Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T01:06:54.132Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Valuing Natural Resource and Environmental Amenities: Can Economic Valuation Be Made Defensible?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2017

Nancy E. Bockstael
Nancy E. Bockstael*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland
Get access

Extract

The topic of this address may seem somewhat remote from the traditional interests of agricultural economists. Yet it has been of central concern to those of us involved in natural resource and environmental issues. Given the direction in which agricultural economics is currently moving, it may soon prove to be as perplexing a problem in that arena as well.

Type
NAREA Invited Address
Information
Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , October 1984 , pp. 129 - 137
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This paper is Scientific Article No. A-3999, Contribution No. 6983, of the Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station. The comments and suggestions of Ivar E. Strand, Jr. are gratefully acknowledged.

Paper presented at the Northeast Agricultural Economics Association meeting, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, August 1984.

References

Bockstael, N. E., and Strand, I. E. “The Nature of Error in Recreation Demand Analysis and its Effect on Benefit Estimates,” manuscript, University of Maryland. College Park, Maryland. 1984.Google Scholar
Bockstael, N. E., Strand, I. E. and Hanemann, W. M. “Time and Income Constraints in Recreation Demand Analysis,” manuscript, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland. 1984.Google Scholar
Hanemann, W. M. “Some Further Results on Exact Consumer's Surplus,” manuscript, University of California, Berkeley. California. 1982.Google Scholar
Hausman, J. A. “Exact Consumer's Surplus and Deadweight Loss,” AER (1981):662–676.Google Scholar
Just, R., Hueth, D. and Schmitz, A. Applied Welfare Economics. New York, Prentice Hall. 1982.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press. 1969.Google Scholar
Stoll, J. R., Shulstad, R. N., and Smathers, W. M. Jr. Nonmarket Valuation: Current Status, Future Directions. Proceedings of a Regional Workshop, Southern Natural Resources Economics Committee. 1983.Google Scholar
Strand, Ivar E. and Bockstael, Nancy E. “Biasedness and Inconsistency in Certain Consumer Surplus Estimates,” manuscript, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland. 1984.Google Scholar
Vartia, Y. O. “Efficient Methods of Measuring Welfare Charge and Compensated Income in Terms of Ordinary Demand Functions,” Econometrica 51 (1983):79–98.Google Scholar
Willig, R. D. “Consumer Surplus Without Apology,” American Economic Review 66 (1976):589–97.Google Scholar