Here is a link from 2017 with some background: BP has funded a book critical of the CVM. In that post I boasted that my review would be forthcoming in 2018. That boast was a commitment mechanism. I don't know if it would have worked unless Marit Kragt had not invited me to review the book for the Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics (thanks for the invitation!). Here is the link: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8489.12280.
Here are two other reviews:
I knew the second review was out but I refrained from reading it until today. Ferrini and Turner point out a major concern:
In total, the book presents 11 chapters co-authored by 21 researchers. The majority of the authors (16) are established consultants, and with the exception of chapter 6 by McFadden, all chapters are partially funded by BP Exploration & Production Inc., as reported in the book acknowledgement. The book’s strength lies in the clarity and simplicity of the argumentation presented, with many chapters that do not get bogged down in details and technicalities. However, the reader might worry that BP sponsorship influenced the authors’ objectivity in testing SP failures. The authors are professional researchers and experienced consultants and readers might wonder whether researchers’ expectation (or preference) in poor results impact studies lay out [sic?]. Economists can easily spot a potential moral hazard here!
It concludes like this:
The key meritocratic conclusion that this book suggests is that ‘experts’ are the best judge of many environmental damages and the general public is often not capable of expressing a meaningful value. However, SP valuation economists do not seem to have a place in the ‘experts’ set.
The book is open access here: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781786434685.xml
From the inbox:
Thank you! Your proof corrections for AJAR - AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND RESOURCE ECONOMICS : 12280 : Contingent Valuation of Environmental Goods: A Comprehensive Critique, by Daniel McFadden and Kenneth Train (Eds.). Published by Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017, 319 pages, ISBN: 978-1-78643-468-5, AU$210 have been received.
Hello,
John Whitehead is happy to report that he is no longer a part-time academic administrator (i.e., Economics Department Chair). If your email is regarding department business, please redirect it to our new chair Todd Cherry at cherrytl at appstate.edu.
John Whitehead is also happy to report that he is on Off-Campus Scholarly Assignment (i.e., sabbatical) in Fall 2017 and back to teaching, research and service in Spring 2018. If your email is about non-department business, he'll reply ASAP (or maybe not).
Thanks,
John Whitehead
P.S. For the remainder of his academic career, John Whitehead will refer to himself in the third person.
From Booklist:
Arguably, our adherence to the free-market model of economics has been among the major factors that have contributed to environmental deterioration. This is because environmental benefits are treated as public goods and are hence underpriced and undervalued. This work introduces readers to some of the factors that have caused that economic model to fail, some of the most prevalent solutions to address these failures, the challenges of these solutions, and some of their successes. Government regulation has traditionally been used to safeguard the interests of those not represented in the economic transaction. More recently, economists have tried to use corrective mechanisms to account for environmental costs. The result has been not only greater government regulation but also publicity campaigns to raise consumer awareness. This has led to international agreements (albeit applied unevenly) that consider the environment.
The entries in this book highlight areas where market-based economic models are inadequate and need to be supplemented to protect our natural resources. An introductory essay summarizes key economic concepts, environmental concerns, and some of the methods used to address these concerns. Entries related to basic economic concepts (specifically market failure and contemporary movements to correct for these failures) are well written. Entries that address valuation models require additional resources for readers who want a working background in these methods. Other entries profile the work of prominent environmental economists, events, and environmental policies. The work is well suited as a supplemental reference for introductory college-level environmental-economics courses.
— Muhammed Hassanali
The book’s introduction does a good job of describing both the historical and current issues and problems in this area of economic research. The literature review presented in the introduction is helpful in putting content to the problem at hand. The 19 papers presented in the book are subdivided in five sections, with the first section discussing theoretical and modeling issues and the mathematical and statistical tools needed to address the many empirical problems that arise in combining SP and RP data. The remaining sections focus on specific empirical problems, identified in the theory section, applied to many different research areas from travel cost models, demand for coastal management and beach erosion, to risk of exposure to pesticides. I was impressed with the scope of the empirical research, as it addresses and confronts many of the problems in applied research in this field. ...
The editors are to be commended for the structure, organization, and consistency across papers to the general research theme of the book. All economists should read at least the first section on modeling and measurement, but for environmental economists this book is a must for both research and teaching. A good read.
Warning: Spoiler Alert below the jump. If you haven't read 'Inferno' yet, don;t read below the jump, I'm going to give away the plot and ending.
