Environmental Engineering Research

Korean Society of Environmental Engineers (대한환경공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Economic Valuation Methods of Biodiversity

  • Cho, Woo-Young (Dept. of Urban Planning & Engineering, Yonsei University) ;
  • Bae, Doo-Hyun (Dept. of Urban Planning & Engineering, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kim, Hong-Sok (Dept. of Urban Planning & Engineering, Yonsei University)
  • Published : 2008.03.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The valuation of biodiversity is a fundamental step in conservation. The useful framework for analysing the economic value of biological resources is that of total economic value (TEV) and TEV comprises both use and non-use values, the former related to an actual use made of the resource, the latter to a willingness to pay for the resource independently of any use made of it. There are several valuation approacher in environmental economics literature. However, stated preference approach should be introduced for valuation of biodiversity because it can estimate non-use value as well as use value. Contingent Valuation and Conjoint Analysis are representative methods in stated preference and Conjoint Analysis can be more useful for valuation of biodiversity. Futhermore, the combination of ecology and economics to assess biodiversity leads to an integrated framework. Thus, interdisciplinary work is required, involving both economists and ecologists transferring elements or even theories and models from one discipline to another and transforming them for their specific, mutually consistent purpose.

Keywords

References

  1. Weitzman, and Martin, L., 'On diversity,' Quarterly journal of Economics, 107, 363-405 (1992) https://doi.org/10.2307/2118476
  2. Pearce, D. W., and Moran, D., The economics of biological diversity conservation, In P. Fiedler and P. Kareiva (eds), Conservation Biodiversity for the Coming Decades, Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 384-409 (1998)
  3. Bann, C., The economic valuation of Mangroves: a Manual for Researches, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia, Singapore (1998)
  4. Turner, R. Kerry, David Pearce and Ian bateman, Environmental Economics, Harvester Wheatsheaf, London (1994)
  5. Ahn, S. E., and Kim, J. K., An Application of Benefit Transfer to Outdoor Recreation Values in Korea, Korea Environment Institute (2006)
  6. Lim, Y. S., and Jun, Y. S., 'The benefit of air quality improvement using hedonic price method,' Environmental and Resource Economics, 3(1), 81-106 (1993)
  7. Kim, J. W., 'Measuring the price of air quality in housing price : using spatial econometrics,' Environmental and Resource Economics, 7(1), 61-85 (1997)
  8. Um, Y. S., 'Valuing the health effects on air pollution : using averting behavior method,' Environmental and resource economics review, 7(1), 1-23 (1998)
  9. Yoo, S. H., Kwak, S. J., and Kim, T. Y., 'Measuring air quality in Seoul : using CVM on multi-attribute utility theory,' Environmental economic review, 7(2), 243-270 (1999)
  10. Lee, H. C., Chung, H. S., and Kim, T. Y., 'Valuation of Air Quality in the Metropolitan Seoul,' Environmental and resource economics review, 13(3), 387-415 (2004)
  11. Choi, J. I., and Shim, S. H., 'An effect of air quality on the apartment prices in Seoul : using hedonic price method,' Environmental and resource economics review, 11(2), 261-278 (2002)
  12. Shin, Y. C., 'Estimating the cost of air pollution on morbidity : focusing on hospital visit for acute respiratory disease,' Environmental and resource economics review, 14(3), 673-697 (2005)
  13. Cho, S. G., Chang, J. I., and Kim, J. I., 'Valuing the health effects on air quality improvement,' Environmental and resource economics review, 15(5), 859-884 (2006)
  14. Kwak, S. J., 'Estimation of water quality improvement : application of CVM and nonparametic approach,' Environmental and Resource Economics, 3(1), 183-198 (1993) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00338784
  15. Kim, D. Y., and Kim, G. H., 'Estimation of tap water quality improvement using averting behavior method,' Environmental and Resource Economics, 3(2), 337-358 (1994) https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00418816
  16. Lee, K. H., and Kwak, S. J., 'Economic value of water quality improvement : CVM and non-division effect,' Environmental and Resource Economics, 6(1), 87-109 (1996)
  17. Jung, K. H., Kim, S. W., and Kwak, S. J., 'The benefit of tap water quality improvement in Daegu : application parametic and non-parametic approach,' Environmental and resource economics review, 6(2), 223-257 (1997)
  18. Shin, Y. C., 'Estimation of Han River water quality improvement using two bounded dichotomous choice model,' Environmental Economic Review, 6(1), 171-192 (1997)
  19. Kim, B. G., Cho, Y. S., and Kwak, J. E., 'Estimation of WTP for water quality improvements in Paldang reservoirs using contingent valuation,' Environmental and resource economics review, 10(3), 433-459 (2001)
  20. Um, Y. S., 'Empirical evidence on scope effects in contingent valuation of water quality improvement in Man gyung river,' Environmental and resource economics review, 10(3), 387-411 (2001)
  21. Cho, S. G., and Shin, C. O., 'Economic value of Han River's water quality attribute using conjoint analysis,' Environmental and resource economics review, 14(3), 655-672 (2005)
  22. Kim, Y. J., and Yoo, Y. S., 'Valuing Non-market benefits of water quality improvements in Paldang reservoir and Han river's Choice experiments study,' Environmental and resource economics review, 14(2), 337-379 (2005)
  23. Hong, S. G., 'Economic valuation of Yeoido park : application of double bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation method,' Journal of Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture, 26(3), 90-103 (1998)
  24. Han, S. Y., and Choi, G., 'New approach to value outdoor recreational benefits of forest : an application of CVM,' Korea journal of Forest Recreation, 2(3), 39-51 (1998)
  25. Yoo, B. G., 'Regional valuation of environmental value : estimation of recreation value of Mud Flats in southern region of Kangwha-do,' Journal of Korean Regional Development Association, 10(3), 19-38 (1998)
  26. Jung, K. H., 'Economic value of natural park conservation,' Public Economics, 4, 119-137 (1999)
  27. Lee, J. G., and Shin, Y. C., 'Economic valuation of greenbelt : focus on the conservation value of green belt in grea ter seoul,' Environmental and resource economics review, 9(4), 773-799 (2000)
  28. Lee, S. T., and Lee, M. H., 'Estimation of Dae-gu Mt. Palgong's benefit : using travel cost method,' Environmental Economic Review, 7(2), 211-228 (1999)
  29. Kwon, O. S., 'Economic valuation of ecology using choice ranking method,' Study of Economics, 48(3), 177-196 (2000)
  30. Lee, B. S., Jung, E. C., and Kim, Y. H., 'Analysis the effect of an apartment complex characteristics on the price of apartment,' Kukje Kyungje yongu, 8(2), 21-45 (2002)
  31. Kwon, O. S., Lim, W. A., and Kim, W. H., 'Economic values of recreational water : Rafting on Han River,' Environmental and resource economics review, 16(3), 427-449 (2007)
  32. Shin, Y. C., and Min, D. G., 'Estimating economic value of first-grade area in ecological nature status,' Environmental and resource economics review, 14(1), 25-50 (2005)
  33. Lim, H. J., Yoo, S. H., and Kwak, S. J., 'Measurement of the economic benefits for seoul forest provisions in seoul,' Journal of the KRSA, 22(2), 225-250 (2006)
  34. Kwon, O. S., 'Valuing recreational benefits of Dam lakes using choice experiment approach,' Environmental and resource economics review, 15(3), 555-573 (2006)
  35. Kim, K. L., A study of a reclaimed land of scrapped material's economic value, Korea Environmental Technical Research Institute (1995)
  36. Kim, J. D., and Cho, M. K., 'An economic feasibility analysis of a public project using contingent valuation method,' Environmental and resource economics review, 14(1), 101-134 (2005)
  37. Yoo, S. H., 'Using one and one-half bounded dichotomous choice model to measure the economic benefits of urban noise reduction,' Environmental and resource economics review, 16(3), 451-483 (2007)
  38. Stevens, T. H., Belkner, R., Dennis, D., Kittredge, D., and Willis, C., 'Comparison of contingent valuation and conjoint analysis in ecosystem management,' Ecological Economic, 32, 63-74 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00071-3
  39. Roe, B., Boyle, K., and Teisl, M., 'Using conjoint analysis to derive estimates of compensating variation,' Journal of Environmental Economics, 31, 145-159 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1996.0037
  40. Johnson, R., Desvougesm, W. H., Fries, E., and Wood, L., 'Conjoint analysis of individual and aggregate preferences,' Triangle Economic Research. Working Paper T-9502. Research Triangle, NC (1995)
  41. Mackenzie, J., 'Conjoint analysis of deer hunting,' Northeastern Journal of agricultural economics, 75, 593-603 (1990)
  42. Boxall, P., Adamowicz, W., Swait, J., Williams, M., and Laviere, J., 'A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation,' Ecological economics, 18, 243-253 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(96)00039-0
  43. Costanza, R., R. D'Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O'Neill, J. Paruelo, R. G. Raskin, P. Suotton, and M. van den Belt, 'The value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital,' Nature, 387, 253-260 (1997) https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
  44. Kim, S. h., Kim, J. H., and Heo, J., 'Study on standardization of biodiversity for environmental value assessment,' KSCE conference and civil expo, Republic of Korea (2007)

Cited by

  1. Liability allocation in pollution involving multiple responsible parties vol.27, pp.36, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-10350-w
  2. Perceived benefits, aesthetic preferences and willingness to pay for visiting urban parks: A case study in Kolkata, India vol.9, pp.1, 2008, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgeop.2020.12.007