Skip to main content

Economic Valuation: Concepts and Empirical Methods

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Regional Science

Abstract

Commensurate valuation of market and nonmarket public goods allows for a more valid benefit-cost analysis. Economic methods for valuing nonmarket public goods include actual behavior-based revealed preference methods such as the hedonic property method for urban-suburban public goods and travel cost-based models for outdoor recreation. For valuing proposed public goods for which there is no current behavior or valuing the existence or passive use values of public goods, economists can rely upon stated preference methods. While there is skepticism among some economists for relying upon what people say they will pay rather than what their actual behavior suggests they will pay, there is general acceptance of stated preference methods. These stated preference methods include the well-known contingent valuation method and choice experiments (sometimes called conjoint analysis). Lastly, in situations where there is neither time nor money to conduct an original revealed or stated preference study, economists typically rely upon benefit transfers from existing revealed preference and stated preference studies to provide rough estimates of the values of public goods such as water quality, air quality, wetlands, recreation, and endangered species.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 849.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 999.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdullah S, Markandya A, Nunes P (2011) Introduction to economic valuation methods. Chapter 5. In: Batabyal A, Nijkamp P (eds) Research tools in natural resource and environmental economics. World Scientific, Hackensack, pp 143–188

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Alberini A, Kahn J (2006) Handbook on contingent valuation. Edward Elgar, Northampton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Anselin L (1988) Spatial econometrics: methods and models. Kluwer, Norwell

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Arrow K, Solow R, Portney P, Leamer E, Radner R, Schuman H (1993) Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed Reg 58(10):4602–4614

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergstrom J, Taylor L (2006) Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: theory and practice. Ecol Econ 60(2):351–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyle K (2003) Contingent valuation in practice. In: Champ PA, Boyle KJ, Brown TC (eds) A primer on nonmarket valuation. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 111–170

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Brookshire D, d’Arge R, Schulze W, Thayer M (1982) Valuing public goods: a comparison of the survey and hedonic approaches. Am Econ Rev 72(1):165–177

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron T (1992) Combining contingent valuation and travel cost data for the valuation of nonmarket goods. Land Econ 68(4):302–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson R, Flores N, Martin K, Wright J (1996) Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods. Land Econ 72(1):113–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson R, Mitchell R, Hanemann M, Kopp R, Presser S, Ruud P (2003) Contingent valuation and lost passive value: damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environ Res Econ 25(2):257–286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Champ P, Brown T, McCollum D (1997) Using donation mechanisms to value nonuse benefits from public goods. J Environ Econ Manage 33(1):151–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creel M, Loomis J (1990) Theoretical and empirical advantages of truncated count data estimators for analysis of deer hunting in California. Am J Agri Econ 72(2):434–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamond P, Hausman J (1994) Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number? J Econ Perspect 8(4):45–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman M (2003) The measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods, 2nd edn. Resources for the Future Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Haab T, McConnell K (2002) Valuing environmental and natural resources: the econometrics of non-market valuation. Edward Elgar, Northampton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann M (1984) Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Am J Agric Econ 66(3):332–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanemann M (1994) Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. J Econ Perspect 8(4):19–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herriges J, Kling C (eds) (1999) Valuing recreation and the environment: revealed preference methods in theory and practice. Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes T, Adamowciz W (2003) Attribute-based methods. In: Champ P, Boyle K, Brown T (eds) A primer on nonmarket valuation. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 171–220

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Krutilla J (1967) Conservation reconsidered. Am Econ Rev 57(4):777–786

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis J (1996) Measuring the economic benefits of removing dams and restoring the Elwha river: results of a contingent valuation survey. Water Resource Res 32(2):441–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loomis J, Yorizane S, Larson D (2000) Testing significance of multi-destination and multi-purpose trip effects in a travel cost method demand model for whale watching trips. Agr Resource Econ Rev 29(2):183–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis J (2005) Updated outdoor recreation use values on national forests and other public lands. General technical report PNW-GTR-658. Pacific Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis J (2011) What’s to know about hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation studies. J Econ Survey 25(2):363–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Louviere J, Hensher D, Swait J (2001) Stated choice methods: analysis and applications in marketing, transportation and environmental valuation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller J, Loomis J (2008) Spatial dependence in Hedonic property models: do different corrections result in economically significant differences in estimated implicit prices. J Agric Res Econ 33(2):212–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson J, Kennedy P (2009) The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: an assessment. Environ Res Econ 42(3):345–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parsons G (2003) The travel cost method. In: Champ P, Boyle K, Brown T (eds) A primer on nonmarket valuation. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 269–330

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Portney P (1994) The contingent valuation debate: why economists should care. J Econ Perspect 8(4):3–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolfe J, Bennett J (2006) Choice modelling and the transfer of environmental values. Edward Elgar, Northampton

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberger R, Loomis J (2003) Benefit Transfer. In: Champ P, Boyle K, Brown T (eds) A primer on nonmarket valuation. Kluwer, Boston, pp 445–482

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor L (2003) The Hedonic method. In: Champ P, Boyle K, Brown T (eds) A primer on nonmarket valuation. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 331–394

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. District Court of Appeals (for the District of Columbia). State of Ohio vs. U.S. Department of Interior (1989) Case number 86–15755. July 14, 1989

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh R, Loomis J, Gillman R (1984) Valuing option, existence and bequest demands for wilderness. Land Econ 60(1):14–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead J, Haab T, Huang J-C (2011) Preference data for environmental valuation: combining revealed and stated approaches. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson M, Hoehn J (2006) Valuing environmental goods and services using benefit transfer: the state-of-the-art and science. Ecol Econ 60(2):335–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John B. Loomis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this entry

Cite this entry

Loomis, J.B. (2014). Economic Valuation: Concepts and Empirical Methods. In: Fischer, M., Nijkamp, P. (eds) Handbook of Regional Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23430-9_54

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23430-9_54

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-23429-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-23430-9

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics

Publish with us

Policies and ethics