Article 37

N. Hanley, R. Wright, B. Álvarez-Farizo
{"title":"Article 37","authors":"N. Hanley, R. Wright, B. Álvarez-Farizo","doi":"10.1093/icsidreview/14.2.449","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper uses three indicators of ecological status that are both recognizable to the general public and follow the scientific goals of the EU's Water Framework Directive (WFD): healthy wildlife and plant populations; absence of litter/debris in the river; and river banks in good condition with only natural levels of erosion. This paper attempts to estimate the non-market values people place on improvements in these three indicators and, thus the benefits provided by moving toward \"good ecological status.\" The rivers sampled for this study are the River Wear and the River Clyde in England. This study uses the Choice Experiment (CE) method, which bases its data on contingent, stated preferences of individuals based on hypothetical scenarios rather than on actual behavior and real site characteristics. The CE method determines that environmental goods are valued in terms of their attributes and this is useful in this study so different attributes of water quality important to the WFD. In order to accomplish this efficiently, the benefits transfer technique is tested on the two rivers in this study to see if values established in previous studies are relevant to future studies. The study estimates that the preferences vary between the two sites studied, which does not indicate that benefits transfer is appropriate. Continued investigation on finding acceptable levels of error in benefits transfer will be needed to fully implement the WFD in Europe without high research costs. The willingness to pay values are higher for the River Clyde sample compared to the River Wear sample, despite the lower overall income of individuals around the River Clyde. All three attributes have the same relative value for the River Wear while aestethic value was considerably lower than river ecology and riverbanks for the River Clyde. None of the values were statistically significant individually, which may indicate that all three must exist to be considered a \"healthy river\" or individuals were not able to discern between the attributes based on the information given.","PeriodicalId":262261,"journal":{"name":"The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights","volume":"231 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icsidreview/14.2.449","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

This paper uses three indicators of ecological status that are both recognizable to the general public and follow the scientific goals of the EU's Water Framework Directive (WFD): healthy wildlife and plant populations; absence of litter/debris in the river; and river banks in good condition with only natural levels of erosion. This paper attempts to estimate the non-market values people place on improvements in these three indicators and, thus the benefits provided by moving toward "good ecological status." The rivers sampled for this study are the River Wear and the River Clyde in England. This study uses the Choice Experiment (CE) method, which bases its data on contingent, stated preferences of individuals based on hypothetical scenarios rather than on actual behavior and real site characteristics. The CE method determines that environmental goods are valued in terms of their attributes and this is useful in this study so different attributes of water quality important to the WFD. In order to accomplish this efficiently, the benefits transfer technique is tested on the two rivers in this study to see if values established in previous studies are relevant to future studies. The study estimates that the preferences vary between the two sites studied, which does not indicate that benefits transfer is appropriate. Continued investigation on finding acceptable levels of error in benefits transfer will be needed to fully implement the WFD in Europe without high research costs. The willingness to pay values are higher for the River Clyde sample compared to the River Wear sample, despite the lower overall income of individuals around the River Clyde. All three attributes have the same relative value for the River Wear while aestethic value was considerably lower than river ecology and riverbanks for the River Clyde. None of the values were statistically significant individually, which may indicate that all three must exist to be considered a "healthy river" or individuals were not able to discern between the attributes based on the information given.
第三十七条
本文采用了三个既为公众所认识又符合欧盟水框架指令(WFD)科学目标的生态状况指标:健康的野生动植物种群;河中没有垃圾/碎片;河岸状况良好,只有自然程度的侵蚀。本文试图估计人们对这三个指标的改善所给予的非市场价值,从而估计向“良好生态状态”迈进所提供的效益。这项研究的河流样本是英格兰的威尔河和克莱德河。本研究使用了选择实验(CE)方法,该方法将数据建立在偶然的、基于假设情景的个人偏好上,而不是基于实际行为和真实地点特征。CE方法确定环境产品是根据其属性来评估的,这在本研究中很有用,因此水质的不同属性对WFD很重要。为了有效地实现这一目标,本研究在两条河流上进行了利益转移技术的测试,看看之前研究建立的价值是否与未来的研究相关。该研究估计,两个研究地点的偏好有所不同,这并不表明利益转移是适当的。为了在欧洲全面实施世界粮食发展计划而不需要高昂的研究费用,将需要继续调查在利益转移方面找到可接受的误差水平。尽管克莱德河周围的个人总收入较低,但克莱德河样本的支付意愿要高于Wear河样本。所有这三个属性对河流Wear具有相同的相对价值,而美学价值明显低于克莱德河的河流生态和河岸。这些值中没有一个单独具有统计显著性,这可能表明必须同时存在这三个值才能被认为是一条"健康的河流",或者个人无法根据所提供的信息区分这些属性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书