I recently finished reading Dan Brown's (author of The Da Vinci Code) newest book 'Inferno.' As a casual reader of the book, I found it entertaining. Brown does his typical job of keeping the action moving, mixing in some interesting conspiracy theories, making me want to visit some cities I've never been to, and making it seem like being a college professor might be cool (although I have my doubts). I didn't enjoy it as much as The Da Vinci Code, which I didn't enjoy as much Angels and Demons, but still a good read (and I refuse to accept that The Lost Symbol was written).
But, as an economist, I found the book to be complete nonsense.
Why? Read below the jump (SPOILER ALERT AGAIN).
The premise of 'Inferno' is pretty simply, a Malthusian nut job is convinced the world is overpopulated, the end is near and everyone else (the World Health Organization, the Catholic Church, and anyone who has babies) is to blame and willing to turn a blind eye. To remedy this, the Malthusian nut job--who also happens to be a genetic engineer--decides to develop and unleash a 'plague' that will cut the world population by 1/3--which is apparently the right number of people to have around. The Malthusian nut job leaves clues as to his plan by referencing Dante's Inferno and some of the renaissance art work based on Dante and his works. Harvard Symbologist Tom Hanks, er Indiana Jones, er I mean Robert Langdon, has to unravel the clues while finding yet another hot chick to hook up with.It's good to be a Harvard symbologist.
They get all the chicks.
Anyway, I digress.
The twist in the book comes when it is revealed that the 'plague' that the nut job has developed and unleashed is not the Black Plague, which Professor Langdon has presumed all along, but rather a new genetically engineered vector virus (is that a real thing?) that will randomly alter the DNA of 1/3 of the population so that they are sterile and the resulting genetic role of the dice is hereditary. So, in the mind of the nut job (and presumably Dan Brown), the result will be a steady state in which 1/3 of the population is sterile, thus restricting the population to be 1/3 of what it is today. That's where the book ends (and yes, the 'plague' does get out and spreads around the world in less than a week).
So what problem does my inner economist have with 'Inferno'? Simple, Langdon, or Brown, or the nut job, or whoever you want to name, fails to account for the unintended consequences and resulting incentives of sterilizing 1/3 of the population. Right now, 99% of the human population (or some high number) wins the genetic lottery and is physically able to reproduce. If the supply of fertile humans is reduced by 1/3, the value of being fertile will increase. As a result, there will be societal pressure to increase the birthrate among those who win the new genetic lottery. The fertile class becomes more valuable to society, average birthrates for the fertile will increase and the infertile wil become a class of outcasts. Will this reproduction rebound effect be enough to outweigh the 1/3 decrease in the fertile population? I have no idea, but I can imagine religions and governments and the like developing policies, moral imperatives and social norms to encourage the fertile class to make more babies, thus creating a new Malthusian dilemma.
Sometimes being an economist ruins an otherwise enjoyable reading experience.
Sylvia Nasar, a longtime journalism professor and prize-winning author, says the university underpaid her from an endowment fund dedicated to provide her with compensation. Ms. Nasar, a former economics reporter for The New York Times, won acclaim for A Beautiful Mind, a 1998 biography of John F. Nash Jr., a Nobel Prize-winning mathematician who has suffered from paranoid schizophrenia. The book was later adapted into an Oscar-winning movie. Ms. Nasar has taught since 2000 at Columbia, which declined to comment on the dispute.
via chronicle.com
Have I told you what I thought of Nasar's lastest book? Didn't think so ...
I'm glad I read the book but I'll be danged if it didn't take me about 10 months to plow my way through it (2-3 pages each night). In contrast, I read The Hunger Games trilogy in about 4 hours. I had forgotten that Karl Marx never visited a factory, Joan Robinson was a Commie and Beatrice Potter (who?) had such a difficult love life. I was looking forward to much more on Marshall, much less on Beatrice Potter.
