Introduction: Benefit Transfer of Environmental and Resource Values

  • John RolfeEmail author
  • Robert J. Johnston
  • Randall S. Rosenberger
  • Roy Brouwer
Part of the The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources book series (ENGO, volume 14)


The goal of this handbook is to provide comprehensive coverage of contemporary methods, issues and challenges in benefit transfer, addressing topics relevant to both researchers and practitioners. This initial chapter provides an overview of benefit transfer and establishes the background for the handbook. It begins with a brief summary of benefit transfer methods and applications, including some of the key challenges faced by researchers and analysts. This sets the context for the remainder of the book. The chapter then provides background on the motivations for using benefit transfer and the historical development of transfer methods. These motivations, and the many of the controversies and challenges surrounding the development of benefit transfer, are summarized into three themes: pragmatic need, accuracy and validity . The chapter concludes with a summary of the handbook structure and a brief discussion about the potential for future development of benefit transfer.


Benefit transfer Value transfer Valuation Reliability Validity 


  1. Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P. R., Leamer, E. E., Radner, R., & Schuman, H. (1993). Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register, 58, 4601–4614.Google Scholar
  2. Atkinson, S., Crocker, T., & Shogren, J. (1992). Bayesian exchangeability, benefit transfer and research efficiency. Water Resources Research, 28, 715–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bateman, I. J., Brouwer, R., Ferrini, S., Schaafsma, M., Barton, D. N., Dubgaard, A., et al. (2011). Making benefit transfers work: Deriving and testing principles for value transfers for similar and dissimilar sites using a case study of the non-market benefits of water quality improvements across Europe. Environmental and Resource Economics, 50, 365–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett, J. (2006). Introduction. In J. Rolfe & J. Bennett (Eds.), Choice modelling and the transfer of environmental values (pp. 1–9). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  5. Boyle, K., & Bergstrom, J. (1992). Benefit transfer studies: Myths, pragmatism and idealism. Water Resources Research, 28, 657–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brookshire, D., & Neill, H. (1992). Benefit transfers: Conceptual and ethical issues. Water Resources Research, 28, 651–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carson, R. (2012). Contingent valuation: A practical alternative when prices aren’t available. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26, 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Champ, P. A., Boyle, K. J., & Brown, T. C. (Eds.). (2003). A primer on nonmarket valuation. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Desvousges, W., Naughton, M., & Parsons, G. (1992). Benefit transfer: Conceptual problems in estimating water quality benefits using existing studies. Water Resources Research, 28, 675–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Freeman, A. M. III. (1984). On the tactics of benefit estimation under executive order 12291. In V. K. Smith (Ed.), Environmental policy under Reagan’s executive order: The role of benefit cost analysis (pp. 167–186). Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  11. Freeman, A. M. III., Herriges, J. A., & Kling, C. L. (2014). The measurement of environmental and resource values: Theory and methods. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  12. Hanley, N., & Barbier, E. B. (2009). Pricing nature: Cost-benefit analysis and environmental policy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  13. Johnston, J., & Rosenberger, R. (2010). Methods, trends and controversies in contemporary benefit transfer. Journal of Economic Surveys, 24, 479–510.Google Scholar
  14. Kling, C. L., Phaneuf, D. J., & Zhao, J. (2012). From Exxon to BP: Has some number become better than no number? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26, 3–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Luken, R., Johnson, F., & Kibler, V. (1992). Benefits and costs of pulp and paper effluent controls under the Clean-Water-Act. Water Resources Research, 28, 665–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Smith, V. K., van Houtven, G., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2002). Benefit transfer via preference calibration: “Prudential algebra” for policy. Land Economics, 78, 132–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Rolfe
    • 1
    Email author
  • Robert J. Johnston
    • 2
  • Randall S. Rosenberger
    • 3
  • Roy Brouwer
    • 4
  1. 1.School of Business and LawCQUniversityRockhamptonAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Economics and George Perkins Marsh InstituteClark UniversityWorcesterUSA
  3. 3.Department of Forest Ecosystems and SocietyOregon State UniversityCorvallisUSA
  4. 4.Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental StudiesVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations