Abstract
Unit value or point value transfers from individual source studies remain the oldest and most common form of benefit transfer. Although practitioners generally recommend benefit function transfers , these are not always possible. Where unit value transfers are to be performed, appropriate protocols must be followed to select source studies, transfer values, and perform necessary value adjustments. This chapter demonstrates the processes and challenges involved in the implementation of unit value transfers , using case studies of environmental values in a peri-urban community on the east coast of Australia where key ecosystems ranged from coastal beaches to inland forests . Key issues in evaluating the potential for benefit transfer included the availability and quality of source studies, the extent of overlap between source studies and the target site, the need for different forms of adjustment to account for variations in scope and scale, and the limitations to unit value transfers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Although sometimes values from several source studies are assessed before choosing a single unit value for transfer. Unit value transfers may also transfer a mean or median value from prior studies.
- 2.
They note that value functions explicitly incorporate differences between sites and hence are appropriate where differences between source and target sites are involved, but may be over-parameterized when limited differences between sites exist.
- 3.
See discussions of commodity consistency in Johnston and Rosenberger (2010).
- 4.
This is related to the concept of the economic jurisdiction, or the size of the population that holds value for a given environmental change (Loomis 2000).
- 5.
Note: in this chapter all dollar values refer to Australian dollars.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
The higher value for study WW9 might be a reflection of the peri-urban context and/or higher values to avoid a loss than for a gain.
- 9.
Note that the use of meta-analysis in this way is generally considered a type of benefit function transfer.
- 10.
In the source study, the status quo was set as a future base, with a lower level of provision than the current situation. All alternative levels represented an improvement on the future base, but were lower than the current level. Consequently, it is not clear if respondents were indicating their WTP to avoid a loss or achieve a gain.
References
Bateman, I. J., Carson, R. T., Day, B., Hanemann, M., Hanley, N., Hett, T., et al. (2002). Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: A manual. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Bateman, I. J., Day, B. H., Georgiou, S., & Lake, I. (2006). The aggregation of environmental benefit values: Welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP. Ecological Economics, 60, 450–460.
Bateman, I., Brouwer, R., Ferrini, S., Schaafsma, M., Barton, D., Dubgaard, A., et al. (2011). Making benefit transfers work: Deriving and testing principles for value transfers for similar and dissimilar sites using a case study of the non-market benefits of water quality improvements across Europe. Environmental and Resource Economics, 50, 365–387.
Bennett, J., Dumsday, R., Howell, G., Lloyd, C., Sturgess, N., & Van Raalte, L. (2008). The economic value of improved environmental health in Victorian Rivers. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 15, 138–148.
Blackwell, B. (2007). The value of a beach recreational visit: An application to Mooloolaba beach and comparisons with other outdoor recreational sites. Economic Analysis and Policy, 37, 77–97.
Brookshire, D., & Neill, H. (1992). Benefit transfers: Conceptual and ethical issues. Water Resources Research, 28, 651–655.
Brouwer, R. (2000). Environmental value transfer: State of the art and future prospects. Ecological Economics, 32, 137–152.
Colombo, S., & Hanley, N. (2008). How can we reduce the errors from benefits transfer? An investigation using the choice experiment method. Land Economics, 84, 128–147.
Concu, G. (2007). Investigating distance effects on environmental values: A choice modelling approach. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 51, 175–194.
DSEWPC (Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population & Communities). (2011). State of the Environment Report 2011. Chapter 11 Coasts, Section 2.7 Population growth and urban development. Canberra: Australian Government.
Hatton MacDonald, D., & Morrison, M. (2010). Valuing biodiversity using habitat types. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 17, 235–243.
Johnston, R. J., & Rosenberger, R. S. (2010). Methods, trends and controversies in contemporary benefit transfer. Journal of Economic Surveys, 24, 479–510.
Kaul, S., Boyle, K. J., Kuminoff, N. V., Parmeter, C. F., & Pope, J. C. (2013). What can we learn from benefit transfer errors? Evidence from 20 years of research on convergent validity. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 66, 90–104.
Kline, J. D., & Mazzotta, M. J. (2012). Evaluating tradeoffs among ecosystem services in the management of public lands. General Technical Report. PNW-GTR-865. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. 48 p. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_gtr865.pdf.
Kovacs, K. F., & Larson, D. M. (2008). Identifying individual discount rates and valuing public open space with stated-preference models. Land Economics, 84, 209–224.
Loomis, J. B. (2000). Vertically summing public good demand curves: An empirical comparison of economic versus political jurisdictions. Land Economics, 76, 312–321.
Mallawaarachchi, T., Blamey, R., Morrison, M., Johnson, A., & Bennett, J. W. (2001). Community values for environmental protection in a cane farming catchment in northern Australia. Journal of Environmental Management, 62, 301–316.
