Abstract: The literature estimating the economic value for water quality changes has grown considerably over the last 30 years, resulting in an expanded pool of information potentially available to support national and regional policy analysis. Using 131 willingness to pay estimates from 18 studies that use a similar definition of water quality, we performed a meta-regression analysis and found mixed results. We find that WTP varies in systematic and expected ways with respect to factors such as the size of the water quality changes, average household income, and use/nonuse characteristics of respondents. As a whole, we conclude that our meta-regression results provide a reasonable basis for estimating expected WTP values for defined changes in water quality. However, despite a large number of existing economic valuation studies, relatively few could be meaningfully combined through meta-analysis due to heterogeneity in the commodities being valued in the original studies. Based on these findings, we provide recommendations for future research, including suggestions regarding more standardized approaches for defining water quality and reporting information in valuation studies.
Keywords: Water quality valuation; Meta-analysis; Meta-regression analysis; Benefit transfer
JEL classification codes: Q2
by George Van Houtven 1, John Powers 2 and Subhrendu K. Pattanayak 1
1. RTI International, 3040 Cornwallis Road, P.O. Box 12194, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-2194, United States; Telphone: +1 919 541 7150
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, United States
Resource and Energy Economics via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
Volume 29, Issue 3; September, 2007; Pages 206-228
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2007.01.002
http://envirovaluation.org/htsrv/trackback.php/4805
No Comments/Trackbacks/Pingbacks for this post yet...
Environmental Valuation & Cost Benefit News covers legal, academic, and regulatory developments pertaining to the valuation of environmental amenities and disamenities, such as clean air, trees, parks, congestion, and noise. We apprise the reader about ways in which costs and benefits are measured, and the results of empirical studies. We hope that this information will allow public and private organizations to comprehend the risks and benefits of various actions, help disputants to resolve conflicts equitably and efficiently, and improve the quality of public policies. We will only discuss issues related to the empirical quantification of private and social costs and benefits and damages, and summarize information from daily newspapers, academic journals, legal publications, court decisions, professional newsletters commissioned studies, and on-line services. This newsletter is dedicated to the principal that all policies place values upon life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We believe that more information, explicit specification of assumptions, and rigorous analysis can help our society to better meet these ends. This site will increasingly serve, in conjunction with others, as a valuation database. We will include a wide range of studies, including non-environmental reports, because omission of a factor effectively values it at zero, and biases decisions. Heavy traffic has caused several site crashes. We are attempting to correct these problems. Apologies for any inconvenience.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| << < | > >> | |||||
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| 31 | ||||||