Advertisement

Benefit Transfer

  • Randall S. Rosenberger
  • John B. Loomis
Part of the The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources book series (ENGO, volume 3)

Abstract

Previous chapters of this book have described how to conduct an original nonmarket valuation study. However, original research can be time-consuming and expensive. What can you do if your time and/or funding prevents you from conducting an original study? For example, suppose the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) is deliberating on whether to grant a permit for a coal mine. Suppose a decision must be made within 60 days. The agency wants to balance the benefits derived from extracting the coal with the environmental damages caused by mining. One impact is the loss of recreational fishing downstream from the mining site. WVDEP wants to know the value of fishing on this stream. How could you provide this information? Even if WVDEP had the necessary funds to conduct a primary study, obviously there is not enough time. In this chapter, we describe how existing data or summary statistics from previous research can be used in different decision contexts. We use the term benefit transfer to describe the use of information from previous research to inform decisions.

Keywords

Original Research Contingent Valuation Water Resource Research Policy Context Benefit Transfer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adamowicz, W. L., Fletcher, J. J., and Graham-Tomasi, T. 1989. Functional Form and the Statistical Properties of Welfare Measures. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71(2):414–421.Google Scholar
  2. Bateman, I. J., A. A. Lovett, and J.S. Brainard. 1999. Developing a Methodology for Benefit Transfers Using Geographical Information Systems: Modeling Demand for Woodland Recreation. Regional Studies 33(3):191–205.Google Scholar
  3. Bergland, O., K. Magnussen, and S. Navrud. 1995. Benefit Transfer: Testing for Accuracy and Reliability. Discussion Paper #D-03/1995. Norway: Dept. of Economics and Social Sciences. 21p.Google Scholar
  4. Berstrom, J.C. 1990. Concepts and Measures of the Economic Value of Environmental Quality: A Review. Journal of Environmental Management 31(3):215–228.Google Scholar
  5. Boyle, K. J., and J. C. Bergstrom. 1992. Benefit Transfer Studies: Myths, Pragmatism, and Idealism. Water Resources Research 28(3):657–663.Google Scholar
  6. Boyle, K., G. Poe, and J. Bergstrom. 1994. What Do We Know about Groundwater Values?: Preliminary Implications from a Meta Analysis of Contingent-Valuation Studies. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76(Dec):1055–1061.Google Scholar
  7. Brouwer, R. 2000. Environmental Value Transfer: State of the Art and Future Prospects. Ecological Economics 32(1):137–152.Google Scholar
  8. Brouwer, R., and F. A. Spaninks. 1999. The Validity of Environmental Benefits Transfer: Further Empirical Testing. Environmental and Resource Economics 14:95–117.Google Scholar
  9. Carson, R. T., J. L. Wright, N. Carson, A. Alberini, and N. Flores. 1994. A Bibliography of Contingent Valuation Studies and Papers. California Natural Resources Damage Assessment, Inc.Google Scholar
  10. Desvousges, W. H., F. R. Johnson, and H. S. Banzhaf. 1998. Environmental Policy Analysis with Limited Information: Principles and Applications of the Transfer Method. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar. 244 p.Google Scholar
  11. Downing, M., and T. Ozuna Jr. 1996. Testing the Reliability of the Benefit Function Transfer Approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30(3):316–322.Google Scholar
  12. Eade, J. D. O., and D. Moran. 1996. Spatial Economic Valuation: Benefits Transfer Using Geographical Information Systems. Journal of Environmental Management 48(2):97–110.Google Scholar
  13. Environment Canada. 1998. Environmental Valuation Resource Inventory homepage. Available: www.evri.ec.gc.ca/evri.Google Scholar
  14. Espey, M., J. Espey, and W. D. Shaw. 1997. Price Elasticity of Residential Demand for Water: A Meta-analysis. Water Resources Research 33(Jun):1369–1374.Google Scholar