I'm using Tietenberg and Lewis, Environmental Economics and Policy, in my sophomore level environmental and resource economics class this semester. I haven't taught this course in awhile so it seems very fresh. As such, I had some fun with planning out the order of topics. Here it is:
Chapter 1 – Visions of the Future
Handout: The Market Forces of Supply and Demand
Chapter 2 – Valuing the Environment: Concepts
Chapter 4 – Property Rights, Externalities, and Environmental Problems
Chapter 5 – Sustainable Development: Defining the Concept
Chapter 7 – Natural Resource Economics: An Overview
Chapter 14 – Environmental Economics: An Overview
Chapter 8 – Energy
Chapter 15 – Stationary‐Source Local and Regional Air Pollution
Chapter 17 ‐ Transportation
Chapter 16 – Climate Change
Chapter 9 – Water
Chapter 11 – Agriculture
Chapter 18 – Water Pollution
Chapter 12 – Forests
Chapter 13 – Common Pool Resources: Fisheries
Chapter 10 ‐ Land
Chapter 19 – Managing Waste
Chapter 5 – Valuing the Environment: Methods
Tietenberg and Lewis first cover the basic welfare economics and intertemporal allocation of nonrenewable resources (under the guise of sustainable development). They then present a natural resource economics overview and march through natural resource topics. Next, they present an environmental economics overview, which is really a misnomer since all of the meat and potatoes of environmental policy analysis is contained in this chapter, and then march through environmental topics.
My rearrangement first covers the basic welfare economics and intertemporal allocation of nonrenewable resources. I pushed the valuation chapter 5 to the end of the course for two reasons: (1) I'm not sure my students really need to know this stuff in detail and (2) I just finished teaching it in my Fall semester benefit-cost analysis course and am a bit burned out by it (i.e., "hypothetical bias, blah, blah, blah"). Then I'll run through the natural resource economics overview chapter quickly and spend plenty of time on the environmental economics "overview".
My guess is that we'll be about halfway through the course at this point. The rest of the course is divided into four modules:
I tacked on valuation at the end just because at that point I'll bet I'm ready to talk about it (if not before), but I doubt that we'll be able to get that far.
That is the plan. Comments are most welcome, especially if you see a problem with how I've rearranged the chapters.
From the Edward Elgar email (Amazon link to the book):
Valuing Environment And Natural Resources
Kenneth G. Willis, Guy Garrod
Edited by Kenneth G. Willis, Emeritus Professor of Environmental Economics, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK and Guy Garrod, Reader in Environmental Economics, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UKMay 2012 1,440 pp Hardback
Series: Elgar Mini Series
Description
Over-exploitation of environment and natural resources is becoming increasingly widespread in the modern world. To combat this, environmental economists have attempted to value such resources in order to ensure that they are given due recognition in any ex ante appraisal, or ex post evaluation of projects or policies; and also to ensure that optimal levels of consumption are determined for the resource. This authoritative collection, along with an original introduction by the editors, brings together seminal papers published in the last three decades which demonstrate the application of a number of techniques employed to value a range of environmental and natural resources. It will be of immense value to students, scholars and practitioners with an interest in environmental affairs and natural resources.
Nothing against the editors (who have done a lot of work putting together a very comprehensive reading list), or the authors of the papers, they are all fine papers (although I have some quibbles -- many are not "seminal" -- and there is no random utility model in the travel cost section), but the price? $693. 78 reprinted journal articles from 1986 to 2011, 1440 pages, for $693. That is way above my choke price (the table of contents is below the jump).
There was a time when these EE collections were valuable. No one wants to schlep over to the library, purchase a copy card, search for hardbound copies of journals and stand in front of the copy machine for hours? When the ECU Library didn't have a journal, sometimes I would drive the Raleigh and find it at NCSU (and don't even ask me about when that journal issue couldn't be found or was checked out). But these days, you can spend a few hours and get all of the PDFs you'd like nestled snugly in your cloud folder so you can read it at work or at home.
So, where is the demand?
Let's say you are new to the field and want to read 50+ papers to get a good feel for the literature. Do you buy this book? No, you use it to reduce your search costs. You can Google the title, save the PDF and read at your leisure. If it takes all afternoon (i.e., four hours) and your time costs are $50 per hour (I'm assuming you don't have a graduate assistant) then the cost is only $200.
Do libraries buy these rapackaged volumes? I can't see how Edward Elgar would have the same sort of bundling power that Elsevier has. If so, that is a shame since the material is already in the library and their purchases are seriously constrained by state and other budget makers.
The only market that I see for this sort of book is someone who is very rich. But if you are very rich, with high opportunity costs, why would you be interested in two volumes of environmental valuation literature? Since your time is constrained you'd much rather read a review paper. Or, you could afford to hire a GA to compile the book for you.
