1、 API PUBL*3Lb 75 0732290 0549425 385 I HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT API PUBLICATION NUMBER 31 6 AUGUST 1995 Identifying and Measuring Nonuse Values for Natural and Envi ron men tal Resources A Critical Review of the State of the Art American Petroleum Institute API PUBL*316 95 W 07322
2、90 0549426 211 I Identifying and Measuring Nonuse Values for Natural and Environmental Resources A Critical Review of the State of the Art Health and Environmental Affairs Department PUBLICATION NUMBER 31 6 PREPARED UNDER CONTRACT BY: RONALD G. CUMMINGS GLENN W. HARRISON DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS UNIV
3、ERSTY OF NEW MEXICO ALBUQUERQUE, NM 87131 APRIL 1992 American Petroleum Institute FOREWORD API PUBLICATIONS NECESSARILY ADDRESS PROBLEMS OF A GENERAL NATURE. W“ RESPECT TO PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES, LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS SHOULD BE REVIEWED. MI IS NOT UNDERTAKING To MEET THE D
4、UTIES OF EMPLOYERS, WAC- TURERS, OR SUPPLIERS TO WARN AND PROPERLY TRAIN AND EQUIP THEIR EMPLOYEES, AND OTHERS EXPOSED, CONCERNING HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS AND PRECAUTIONS, NOR UNDERTAKING THEIR OBLIGATIONS UNDER LOCAL, STATE, OR FEDERAL LAWS. NOTHING CONTAINED IN ANY API PUBLICATION IS TO BE CONSTRU
5、ED AS GRANTING ANY RIGHT, BY IMPLICATION OR OTHERWISE, FOR THE MANU- FACTURE, SALE, OR USE OF ANY METHOD, APPARATUS, OR PRODUCT COV- ERED BY LETERS PATENT. NEITHER SHOULD ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ITY FOR INFRINGEMENT OF LETTERS PATENT. THE PUBLICATION BE CONSTRUED AS INSURING ANYONE AGAINST LIABIL- Cop
6、yright O 1993 American Petroleum institute i API PUBL*3Lb 95 0732290 0549428 094 = ACKNOWLEDGMENTS THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE ARE RECOGNIZED FOR THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS OF TIME AND EXPERTISE DURING THIS STUDY AND IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT: API STAFF CONTACT Stephanie Meadows, Health and Environmental
7、Affairs Department We have benefited from comments by a number of individuals. We would particularly like to acknowledge the following for their helpful remarks: Robert Anderson, American Petroleum Institute Peter Bohm, University of Stockholm William Desvousges, Research Triangle Institute Dewey H.
8、 Johnson, University of South Carolina Ted McConnell, University of Maryland E.E. Rutstrm, University of South Carolina V. Kerry Smith, North Carolina State University iii . API PUBLX3Lb 95 PI 0732290 0549429 TZ0 I TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1 . OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 1-1 2 . OPERATIO
9、NALLY MEANINGFUL THEOREMS FOR NONUSE VALUES . 2-1 A . Overview . 2-1 B . What Are Operationally Meaningful Theorems? 2-3 C . In The Beginning There Was Option Value . 2-4 D . Option Value. Perspective And The Pre-1980 State Of The At 2-10 E . Separate But Parallel Advances In Methods For Valuing Pub
10、lic Goods 2-13 F . Measuring Distinct Nonuse Values With The CVM . 2-15 F.l Three early “existence value“ studies 2-16 F.2 Examples of other “nonuse value“ studies 2-20 and Nonuse Components 2-25 G.l Defining total value . 2-26 G.2 Defining nonuse value . 2-27 G.3 Defining use value . 2-28 G.4 Measu
11、rement problems 2-28 H . Conclusions 2-31 USING THE CONTINGENT VALUATION METHOD FOR ESTIMATING VALUES FOR NATURAL RESOURCE AND ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGES: A . Introduction 3-1 B . Is Individual Behavior In Contingent Markets Consistent With Behavior Assumed In Value Theory? . 3-7 B.l 8.2 CVM behavior and
12、 well-defined choice sets . 3-28 B.3 The “solid“ theoretical foundation for the CVM: closing remarks . 3-39 G . A Formal Decomposition of Total Values Into Use 3 . ARE CVM VALUES REAL ECONOMIC COMMITMENTS? 3-1 CVM valuation behavior and the incentives assumption 3-7 C . Do CVM Values Closely Approxi
13、mate Real Economic Commitments? . 3-42 C.l Comparing CVM results with results from indirect estimation methods: Inferential evidence of real economic commitments? . 3-43 C.2 CVM values and real economic commitments 3-46 4 . CONCLUSIONS . 4-1 D . Concluding Remarks 3-54 A . A Theory Of Nonuse Value 4
14、-4 API PUBLr3Lh 95 E 0732290 0549430 742 E TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Section 4. CONCLUSIONS (Continued) Page B. Measuring Nonuse Values With The CVM: The “Strong“ Theoretical Foundation For The CVM . 4-5 C. The Real Economic Commitment Implied By CVM Values 4-6 REFERENCES .R-l APPENDIX A: SUGGES
15、TIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY A-1 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2-1 Selected citations referring to nonuse values 2-2 2-2 Krutilla on existence and bequest motives 2-8 3-1 Results from the Duffield and Patterson 1992 experiment . 3-53 API PUBL*33b 95 0732290 0549433 689 Section 1 OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE OF THE S
16、TUDY The purpose of this study is to review the state of the art for identifying nonuse values for natural and environmental resources and for measuring them with the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM). The intent is to move beyond the taxonomic survey of potential biases which is found in a number o