  15. Feather, P., and D. Hellerstein. 1997. Calibrating Benefit Function Transfer to Assess the Conservation Reserve Program. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79(1):151–162.Google Scholar
  16. Fix, P., and J. Loomis. 1998. Comparing the Economic Value of Mountain Biking Estimated Using Revealed and Stated Preference. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 41(2):227–236.Google Scholar
  17. Freeman, A. M., III. 1984. On the Tactics of Benefit Estimation under Executive Order 12291. In Environmental Policy under Reagan’s Executive Order: TheRole of Benefit-cost Analysis. Edited by V. K. Smith. Chapel Hill, NC: The Univ. of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hanemann, M., J. Loomis, and B. Kanninen. 1991. Statistical Efficiency of Double Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73(4):1255–1263.Google Scholar
  19. Kirchhoff, S. 1998. Benefit Function Transfer Vs. Meta-analysis as Policy-making Tools: A Comparison. Paper presented at the workshop on Meta-Analysis and Benefit Transfer: State of the Art and Prospects. Amsterdam: Tinbergen Institute. April 6-7, 1998.Google Scholar
  20. Kirchhoff, S., B. G. Colby, and J. T. LaFrance. 1997. Evaluating the Performance of Benefit Transfer: an Empirical Inquiry. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 33(1):75–93.Google Scholar
  21. Krupnick, A., K. Harrison, E. Nickell, and M. Toman. 1996. The Value of Health Benefits from Ambient Air Quality Improvements in Central and Eastern Europe: An Exercise in Benefits Transfer. Environmental and Resource Economics 7(4):307–332.Google Scholar
  22. Layton, D., G. Brown, and M. Plummer. 1999. Valuing Multiple Programs to Improve Fish Populations. Davis, CA:.Dept. of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California.Google Scholar
  23. Loomis, J. 1992. The Evolution of a More Rigorous Approach to Benefit Transfer: Benefit Function Transfer. Water Resources Research 28(3):701–705.Google Scholar
  24. Loomis, J. 1996a. Measuring the Economic Benefits of Removing Dams and Restoring the Elwha River: Results of a Contingent Valuation Survey. Water Resources Research 32(2):441–447.Google Scholar
  25. Loomis, J. 1996b. How Large is the Extent of the Market for Public Goods: Evidence from a Nationwide Contingent Valuation Survey. Applied Economics 28:779–782.Google Scholar
  26. Loomis, J., B. Roach, F. Ward, and R. Ready. 1995. Testing the Transferability of Recreation Demand Models Across Regions: a Study of Corps of Engineers Reservoirs. Water Resources Research 31(3):721–730.Google Scholar
  27. Loomis, J. B., and D. White. 1996. Economic Benefits of Rare and Endangered Species: Summary and Meta-Analysis. Ecological Economics 18(2):197–206.Google Scholar
  28. Lovett, A. A., J. S. Brainard, and I. J. Bateman. 1997. Improving Benefit Transfer Demand Functions: a GIS Approach. Journal of Environmental Management 51(4):373–389.Google Scholar
  29. Morrison, M. and J. Bennett. 2000. Choice Modeling, Non-use Values Benefit Transfers. Economic Analysis and Policy 30(1):13–32.Google Scholar
  30. Mrozek, J. R., and L. O. Taylor. 2002. What Determines the Value of Life? A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 21(2):253–270.Google Scholar
  31. Olsen, D., J. Richards, and R. D. Scott. 1991. Existence and Sport Values for Doubling the Size of Columbia River Basin Salmon and Steelhead Runs. Rivers 2(1):44–56.Google Scholar
  32. Parsons, G. R., and M. J. Kealy. 1994. Benefits Transfer in a Random Utility Model of Recreation. Water Resources Research 30(8):2477–2484.Google Scholar
  33. Rosenberger, R. S., and J. B. Loomis. 2000a. Using Meta-analysis for Benefit Transfer: In-Sample Convergent Validity Tests of an Outdoor Recreation Database. Water Resources Research 36(4):1097–1107.Google Scholar
  34. Rosenberger, R. S., and J. B. Loomis. 2000b. Panel Stratification in Meta-analysis of Economic Studies: An Investigation of its Effects in the Recreation Valuation Literature. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 32(3):459–470.Google Scholar