Here, finally, is the table of contents (note that one of Tim's RUM papers is in the "marine" section):
PART I OPPORTUNITY COST
1. Michael Norton-Griffiths and Clive Southey (1995), ‘The Opportunity Costs of Biodiversity Conservation in Kenya’
2. Richard T. Carson, Phoebe Koundouri and Céline Nauges (2011), ‘Arsenic Mitigation in Bangladesh: A Household Labor Market Approach’
3. Claire A. Montgomery, Gardner M. Brown, Jr. and Darius M. Adams (1994), ‘The Marginal Costs of Species Preservation: The Northern Spotted Owl’
PART II TRAVEL-COST
4. KyeongAe Choe, Dale Whittington and Donald T. Lauria (1996), ‘The Economic Benefits of Surface Water Quality Improvements in Developing Countries: A Case Study of Davao, Philippines’
5. Daniel M. Hellerstein (1991), ‘Using Count Data Models in Travel Cost Analysis with Aggregate Data’
6. Nick Hanley, David Bell and Begona Alvarez-Farizo (2003), ‘Valuing the Benefits of Coastal Water Quality Improvements Using Contingent and Real Behaviour’
PART III HEDONIC PRICE
7. Maureen L. Cropper, Leland Deck, Nalin Kishor and Kenneth E. McConnell (1993), ‘Valuing Product Attributes Using Single Market Data: A Comparison of Hedonic and Discrete Choice Approaches’
8. Iain R. Lake, Andrew A. Lovett, Ian J. Bateman and Brett Day (2000), ‘Using GIS and Large-Scale Digital Data to Implement Hedonic Pricing Studies’
9. Brett Day, Ian Bateman and Iain Lake (2007), ‘Beyond Implicit Prices: Recovering Theoretically Consistent and Transferable Values for Noise Avoidance from a Hedonic Property Price Model’
PART IV CONTINGENT VALUATION
10. John P. Hoehn (1991), ‘Valuing the Multidimensional Impacts of Environmental Policy: Theory and Methods’
11. Richard T. Carson, Nicholas E. Flores and Norman F. Meade (2001), ‘Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence’
12. Ian J. Bateman, Matthew Cole, Philip Cooper, Stavros Georgiou, David Hadley and Gregory L. Poe (2004), ‘On Visible Choice Sets and Scope Sensitivity’
13. Nick Hanley, Felix Schläpfer and James Spurgeon (2003), ‘Aggregating the Benefits of Environmental Improvements: Distance-Decay Functions for Use and Non-Use Values’
14. Mark Morrison and Thomas C. Brown (2009), ‘Testing the Effectiveness of Certainty Scales, Cheap Talk, and Dissonance-Minimization in Reducing Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies’
15. John A. List (2004), ‘Substitutability, Experience, and the Value Disparity: Evidence from the Market Place’
16. Thomas Broberg (2010), ‘Income Treatment Effects in Contingent Valuation: The Case of the Swedish Predator Policy’
17. Henrik Lindhjem and Ståle Navrud (2009), ‘Asking for Individual or Household Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods? Implication for Aggregate Welfare Measures’
18. Ian J. Bateman, Brett H. Day, Stavros Georgiou and Iain Lake (2006), ‘The Aggregation of Environmental Benefit Values: Welfare Measures, Distance Decay and Total WTP’
19. Kent F. Kovacs and Douglas M. Larson (2008), ‘Identifying Individual Discount Rates and Valuing Public Open Space with Stated-Preference Models’
PART V CHOICE EXPERIMENTS
20. Kenneth E. Train (1998), ‘Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences over People’
21. Silvia Ferrini and Riccardo Scarpa (2007), ‘Designs with A-Priori Information for Nonmarket Valuation with Choice-Experiments: A Monte Carlo Study’
22. J.R. DeShazo and German Fermo (2002), ‘Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency’
23. Sebastián Caussade, Juan de Dios Ortuzar, Luis I. Rizzi and David A. Hensher (2005), ‘Assessing the Influence of Design Dimensions on Stated Choice Estimates’
24. Ian J. Bateman, Alistair Munro and Gregory L. Poe (2008), ‘Decoy Effects in Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation: Asymmetric Dominance’
25. Jürgen Meyerhoff and Ulf Liebe (2009), ‘Status Quo Effect in Choice Experiments: Empirical Evidence on Attitudes and Choice Task Complexity’
26. Joan Mogas, Pere Riera and Jeff Bennett (2006), ‘A Comparison of Contingent Valuation and Choice Modelling with Second-Order Interactions’
27. Roy Brouwer, Julia Martin-Ortega and Julio Berbel (2010), ‘Spatial Preference Heterogeneity: A Choice Experiment’
28. Joffre Swait, Wiktor Adamowicz and Martin van Bueren (2004), ‘Choice and Temporal Welfare Impacts: Incorporating History into Discrete Choice Models’
PART VI ANOMALIES, COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND OTHER ISSUES
