Grantee Research Project Results
1999 Progress Report: A Comparison of Direct Methods for Valuing Environmental Policies: A Case Study in New Hampshire's White Mountains
EPA Grant Number: R825824Title: A Comparison of Direct Methods for Valuing Environmental Policies: A Case Study in New Hampshire's White Mountains
Investigators: Halstead, John M. , Hill, L. Bruce , Stevens, Thomas H.
Institution: University of New Hampshire , University of Massachusetts - Amherst
EPA Project Officer: Chung, Serena
Project Period: October 1, 1997 through September 30, 1999 (Extended to December 31, 2000)
Project Period Covered by this Report: October 1, 1998 through September 30, 1999
Project Amount: $159,071
RFA: Decision-Making and Valuation for Environmental Policy (1997) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Environmental Justice
Objective:
The objectives of this project are to: (1) compare and contrast two frequently used methods of valuation on nonmarket commodities such as visibility (the contingent valuation methods and conjoint analysis) to provide insight into which (if either) might be the more appropriate technique to address the problem at hand; (2) derive estimates of the impacts of visibility changes in the White Mountains region of New Hampshire on visitors to the region; and (3) use these estimates to determine part of the potential economic impact of deregulation of the electric industry in New Hampshire.Progress Summary:
In the second year of the project, the computer-based survey developed in the first year was administered on a face-to-face basis to collect more data in the White Mountains.Although preliminary results indicated that there may be subtle differences in the responses to those surveys using the contingent valuation method (CVM) as compared to the conjoint analysis (CA) method, subsequent analysis has shown that the two techniques yield essentially similar results. However, analysis of data has shown that respondents are essentially unwilling to make the tradeoffs proposed in the survey between reduced air quality and reduced monthly electric bills. This was true both for onsite and offsite face-to-face surveys and a mail survey. Thus, the willingness-to-accept-compensation approach was probably not appropriate for this particular vehicle, as it did not provide large enough bids to elicit tradeoffs.
A no-cost extension has been granted to continue the project through September 30, 2000. The current year's activities will construct a different bid procedure (willingness to pay) to be incorporated with the survey, which will be otherwise unchanged. This survey then will be administered to the general public through a mail instrument, and in face-to-face surveys in Pinkham Notch in the White Mountains and in Acadia National Park. It is anticipated that willingness-to-pay estimates will be much higher than the previous willingness-to-accept estimates. Finally, the two mail surveys, the offsite face-to-face survey, and three onsite surveys will be pooled to conduct a meta-analysis and to examine the question of CA versus CVM further.
Future Activities:
As noted, analysis of data conducted at Pinkham Notch and in western Massachusetts will continue to provide information on differences in consumer surplus (if any) generated by the two valuation techniques. This research will result in a dissertation, a Master's thesis, several papers presented at professional meetings, and several journal articles.In addition, as noted, the survey will be conducted at several new locations in 2000. These additional survey efforts will provide additional information in comparing CVM and CA, as well as a more diverse sample population so that inferences may be drawn on the value of changes in visibility/air quality in the region.
Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 19 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
conjoint analysis, contingent valuation, visibility, RFA, Scientific Discipline, Geographic Area, Economic, Social, & Behavioral Science Research Program, Economics & Decision Making, State, Economics, decision-making, Social Science, Psychology, Ecology and Ecosystems, New Hampshire (NH), benefits assessment, public values, air pollution policy, conjoint analysis, ecosystem valuation, non-market valuation, community involvement, visibility degradation, environmental values, nonmarket choice, direct valuation method, electric industry deregulation, psychological attitudes, contingent valuation, empirical validationProgress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.