  35. Rosenberger, R. S., and J. B. Loomis. 2001. Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Use Values: a Technical Document Supporting the Forest Service Strategic Plan (2000 Revision). General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-72. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. 59p.Google Scholar
  36. Rosenberger, R. S., and T. T. Phipps. 2001. Improving the Validity of Benefit Transfers: A Site Correspondence Model and Meta-Analysis Transfer. RRI Research Paper 2001-6. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University, Regional Research Institute and Division of Resource Management.Google Scholar
  37. Shrestha R. K., and J. B. Loomis. 2001. Testing a Meta-Analysis Model for Benefit Transfer in International Outdoor Recreation. Ecological Economics 39(1):67–83.Google Scholar
  38. Smith, V. K., and J. Huang. 1995. Can Markets Value Air Quality? A Meta-Analysis of Hedonic Property Value Models. Journal of Political Economy 103(Feb):209–227.Google Scholar
  39. Smith, V. K., and Y. Kaoru. 1990. Signals or Noise?: Explaining the Variation in Recreation Benefit Estimates. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 72(2):419–433.Google Scholar
  40. Smith, V. K., and L. Osborne. 1996. Do Contingent Valuation Estimates Pass a Scope Test?: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 31(Nov):287–301.Google Scholar
  41. Smith, V. K., G. van Houtven, and S. Pattanayak. 1999. Benefit Transfer as Preference Calibration. Discussion Paper 99-36. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future. 37p.Google Scholar
  42. Stanley, T. D. 2001. Wheat From Chaff: Meta-Analysis as Quantitative Literature Review. Journal of Economic Perspectives 15(3):131–150.Google Scholar
  43. Stanley, T. D., and S. B. Jarrell. 1989. Meta-regression Analysis: A Quantitative Method of Literature Surveys. Journal of Economic Surveys 3:161–170.Google Scholar
  44. Sturtevant, L. A., F. R. Johnson, and W. H. Desvousges. 1998. A Meta-Analysis of Recreational Fishing. Durham, NC: Triangle Economic Research. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
  45. U.S. EPA. 1997. The Benefits and Costs of the Clean Air Act, 1970 to 1990. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2000, June 13). Available: www.epa.gov/economics. 350p.Google Scholar
  46. U.S. Water Resources Council. 1973. Principles, Standards, and Procedures for Water and Related Land Resource Planning. Federal Register 38(174): Part III, 24,778-24,945.Google Scholar
  47. U.S. Water Resources Council. 1979. Procedures for Evaluation of National Economic Development (NED) Benefits and Costs in Water Resources Planning (Level c). Federal Register 44(243):72,892-72,976.Google Scholar
  48. U.S. Water Resources Council. 1983. Economic and Environmental Principles And Guidelines for Water and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. 137 p.Google Scholar
  49. VandenBerg, T. P., G. L. Poe, and J. R. Powell. 2001. Assessing the Accuracy of Benefits Transfers: Evidence from a Multi-site Contingent Valuation Study of Groundwater Quality. In The Economic Value of Water Quality. Edited by J. C. Bergstrom, K. J. Boyle, and G. L. Poe. Mass: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  50. Walsh, R. G., D. M. Johnson, and J. R. McKean. 1989. Issues in Nonmarket Valuation and Policy Application: A Retrospective Glance. Western Journal of Agricultural Economics 14(Jul):178–188.Google Scholar
  51. Walsh, R. G., D. M. Johnson, and J. R. McKean. 1992. Benefit Transfer of Outdoor Recreation Demand Studies: 1968-1988. Water Resources Research 28(3):707–713.Google Scholar
  52. Walsh, R. G., D. M. Johnson, and J. R. McKean. 1992. Special Section: Benefit Transfers. Water Resources Research 28(3):651–722.Google Scholar
  53. Woodward, R. T., and Y-S Wui. 2001. The Economic Value of Wetland Services: A Meta-Analysis. Ecological Economics 37(2):257–270.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Randall S. Rosenberger
    • 1
  • John B. Loomis
    • 2
  1. 1.Oregon State UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Colorado State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations