Catalogo Articoli (Spogli Riviste)


Experimenting with multi-attribute utility survey methods in a multi-dimensional valuation problem
Russell, C; Dale, V; Lee, JS; Jensen, MH; Kane, M; Gregory, R;
Vanderbilt Inst Publ Policy Studies, Nashville, TN 37212 USA Vanderbilt Inst Publ Policy Studies Nashville TN USA 37212 , TN 37212 USA Oak Ridge Natl Lab, Div Environm Sci, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 USA Oak Ridge Natl Lab Oak Ridge TN USA 37831 nm Sci, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 USA Univ Cent Florida, Dept Econ, Orlando, FL 32816 USA Univ Cent Florida Orlando FL USA 32816 , Dept Econ, Orlando, FL 32816 USA Univ Tennessee, Dept Ecol & Evolutionary Biol, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA Univ Tennessee Knoxville TN USA 37996 onary Biol, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA Decis Res, Vancouver, BC, Canada Decis Res Vancouver BC CanadaDecis Res, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Titolo Testata:
fascicolo: 1, volume: 36, anno: 2001,
pagine: 87 - 108
ecosystem valuation; multi-attribute utility; willingness to pay surveys; forest attributes;
Tipo documento:
Settore Disciplinare:
Agriculture,Biology & Environmental Sciences
Social & Behavioral Sciences
Indirizzi per estratti:
Indirizzo: Russell, C Vanderbilt Inst Publ Policy Studies, 1207 18th Ave S, Nashville, TN 37212 USA Vanderbilt Inst Publ Policy Studies 1207 18th Ave S Nashville TN USA 37212
C. Russell et al., "Experimenting with multi-attribute utility survey methods in a multi-dimensional valuation problem", ECOL ECON, 36(1), 2001, pp. 87-108


The use of willingness-to-pay (WTP) survey techniques based on multi-attribute utility (MAU) approaches has been recommended by some authors as a wayto deal simultaneously with two difficulties that increasingly plague environmental valuation. The first of these is that, as valuation exercises come to involve less familiar and more subtle environmental effects. such as ecosystem management, lay respondents are less likely to have any idea, in advance, of the value they would attach to a described result. The second isthat valuation questions may increasingly be about multi-dimensional effects (e.g. changes in ecosystem function) as opposed for example to changes in visibility from a given point. MAU has been asserted to allow the asking of simpler questions, even in the context of difficult subjects. And it is,as the name suggests, inherently multi-dimensional. This paper asks whether MAU techniques can be shown to 'make a difference' in the context of questions about preferences over, and valuation of differences between, alternative descriptions of a forest ecosystem. Making a difference is defined in terms of internal consistency of answers to preference and WTP questions involving three 5-attribute forest descriptions. The method involves first asking MAU-structured questions attribute-by-attribute. The responses to these questions allow researchers to infer each respondent's preferences and WTP. Second, the same respondents are asked directly about their preferences and WTPs. The answer to the making-a-difference question, based largely on comparing the inferred and slated results is not straightforward. Overall, the inferred results are good 'predictors' of what is slated. But the agreement is by no means perfect. And the individual differences are not explainable by the socio-economic characteristics of the individuals. Since the technique involves creating a long, somewhat tedious, and even apparently confusing series of tasks (though each task may itself be simple), it is by nomeans clear that the prescription,'use MAU techniques', holds the same level of practical as of theoretical promise. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

ASDD Area Sistemi Dipartimentali e Documentali, Università di Bologna, Catalogo delle riviste ed altri periodici
Documento generato il 12/07/20 alle ore 13:24:49