Monetary assessment of the recreational benefits of improved water quality – description of a new model and a case study

References

• Adamowicz, W., J. Swait, P. Boxall, J. Louviere, and M. Williams. 1997. “Perceptions Versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32: 65–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahtiainen, H. 2008. Benefits of Lake Water Quality Improvement. A Case Study of Lake Hiidenvesi. The Finnish Environment 47/2008. (In Finnish, English abstract). Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Ahtiainen, H., J. Artell, M. Czajkowski, B. Hasler, L. Hasselström, A. Huhtala, J. Meyerhoff, et al. 2014. “Benefits of Meeting Nutrient Reduction Targets for the Baltic Sea: a Contingent Valuation Study in the Nine Coastal States.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy 3: 278–305.
   Google Scholar
• Artell, J. 2014. “Lots of Value? A Spatial Hedonic Approach to Water Quality Valuation.” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 57: 862–882.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Artell, J., H. Ahtiainen, and E. Pouta. 2013. “Subjective vs. Objective Measures in the Valuation of Water Quality.” Journal of Environmental Management 130: 288–296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bateman, I. J., R. Brouwer, H. Davies, B. H. Day, A. Deflandre, S. D. Falco, S. Georgiou, et al. 2006. “Analysing the Agricultural Costs and Non-Market Benefits of Implementing the Water Framework Directive.” Journal of Agricultural Economics 57: 221–237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bateman, I. J., R. Brouwer, S. Ferrini, M. Schaafsma, D. N. Barton, A. Dubgaard, B. Hasler, 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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bateman, I. J., M. A. Cole, S. Georgiou, and D. J. Hadley. 2006. “Comparing Contingent Valuation and Contingent Ranking: A Case Study Considering the Benefits of Urban River Water Quality Improvements.” Journal of Environmental Management 79: 221–231.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bockstael, N., W. Hanemann, and C. Kling. 1987. “Estimating the Value of Water Quality Improvements in a Recreational Demand Framework.” Water Resources Research 23: 951–960. doi:10.1029/WR023i005p00951
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bunse, L., O. Rendon, and S. Luque. 2015. “What can Deliberative Approaches Bring to the Monetary Valuation of Ecosystem Services? A Literature Review.” Ecosystem Services 14: 88–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson, R., and R. Mitchell. 1993. “The Value of Clean Water: The Public's Willingness to Pay for Boatable, Fishable, and Swimmable Quality Water.” Water Resources Research 29 (7): 2445–2454.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carvalho, L., C. McDonald, C. de Hoyos, U. Mischke, G. Phillips, G. Borics, S. Poikane, et al. 2013. “Sustaining Recreational Quality of European Lakes: Minimizing the Health Risks from Algal Blooms Through Phosphorus Control.” Journal of Applied Ecology 50: 315–323.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Champ, P., K. J. Boyle, and T. Brown, eds. 2003. A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Crompton, J. 2005. “The Impact of Parks on Property Values: Empirical Evidence from the Past Two Decades in the United States.” Managing Leisure 10 (4): 203–218.
   Google Scholar
• Dehnhardt, A. 2013. “Decision-Makers’ Attitudes Towards Economic Valuation: A Case Study of German Water Management Authorities.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy 2 (2): 201–221.
   Google Scholar
• Dodds, W., W. Bouska, J. Eitzmann, T. Pilger, K. Pitts, A. Riley, J. Schloesser, and D. Thornbrugh. 2009. “Eutrophication of U.S. Freshwaters: Analysis of Potential Economic Damages.” Environmental Science and Technology 43: 12–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dupont, D. 2004. “Do Children Matter? An Examination of Gender Differences in Environmental Valuation.” Ecological Economics 49: 273–286.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eaton, J. 1999. “Water-Resource Allocation for Recreation, Leisure and Amenity.” Water and Environment Journal 13 (4): 235–240.