Mallawaarachchi, T., Morrison, M. D., & Blamey, R. K. (2006). Choice modelling to determine the significance of environmental amenity and production alternatives in the community value of peri-urban land: Sunshine Coast, Australia. Land Use Policy, 23, 323–332.
Mazur, K., & Bennett, J. (2009). Scope and scale effects on communities; values for environmental improvements in the Namoi catchment: A choice modelling approach. Environmental Economics Research Hub. Research Report #42. http://www.crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/publications/ (accessed 11/13/2012).
Morrison, M., & Bennett, J. (2004). Valuing New South Wales rivers for use in benefits transfer. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 48, 591–611.
Morrison, M., & Bergland, O. (2006). Prospects for the use of choice modelling for benefit transfer. Ecological Economics, 60, 420–428.
Morrison, M., Bennett, J., Blamey, R., & Louviere, J. (2002). Choice modelling and tests of benefit transfer. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 84, 161–170.
Navrud, S., & Ready, R. (Eds.). (2007). Environmental value transfer: Issues and methods. Dordrecht: Springer.
Nelson, J. P., & Kennedy, P. E. (2009). The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and resource economics: An assessment. Environmental and Resource Economics, 42, 345–377.
Rolfe, J. (2006). A simple guide to choice modelling and benefit transfer. In J. Rolfe & J. Bennett (Eds.), Choice modelling and the transfer of environmental values (pp. 10–27). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Rolfe, J., & Bennett, J. (Eds.). (2006). Choice modelling and the transfer of environmental values. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Rolfe, J., & Bennett, J. (2009). The impact of offering two versus three alternatives in choice modelling experiments. Ecological Economics, 68, 1140–1148.
Rolfe, J., & Brouwer, R. (2012). Design effects in a meta-analysis of river health choice experiments in Australia. Journal of Choice Modelling, 5, 81–97.
Rolfe, J., & Dyack, B. (2010). Testing for convergent validity between travel cost and contingent valuation estimates of recreation values in the Coorong, Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 54, 583–599.
Rolfe, J., & Gregg, D. (2012). Valuing beach recreation across a regional area: The Great Barrier Reef in Australia. Ocean and Coastal Management, 69, 282–290.
Rolfe, J., & Windle, J. (2003). Valuing the protection of Aboriginal cultural heritage sites. Economic Record, 79 (Special Issue), 85–95.
Rolfe, J., & Windle, J. (2008). Testing for differences in benefit transfer values between state and regional frameworks. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 52, 149–168.
Rolfe, J., Loch, A., & Bennett, J. (2002). Tests of benefit transfer across sites and populations in the Fitzroy Basin. Valuing Floodplain Development in the Fitzroy Basin. Research Report #4, Central Queensland University. http://resourceeconomics.cqu.edu.au/. Accessed October 29, 2012.
Rolfe, J., Windle, J., Bennett, J., & Mazur K. (2013). Calibration of values in benefit transfer to account for variations in geographic scale and scope: Comparing two choice modelling experiments. Paper presented at the 57th Annual conference of the Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, Sydney, February.
Rosenberger, R. S., & Johnston, R. J. (2009). Selection effects in meta-analysis and benefit transfer: Avoiding unintended consequences. Land Economics, 85, 410–428.
Rosenberger, R. S., & Stanley, T. D. (2006). Measurement, generalization, and publication: Sources of error in benefit transfers and their management. Ecological Economics, 60, 372–378.
Smith, V. K., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2002). Is meta-analysis a Noah’s Ark for non-market valuation? Environmental and Resource Economics, 22, 271–296.
Tapsuwan, S., Ingram, G., Burton, M., & Brennan, D. (2009). Capitalized amenity value of urban wetlands: A hedonic property price approach to urban wetlands in Perth, Western Australia. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 53, 527–545.
Van Bueren, M., & Bennett, J. (2004). Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 48, 1–32.
Whitten, S., & Bennett, J. (2006). Transferring the environmental values of wetlands. In J. Rolfe & J. Bennett (Eds.), Choice modelling and the transfer of environmental values (pp. 164–190). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Windle, J., & Rolfe, J. (2005). Assessing non-use values for environmental protection of an estuary in a Great Barrier Reef catchment. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 12, 147–156.
Windle, J., & Rolfe, J. (2013). Estimating nonmarket values of Brisbane (state capital) residents for state based beach recreation. Ocean and Coastal Management, 85, 103–111.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rolfe, J., Windle, J., Johnston, R.J. (2015). Applying Benefit Transfer with Limited Data: Unit Value Transfers in Practice. In: Johnston, R., Rolfe, J., Rosenberger, R., Brouwer, R. (eds) Benefit Transfer of Environmental and Resource Values. The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9930-0_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9930-0_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-9929-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-9930-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)