Show Less

Econometrics Informing Natural Resources Management

Selected Empirical Analyses

Edited by Phoebe Koundouri

This fascinating book outlines the fundamental principles and difficulties that characterise the challenging task of using econometrics to inform natural resource management policies, and illustrates them through a number of case studies from all over the world. The book offers a comprehensive overview of the broader picture of the state-of-the-art in econometrics as applied to environmental and natural resource management.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 13: Contrasting conventional with multi-level modelling approaches to meta-analysis: expectation consistency in UK woodland recreation values

Ian J. Bateman and Andrew P. Jones


Ian J. Bateman and Andrew P. Jones 1. INTRODUCTION The past two decades have witnessed an increasing reliance upon benefitcost analysis (BCA) as a tool for project appraisal and to inform decision making. In the UK, a typical example of this trend is provided by the 1995 Environment Act which brought into being the Environment Agency (EA) and imposed ‘general duties’ upon the Agency to take account of the costs and benefits arising from its policies (HM Government, 1995). For many agencies, particularly those which have explicitly environmental or public good responsibilities, the assessment of benefits necessitated by adopting BCA approaches has led to a growing interest in tools for the monetary valuation of preferences for environmental goods and services. Consequently, expressed preference methods such as contingent valuation (CV) and conjoint analysis (CA) together with revealed preference techniques such as hedonic pricing (HP) and individual and zonal travel cost (TC) have enjoyed an unprecedented increase in application. However, use of such methods raises theoretical, empirical and practical issues. At a theoretical level, certain of these various techniques yield different measures of value. Furthermore, the validity of certain modes of application and analysis has been questioned. They are associated with recognized biases, exhibited as empirical regularities within the published literature. These issues place an onus upon the analyst to explain to decision makers the consequences of adopting certain study designs. However, from a decision perspective, a further and pressing practical issue concerns the fact that individual applications...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information

or login to access all content.