   Google Scholar
• Egan, K., J. Herriges, C. Kling, and J. Downing. 2009. “Valuing Water Quality as a Function of Water Quality Measures.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 91: 106–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eggert, H., and B. Olsson. 2009. “Valuing Multi-Attribute Marine Water Quality.” Marine Policy 33: 201–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrini, S., M. Schaafsma, and I. Bateman. 2014. “Revealed and Stated Preference Valuation and Transfer: A Within-Sample Comparison of Water Quality Improvement Values.” Water Resources Research 50: 4746–4759.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feuillette, S., H. Levrel, B. Boeuf, S. Blanquart, O. Gorin, G. Monaco, B. Penisson, and S. Robichon. 2016. “The Use of Cost–Benefit Analysis in Environmental Policies: Some Issues Raised by the Water Framework Directive Implementation in France.” Environmental Science and Policy 57: 79–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frykblom, P. 1998. “Questions in the Contingent Valuation Method: Five Essays.” PhD diss., The Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Hanley, N., D. Bell, and B. Alvarez-Farizo. 2003. “Valuing the Benefits of Coastal Water Quality Improvements Using Contingent and Real Behaviour.” Environmental and Resource Economics 24: 273–285.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanley, N., F. Schläpfer, and J. Spurgeon. 2003. “Aggregating the Benefits of Environmental Improvements: Distance-Decay Functions for Use and Non-Use values.” Journal of Environmental Management 68 (3): 297–304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanley, N., R. Wright, and B. Alvarez-Farizo. 2006. “Estimating the Economic Value of Improvements in River Ecology Using Choice Experiments: An Application to the Water Framework Directive.” Journal of Environmental Management 78: 183–193.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hein, L. 2006. “Cost-Efficient Eutrophication Control in a Shallow Lake Ecosystem Subject to Two Steady States.” Ecological Economics 59: 429–439.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hering, D., A. Borja, J. Carstensen, L. Carvalho, M. Elliott, C. Feld, A-S. Heiskanen, et al. 2010. “The European Water Framework Directive at the Age of 10: A Critical Review of the Achievements with Recommendations for the Future.” Science of the Total Environment 408: 4007–4019.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huhtala, A., and H. Lankia. 2012. “Valuation of Trips to Second Homes: Do Environmental Attributes Matter?” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 55: 733–752.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huttunen, I., M. Huttunen, V. Piirainen, M. Korppoo, A. Lepisto, A. Räike, S. Tattari, and B. Vehviläinen. 2016. “A National Scale Nutrient Loading Model for FINNISH Watersheds — VEMALA.” Environmental Modeling and Assessment 21: 83–109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyytiäinen, K., and M. Ollikainen, eds. 2012. Economic Aspects of Baltic Sea Protection. Reports of the Ministry of the Environment 22/2012. (In Finnish, English abstract) Helsinki: Ministry of the Environment.
   Google Scholar
• Ignatius, S-M. 2012. “Effects of Water Status on Recreation Value on River Paimionjoki Watershed.” Masters diss., Aalto University, School of Engineering, Department of Water Resources Engineering. (In Finnish, English abstract).
   Google Scholar
• Kakoyannis, C., and G. H. Stankey. 2002. Assessing and Evaluating Recreational Uses of Water Resources: Implications for an Integrated Management Framework. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-536. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station.
   Google Scholar
• Kenney, M. 2007. “Which Nutrient Criteria Should States and Tribes Choose to Determine Waterbody Impairment?: Using Science and Judgments to Inform Decision Making.” PhD diss., Division of Environmental Sciences and Policy, Duke University.