17、f existing works such as Cummings, Brookshire and Schulze 119861 and Mitchell and Carson 1989. We attempt to keep attention sharply focused on a set of basic issues which, in our view, should be at the core of contemporary debate concerning nonuse values and the CVM. These issues are: the theoretica
18、l foundation of nonuse values; the conditions under which nonuse values can be measured; the theoretical foundation of the CVM; and the extent to which responses to “willingness to pay“ questions posed in applications of the CVM can be interpreted as values that represent a real economic commitment.
19、 To set the stage for our study, we briefly sketch our major conclusions and describe the manner in which the study is organized. We must first, however, provide the reader with an appropriate perspective for the notion of “conventional wisdoms“ and their importance for the method of inquiry used in
20、 the study, as well as for the manner in which our conclusions regarding nonuse values and the CVM must be interpreted. “Conventional wisdom“ refers to knowledge of what is true or right (“wisdom“) that is established by convention, general consent, or accepted usage (“conventional“). Conventional w
21、isdoms regarding one position or another may be implied by assertions of “fact“ (“this“ is the way it is, or “everyone knows that.“), by references or citations to many people that have accepted the position, or by appeal to substantive evidence which supports the position. Conventional wisdoms may
22、not be correct. They can change when knowledge about what is true or right changes. Assertions of conventional wisdom for a position may not be correct in cases where “factual“ statements are incorrect, citations of people supporting the position are incorrect (they do not support the position), or
23、when evidence posited to support the conventional wisdom is shown to support a contrary position. Appeal to conventional wisdom can be a powerful argumentative tool when it imposes on opposing views the burden of proof that the conventional wisdom is incorrect for one or more of the reasons given ab
24、ove. American Heritage Dictionary1982; pp. 319, 13861. 1-1 API PUBL*3Lb 95 = 0732290 0549432 515 A review of the state of the art in a subdiscipline would typically involve the simple process of bringing together the relevant conventional wisdoms. In total, these wisdoms constitute the state of the
25、art. All else equal, such a process would make our task a particularly easy one in the sense that there is certainly no shortage of conventional wisdoms regarding nonuse values and the CVM. As examples, the following exemplify a conventional wisdom concerning the composition of individual values and
26、 our knowledge of existence values that are based upon asserted fact and an appeal to substantive evidence: “.total economic value is made up of five components: (1) onsite recreation use of the resource; (2) commercial use of the resource; (3) an option demand from maintaining the potential to visi
27、t the resource in the future; (4) an existence value derived from simply knowing the resource exists in a preserved state; and (5) a bequest value derived by individuals from knowing that future generations will be able to enjoy existence or use of a resource.“ Loomis, Hanemann and Kanninen 1991; pp
28、. 41 2-41 31 “Contingent valuation studies have also documented considerable willingness to pay for existence. For example, Schulze et al. (1 983) found that estimates of willingness to pay to preserve visibility at the Grand Canyon were dominated by existence values. Other contingent valuation stud
29、ies that found a willingness to pay for existence were reported by Brookshire, Eubanks and Randall (1 983).“ Boyce, Brown, McClelland, Peterson and Schulze 1989; pp. 306-3071 Here is an example of “fact“ concerning a strong theoretical foundation underlying the CVM: “Constructed markets the CVM enjo
30、y a very strong theoretical foundation. (.) Constructed markets, in principle and in contrast to other benefit measurement techniques, can directly obtain WTP or WTA.“ Carson 1991; p. 1231 And here are examples of “facts“ related to peoples behavior in CVM studies: in offering values for environment
31、al and natural resource goods, people do not behave strategically, they tell the truth. I . experimental work, such as that reported by Vernon Smith 1980 is of interest. In experimental public goods markets with relatively weak incentives for accurate value revelation, Smith finds that most subjects
32、 accurately report their personal (induced) valuations.“ Randall, Hoehn and Brookshire 1983; p.6381 I . the specter of Samuelsons strategic bias proposition remained as a concern . until the appearance of Vernon Smiths 1977 report of experimental evidence that further belied the strategic bias propo
33、sition.“ Cummings, Brookshire and Schulze 1986; p.161 1-2 API PUBL*3Lh 95 E 0732290 0549433 451 In citing these examples, we do not mean to infer that all researchers concerned with nonuse value and the CVM accept the positions implied by the citations. Many do not and we attempt to draw this distin