29. Jason F. Shogren and Laura O. Taylor (2008), ‘On Behavioral-Environmental Economics’
30. Graham Loomes, Chris Starmer and Robert Sugden (2003), ‘Do Anomalies Disappear in Repeated Markets?’
31. Charles R. Plott and Kathryn Zeiler (2005), ‘The Willingness to Pay-Willingness to Accept Gap, the “Endowment Effect”, Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations’
32. John A. List (2002), ‘Preference Reversals of a Different Kind: The “More is Less” Phenomenon’
33. Susan Chilton, Judith Covey, Lorraine Hopkins, Michael Jones-Lee, Graham Loomes, Nick Pidgeon and Anne Spencer (2002), ‘Public Perceptions of Risk and Preference-Based Values of Safety’
34. Trudy Ann Cameron (2010), ‘Euthanizing the Value of a Statistical Life’
35. Simon Dietz and Giles Atkinson (2010), ‘The Equity-Efficiency Trade-off in Environmental Policy: Evidence from Stated Preferences’
36. John B. Loomis (2011), ‘Incorporating Distributional Issues into Benefit Cost Analysis: Why, How, and Two Empirical Examples Using Non-market Valuation’
37. Sergio Colombo and Nick Hanley (2008), ‘How Can We Reduce the Errors from Benefits Transfer? An Investigation Using the Choice Experiment Method’
Volume II
Acknowledgements
An introduction to both volumes by the editors appears in Volume I
PART I AGRI-ENVIRONMENTAL SCHEMES
1. Alan Randall (2002), ‘Valuing the Outputs of Multifunctional Agriculture’
2. Roy Brouwer and Louis H.G. Slangen (1998), ‘Contingent Valuation of the Public Benefits of Agricultural Wildlife Management: The Case of Dutch Peat Meadow Land’
3. Riccardo Scarpa, Eric S.K. Ruto, Patti Kristjanson, Maren Radeny, Adam G. Drucker and John E.O. Rege (2003), ‘Valuing Indigenous Cattle Breeds in Kenya: An Empirical Comparison of Stated and Revealed Preference Value Estimates’
4. Eric Ruto and Guy Garrod (2009), ‘Investigating Farmers’ Preferences for the Design of Agri-Enviroment Schemes: A Choice Experiment Approach’
PART II BIODIVERSITY
5. R. David Simpson, Roger A. Sedjo and John W. Reid (1996), ‘Valuing Biodiversity for Use in Pharmaceutical Research’
6. Paulo A.L.D. Nunes and Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh (2001), ‘Economic Valuation of Biodiversity: Sense or Nonsense?’
7. David Pearce (2007), ‘Do We Really Care About Biodiversity?’
PART III ECOSYSTEMS
8. Stephen C. Farber, Robert Costanza and Matthew A. Wilson (2002), ‘Economic and Ecological Concepts for Valuing Ecosystem Services’
9. Fredrik Carlsson, Peter Frykblom and Carolina Liljenstolpe (2003), ‘Valuing Wetland Attributes: An Application of Choice Experiments’
10. Luke M. Brander, Raymond J.G.M. Florax and Jan E. Vermaat (2006), ‘The Empirics of Wetland Valuation: A Comprehensive Summary and a Meta-Analysis of the Literature’
PART IV LANDSCAPE AND PARKS
11. Matías González and Carmelo J. León (2003), ‘Consumption Process and Multiple Valuation of Landscape Attributes’
12. Danny Campbell (2007), ‘Willingness to Pay for Rural Landscape Improvements: Combining Mixed Logit and Random-Effects Models’
13. K.G. Willis (2003), ‘Pricing Public Parks’
14. Robin Naidoo and Wiktor L. Adamowicz (2005), ‘Biodiversity and Nature-Based Tourism at Forest Reserves in Uganda’
PART V CULTURE
15. John Rolfe and Jill Windle (2003), ‘Valuing the Protection of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Sites’
16. Edward Morey and Kathleen Greer Rossmann (2003), ‘Using Stated-Preference Questions to Investigate Variations in Willingness to Pay for Preserving Marble Monuments: Classic Heterogeneity, Random Parameters, and Mixture Models’
17. Peter V. Schaeffer and Cecily Ahern Millerick (1991), ‘The Impact of Historic District Designation on Property Values: An Empirical Study’
18. David Maddison and Terry Foster (2003), ‘Valuing Congestion Costs in the British Museum’
PART VI AIR QUALITY
19. V. Kerry Smith and Ju-Chin Huang (1995), ‘Can Markets Value Air Quality? A Meta-Analysis of Hedonic Property Value Models’
20. Neil A. Powe and Kenneth G. Willis (2004), ‘Mortality and Morbidity Benefits of Air Pollution (SO2 and PM10) Absorption Attributable to Woodland in Britain’
21. Ari Rabl, Joseph V. Spadaro and Bob van der Zwaan (2005), ‘Uncertainty of Air Pollution Cost Estimates: To What Extent Does It Matter?’