   Google Scholar
• Kenney, M., G. Arhonditsis, L. Reiter, M. Barkley, and K. Reckhow. 2009. “Using Structural Equation Modeling and Expert Elicitation to Select Nutrient Criteria Variables for South-Central Florida Lakes.” Lake and Reservoir Management 25: 119–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenter, J., L. O'Brien, N. Hockley, N. Ravenscroft, I. Fazey, K. Irvine, M. Reed, et al. 2015. “What are Shared and Social Values of Ecosystems?” Ecological Economics 111: 86–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kotamäki, N., A. Pätynen, A. Taskinen, T. Huttula, and O. Malve. 2015. “Statistical Dimensioning of Nutrient Loading Reduction: LLR Assessment Tool for Lake Managers.” Environmental Management 56 (2): 480–491. doi:10.1007/s00267-015-0514-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreitler, J., M. Papenfus, K. Byrd, and W. Labiosa. 2013. “Interacting Coastal Based Ecosystem Services: Recreation and Water Quality in Puget Sound, WA.” PLoS ONE 8 (2): e56670. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0056670
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyber, M. 1981. Vesistön likaantumisen virkistyskäytölle aiheuttamat haitat ja niiden arviointi katselmustoimituksessa [Problems Caused by Contamination of Water Bodies for Recreational Use and the Evaluation of them in Inspection]. Tiedotteita/VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland 23, 0358–5077. (In Finnish) Espoo: Technical Research Centre of Finland.
   Google Scholar
• Laurans, Y., A. Aleksandar Rankovic, R. Billéa, R. Pirarda, and L. Mermetc. 2013. “Use of Ecosystem Services Economic Valuation for Decision Making: Questioning a Literature Blindspot.” Journal of Environmental Management 119: 208–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leggett, C., and N. Bockstael. 2000. “Evidence of the Effects of Water Quality on Residential Land Prices.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 39: 121–144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipton, D. 2003. “The Value of Improved Water Quality to Chesapeake Bay Boaters.” Working Paper WP 03-16. College Park, MD: Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland.
   Google Scholar
• Lipton, D., and R. Hicks. 2003. “The Cost of Stress: Low Dissolved Oxygen and Economic Benefits of Recreational Striped Bass (Moronesaxatilis) Fishing in the Patuxent River.” Estuaries 26: 310–315.
   Google Scholar
• Mathews, L., F. Homans, and K. Easter. 2002. “Estimating the Benefits of Phosphorus Pollution Reductions: An Application in the Minnesota River.” Journal of the American Water Resources Association 38: 1217–1223. doi:10.1111/j.1752-1688.2002.tb04343.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattila, T. 1995. Rantakiinteistöjen virkistysarvo ja vesistöjen likaantumisen vaikutus siihen [ Recreational Value of Waterfront Properties and the Effect of Water Pollution on it]. Finnish Environment Institute 6. 101 p. (In Finnish). Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Navrud, S., and R. Ready, eds. 2007. Environmental Value Transfer: Issues and Methods. Dordrecht: Springer
   Google Scholar
• Nicholson, E., J. Ryan, and D. Hodgkinds. 2002. “Community Data: Where Does the Value Lie? Assessing Confidence Limits of Community Collected Water Quality Data.” Water Science Technology 45 (11): 193–200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, J., and P. Kennedy. 2009. “The Use (and Abuse) of Meta-Analysis in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics: An Assessment.” Environmental and Resource Economics 42 (3): 345–377.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poor, J., K. Boyle, L. Taylor, and R. Bouchard. 2001. “Objective Versus Subjective Measures of Water Clarity in Hedonic Property Value Models.” Land Economics 77: 482–493.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poor, J., K. Pessagno, and R. Paul. 2007. “Exploring the Hedonic Value of Ambient Water Quality: A Local Watershed-Based Study.” Ecological Economics 60: 797–806. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.02.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravenscroft, N., and A. Church. 2011. “The Attitudes of Recreational User Representatives to Pollution Reduction and the Implementation of the European Water Framework Directive.” Land Use Policy 28: 167–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raymond, C., J. Kenter, T. Plieninger, N. Turner, and K. Alexander. 2014. “Comparing Instrumental and Deliberative Paradigms Underpinning the Assessment of Social Values for Cultural Ecosystem Services.” Ecological Economics 107: 145–156.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, A. A., M. E. Kragt, F. L. Gibson, M. P. Burton, E. H. Petersen, and D. J. Pannell. 2015. “Non-Market Valuation: Usage and Impacts in Environmental Policy and Management in Australia.” The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 59 (1): 1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandström, M. 1996. “Recreational Benefits from Improved Water Quality: A Random Utility Model of Swedish Seaside Recreation.” Working Paper 121. Stockholm School of Economics, Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics.