34、ction in our later discussions. Statements of the type exemplified above are sufficiently common, however, to convey the impression of established conventions or accepted usage - conventional wisdoms. This may particularly be the case for the unwary reader of the literature. In any case, a state of
35、the art assessment based upon these conventional wisdoms, and we document many related assertions in our study, would likely take the following form. Existence values “exist,“ they are measurable, and they are large, relative to any total value. The CVM enjoys a strong theoretical foundation and can
36、 be used to measure a broad range of values when implemented carefully. Finally, values derived from the CVM may be generally taken as representing truthfully reported values by participants in CVM studies. Surely, then, a method that enjoys this state of the art can serve as a basis for deriving re
37、asonable values. But What if the Conventional Wisdoms are Incorrect? Our review of the state of the art for nonuse values and the CVM addresses this question: are the conventional wisdoms regarding nonuse values and the CVM indeed correct? We examine the studies cited as providing evidence that exis
38、tence values exist and are measurable, the factual basis of claims that the CVM is based upon a strong theoretical foundation; the studies cited as providing evidence that CVM subjects will generally report truthful values, and results from empirical studies regarding the extent to which people will
39、 actually pay amounts that they say they will pay in the CVM. Results from these analyses are laid bare for the readers examination. Effectively, we ask the reader to join us in asking: are these results consistent with the conventional wisdoms for nonuse values and the CVM? As will become apparent,
40、 our reading leads us to conclusions which are in stark contrast with the conventional wisdoms and state of the art characterized above. We hope to make clear, however, that these contrasts are not simply the result of differences in opinion between us and other scholars. They result from simply “li
41、stening“ to the data that form the substance of the evidentiary pillars which are claimed to support these wisdoms. The reader, of course, will draw his or her own conclusions on this point. We attempt, although not always successfully, to facilitate broad participation in this regard by trying to m
42、aintain a level of exposition that 1-3 API PUBLX316 95 M 0732290 0549434 398 M may be accessible to the nontechnical reader. A final observation may be useful in setting the stage for our study and for providing a context for our conclusions sketched below, particularly as they relate to the CVM. Ov
43、er the last two decades or so, hundreds of studies have been conducted which make use of the CVM in one form or another.2 The qualifying clause “one form or another“ is important inasmuch as few if any of these studies are strictly comparable. The researchers judgment plays a large role in the devel
44、opment and application of a CVM.3 Indeed, Carson and Mitchell 1992; p. 21 describe such judgment as it relates to questionnaire design in the CVM as a form of art: “In any event, reliability and validity are at best relative concepts. A fair assessment of work during the last decade on all of the no
45、nmarket valuation techniques is that none of them are (sic) automatically produce reliable and valid answers. A fair amount of art is required to assess the value of a natural resource. For hedonic pricing and travel cost analysis, this art comes primarily in the econometric specification; for conti
46、ngent valuation, it comes largely in the form of question wording. In both cases the problem is that natural resources do not and can not have a true value which is context independent.“4 Just a few examples of the many judgments required of the researcher in applying the CVM are: * the amount and k
47、inds of information regarding a good which the framing of valuation questions. pretests of questionnaires and interpretations of results. - the choice of a sample population and the choice of an the treatment of zero and outlier values and the choice of is to be given to subjects. elicitation mode.
48、statistical methods. The bulk of these studies focus on total, as opposed to nonuse, values. For example, Carson et al. 1991; p. 31 argues that “In the course of designing a contingent valuation survey . the researcher inevitably must make and justify a number of design decisions which often have no
49、 obviously correct answers.“ but one example, see Bowker and Stol1 1988. Without implying our acceptance of the argument, we also note Schulzes 1992 position that seems to argue that some natural resources may have values that are independent of context: those for which subjects attitudes are “crystallized.“ Many would argue that econometric specification in the CVM is more an art than a science. As 1-4 API PUBL*3Lb 95 W 0732290 0549435 224 While there exist works to which one may appeal for guidance in making judgments concerning one as
