Grantee Research Project Results
2008 Progress Report: Valuation of Regional Ecological Response to Acidification and Techniques for Transferring Estimates
EPA Grant Number: R832422Title: Valuation of Regional Ecological Response to Acidification and Techniques for Transferring Estimates
Investigators: Krupnick, Alan J. , Burtraw, Dallas , Driscoll, Charles T. , Cosby, Bernard , Evans, David , Siikam�ki, Juha , Banzhaf, Spencer
Institution: Resources for the Future , University of Virginia , Syracuse University
Current Institution: Resources for the Future , Syracuse University , University of Virginia
EPA Project Officer: Hahn, Intaek
Project Period: October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2008 (Extended to September 30, 2009)
Project Period Covered by this Report: October 1, 2007 through September 30,2008
Project Amount: $717,929
RFA: Valuation for Environmental Policy (2004) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Environmental Justice
Objective:
The development of efficient environmental policy needs information about the willingness to pay by individuals to prevent changes to ecological resources that result from acid deposition. This project will initiate the development of such estimates for the Southern Appalachian Region. The research will transfer methods developed in previous analysis applied to estimate the total value of ecological improvements from reduced acidification in the Adirondacks.
Progress Summary:
Progress in three primary areas has been achieved to date. The first involves completion of an annotated bibliography. A second involves the development of a summary of the science pertaining to ecological changes that result from acidification, and especially ecological improvements that could be expected to result from reductions in acidification. Accurate estimates of willingness to pay for resource improvements hinges on an accurate characterization of the changes in ecosystems that are affected by acidification. Two summaries have been written, one pertaining to the science in the Adirondacks and a second pertaining to the science in the Southern Appalachian Mountain Region.
The third area of progress concerns the development of an instrument to assess willingness to pay for appropriately defined improvements to the resources that are affected. In this period substantial progress was made in this regard through conducting a dozen focus groups in Washington DC and in the field involving local residents proximate to the target location of the study. In these focus groups, many complex issues were addressed, such how individuals perceive the effects of acidification in ecosystem environments of the Adirondacks and the Southern Appalachians, as well as how they trade off between the different attributes in the choice experiment (CE). Through these focus groups, several changes were made to the original Adirondacks contingent valuation (CV) instrument to create a version that is both appropriate for the CE framework and applicable to the Southern Appalachian region.
Additional research for the development of the instrument included a literature review of survey design elements, such as the payment vehicle, as well as initial conversations with science advisors on the study about the air pollution and acidification scenarios that will be used in the instrument. This effort has led to well-developed drafts of a revised contingent valuation instrument and a complementary choice experiment that will be the main tools of the study. These surveys have gone through several rounds of revisions but still need more development and focus group testing.
Future Activities:
The major activities to be conducted in the next year are completion of the draft instrument. This will involve additional focus group activity. It will be followed by a pretest in the field and planning for implementation of the survey.
Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 1 publications for this projectSupplemental Keywords:
acid rain, acidification, stated preference, willingness to pay, benefit estimation, Media: (media, air, ambient air, atmosphere, ozone, water, drinking water, watersheds, groundwater, land, soil, sediments, acid deposition, global climate, indoor air, mobile sources, CASNET, stratospheric ozone, tropospheric, marine, estuary, precipitation, leachate, adsorption, absorption, chemical transport), Risk Assessment: (exposure, risk, risk assessment, effects, health effects, ecological effects, human health, bioavailability, metabolism, vulnerability, sensitive populations, dose-response, carcinogen, teratogen, mutagen, animal, mammalian, organism, cellular, population, enzymes, infants, children, elderly, stressor, age, race, diet, metabolism, genetic predisposition, genetic polymorphisms, sex, ethnic groups, susceptibility, cumulative effects), Chemicals, Toxics, Toxic Substances: (chemicals, toxics, particulates, ODS, VOC, CFCs, PAHs, PNAs, PCBs, Dioxin, metals, heavy metals, solvents, oxidants, nitrogen oxides, sulfates, organics, DNAPL, NAPL, pathogens, viruses, bacteria, acid rain, effluent, discharge, dissolved solids, intermediates), Ecosystem Protection: (ecosystem, indicators, restoration, regionalization, scaling, terrestrial, aquatic, habitat, integrated assessment), Risk Management: (pollution prevention (green chemistry, life-cycle analysis, alternatives, sustainable development, clean technologies, innovative technology, renewable, waste reduction, waste minimization, environmentally conscious manufacturing); treatment (remediation, bioremediation, cleanup, incineration, disinfection, oxidation, restoration), Public Policy: (public policy, decision making, community-based, cost benefit, conjoint analysis, observation, nonmarket valuation, contingent valuation, survey, psychological, preferences, public good, Bayesian, socioeconomic, willingness-to-pay, compensation, conservation, environmental assets, sociological), Scientific Disciplines: (environmental chemistry, biology, physics, engineering, social science, ecology, hydrology, geology, histology, epidemiology, genetics, pathology, mathematics, limnology, zoology,), Methods/Techniques: (emap, modeling, monitoring, analytical, surveys, measurement methods, general circulation models, climate models, satellite, landsat, remote sensing), Geographic Areas: (northeast, central, northwest, western, southwest, south central, southeast, pacific coast, Atlantic coast, gulf coast, pacific northwest, Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes, Midwest, midatlantic, States (use both full name and two letter abbreviation), EPA Regions,, RFA, Scientific Discipline, Economic, Social, & Behavioral Science Research Program, Economics, Ecology and Ecosystems, decision-making, Social Science, Economics & Decision Making, contingent valuation, valuation, Bayesian approach, economic benefits, environmental decision making, constructivist approach, environmental policy, willingness to pay, benefits assessment, choice experimentRelevant Websites:
http://www.rff.org ExitProgress 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.