   Google Scholar
• Seppälä, E., T. Hjerppe, and M. Marttunen. 2014. The Benefits of Water Pollution Control in the Gulf of Finland: Water Quality Impacts on Recreational Use of Water Bodies Estimated with VIRVA Model. Reports of the Finnish Environment Institute 34/2014. (In Finnish, English abstract). Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Seppänen, E., A-L. Toivonen, M. Kurkilahti, and P. Moilanen. 2011. “Fishing in Finland 2009: Recreational Fishing in Fishery Regions.” Riista- ja kalatalous – Tutkimuksia ja selvityksiä 1/2011 (In Finnish, English abstract). Helsinki: Riista- ja kalatalouden tutkimuslaitos.
   Google Scholar
• Sievänen, T., and M. Neuvonen, eds. 2011. “Luonnon virkistyskäyttö 2010 [Recreational Use of Nature 2010].” Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 212. 190 s. ISBN 978-951-40-2332-3 (In Finnish). Vantaa: Metsäntutkimuslaitos.
   Google Scholar
• Sievänen, T., M. Neuvonen, and E. Pouta. 2003. “ Veneilijöiden harrastajaprofiilit [Recreational User Profiles of Boaters].” Liikunta jaTiede 5–6: 44–51. ( In Finnish).
   Google Scholar
• Sievänen, T., E. Pouta, and M. Neuvonen. 2007. “Recreational Home Users: Potential Clients for Countryside Tourism?” Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 7 (3): 223–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, D., G. Croker, and K. McFarlane. 1995. “Human Perception of Water Appearance.” New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 29: 29–43. doi:10.00288330/00288330.1995.9516637
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soutukorva, Å. 2005. “The Value of Improved Water Quality: A Random Utility Model of Recreation in the Stockholm Archipelago.” Beijer Discussion Paper Series 135. Stockholm: Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics, The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Stedman, R., A-M. Ventelä, L. Arvola, H. Helminen, and J. Sarvala. 2003. “Lake Quality and Sense of Place: A Comparison of Finland and the United States, With Implications for Tourism Development.” In Proceedings of the International Lake Tourism Conference 2-5 July 2003, edited by T. Härkönen, Savonlinna, 159-170. Finland: Publications of the Savonlinna Institute for Regional Development and Research No 5.
   Google Scholar
• Stumborg, B., K. Baerenklau, and R. Bishop. 2001. “Nonpoint Source Pollution and Present Values: A Contingent Valuation Study of Lake Mendota.” Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy 23: 120–132. doi:10.1111/1058-7195.0004
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, T., and A. Longo. 2010. “Valuing Algal Bloom in the Black Sea Coast of Bulgaria: A Choice Experiments Approach.” Journal of Environmental Management 91: 1963–1971.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Väisänen, S., ed. 2013. Models in Support of River Basin Management Planning in GisBloom Pilot Areas, Guidance Document for Applying the Demonstrated Methods in River Basin Management Planning. Reports of the Finnish Environment Institute 29/2013. (In Finnish, English abstract), Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute.
   Google Scholar
• van der Veeren, R. 2010. “Different Cost-Benefit Analyses in the Netherlands for the European Water Framework Directive.” Water Policy 12: 746–760.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vesterinen, J., E. Pouta, A. Huhtala, and M. Neuvonen. 2010. “Impacts of Changes in Water Quality on Recreation Behavior and Benefits in Finland.” Journal of Environmental Management 91: 984–994. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.12.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehead, J. 2005. “Combining Willingness to Pay and Behavior Data with Limited Information.” Resource and Energy Economics 27: 143–155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitehead, J., T. Haab, and J. Huang. 2000. “Measuring Recreation Benefits of Quality Improvements with Revealed and Stated Behavior Data.” Resource and Energy Economics 22: 339–354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, M. A., and J. P. Hoehn. 2006. “Special Issue: Environmental Benefits Transfer: Methods, Applications, and New Directions.” Ecological Economics 60: 335–482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar