald Tinch & Andrew Black & Ashar Aftab, 2006. "Estimating the benefits of water quality improvements under the Water Framework Directive: are benefits transferable?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 33(3), pages 391-413, September.
  23. Polinsky, A Mitchell, 1972. "Probabilistic Compensation Criteria," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 86(3), pages 407-25, August.
  24. Roger H. von Haefen & D. Matthew Massey & Wiktor L. Adamowicz, 2005. "Serial Nonparticipation in Repeated Discrete Choice Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(4), pages 1061-1076.
  25. repec:reg:rpubli:98 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sua:ekonwp:1437. 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: (Alejandro Engelmann)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.