PART VII WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
22. V. Kerry Smith and William H. Desvousges (1986), ‘The Value of Avoiding a Lulu: Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites’
23. Robin R. Jenkins, Kelly B. Maguire and Cynthia L. Morgan (2004), ‘Host Community Compensation and Municipal Solid Waste Landfills’
PART VIII CONTAMINATED LAND
24. Larry Dale, James C. Murdoch, Mark A. Thayer and Paul A. Waddell (1999), ‘Do Property Values Rebound from Environmental Stigmas? Evidence from Dallas’
25. Joachim Zietz, Emily Norman Zietz and G. Stacy Sirmans (2008), ‘Determinants of House Prices: A Quantile Regression Approach’
26. Arianto A. Patunru, John B. Braden and Sudip Chattopadhyay (2007), ‘Who Cares About Environmental Stigmas and Does it Matter? A Latent Segmentation Analysis of Stated Preferences for Real Estate’
27. Andrey Kalugin, Satrou Komatsu, Shinji Kaneko and Olena Slozko (2010), ‘Citizens’ Perception of Past Environmental Damage and Liability in Countries with Transition: Evidence from Kemerovo, Russia’
28. Anna Alberini, Stefania Tonin, Margherita Turvani and Aline Chiabai (2007), ‘Paying for Permanence: Public Preferences for Contaminated Site Cleanup’
PART IX ENERGY
29. David Revelt and Kenneth Train (1998), ‘Mixed Logit with Repeated Choices of Households’ Choices of Appliance Efficiency Level’
30. Riccardo Scarpa and Ken Willis (2010), ‘Willingness-to-Pay for Renewable Energy: Primary and Discretionary Choice of British Households’ for Micro-Generation Technologies’
31. David Pearce (2003), ‘The Social Cost of Carbon and its Policy Implications’
PART X MARINE
32. Sturla Furunes Kvamsdal and Leif Kristoffer Sandal (2008), ‘The Premium of Marine Protected Areas: A Simple Valuation Model’
33. Timothy C. Haab, Marcia Hamilton and Kenneth E. McConnell (2008), ‘Small Boat Fishing in Hawaii: A Random Utility Model of Ramp and Ocean Destinations’
34. Christopher G. Leggett and Nancy E. Bockstael (2000), ‘Evidence of the Effects of Water Quality on Residential Land Prices’
35. Nesha Beharry-Borg, David A. Hensher and Riccardo Scarpa (2009), ‘An Analytical Framework for Joint vs Separate Decisions by Couples in Choice Experiments: The Case of Coastal Water Quality in Tobago’
PART XI WATER
36. R.A. Hope and G.D. Garrod (2004), ‘Household Preferences to Water Policy Interventions in Rural South Africa’
37. Kenneth G. Willis, Riccardo Scarpa and Melinda Acutt (2005), ‘Assessing Water Company Customer Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Service Improvements: A Stated Choice Analysis’
38. Nick Hanley, Robert E. Wright and Begona Alvarez-Farizo (2006), ‘Estimating the Economic Value of Improvements in River Ecology Using Choice Experiments: An Application to the Water Framework Directive’
PART XII PLANNING
39. Kenneth G. Willis (2006), ‘Assessing Public Preferences: The Use of Stated-Preference Experiments to Assess the Impact of Varying Planning Conditions’
40. Guy D. Garrod, Riccardo Scarpa and Kenneth G. Willis (2002), ‘Estimating the Benefits of Traffic Calming on Through Routes: A Choice Experiment Approach’
41. Anna Alberini, Alberto Longo, Stefania Tonin, Francesco Trombetta and Margherita Turvani (2005), ‘The Role of Liability, Regulation and Economic Incentives in Brownfield Remediation and Redevelopment: Evidence from Surveys of Developers’