David J. Pannell , Robert J. Johnston , Michael P. Burton , Md Sayed Iftekhar , Abbie A. Rogers , Cheryl Day
{"title":"价值的价值:通过非市场估值改善决策的好处","authors":"David J. Pannell , Robert J. Johnston , Michael P. Burton , Md Sayed Iftekhar , Abbie A. Rogers , Cheryl Day","doi":"10.1016/j.jeem.2025.103148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Information on non-market values has the potential to improve decision making but approaches to measure these values are costly and may be inaccurate. This study develops a Bayesian value of information (VOI) model to evaluate when and if the benefit of conducting a non-market valuation (NMV) study exceeds the cost, and which method of those considered delivers the highest expected net benefit. The approach is illustrated using a water quality improvement decision, with VOI estimated for stated preference, revealed preference and benefit transfer methods, the first two implemented at varying degrees of best practice. Information on the anticipated accuracy of each valuation method is derived via structured expert-elicitation. Results show that the net VOI from NMV studies varies widely and depends on multiple factors, including project scale, the quality of existing knowledge, the accuracy of NMV methods, the type of values measured (e.g., use versus nonuse values) and the costs of applying each method. Findings suggest that familiar narratives regarding the value of NMV estimates may be too simplistic, suggesting that a more nuanced approach to study application is warranted. Although demonstrated for one case study, the approach can be adapted to many decision settings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15763,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management","volume":"131 ","pages":"Article 103148"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The value of a value: The benefits of improved decision making informed by non-market valuation\",\"authors\":\"David J. Pannell , Robert J. Johnston , Michael P. Burton , Md Sayed Iftekhar , Abbie A. Rogers , Cheryl Day\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jeem.2025.103148\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Information on non-market values has the potential to improve decision making but approaches to measure these values are costly and may be inaccurate. This study develops a Bayesian value of information (VOI) model to evaluate when and if the benefit of conducting a non-market valuation (NMV) study exceeds the cost, and which method of those considered delivers the highest expected net benefit. The approach is illustrated using a water quality improvement decision, with VOI estimated for stated preference, revealed preference and benefit transfer methods, the first two implemented at varying degrees of best practice. Information on the anticipated accuracy of each valuation method is derived via structured expert-elicitation. Results show that the net VOI from NMV studies varies widely and depends on multiple factors, including project scale, the quality of existing knowledge, the accuracy of NMV methods, the type of values measured (e.g., use versus nonuse values) and the costs of applying each method. Findings suggest that familiar narratives regarding the value of NMV estimates may be too simplistic, suggesting that a more nuanced approach to study application is warranted. Although demonstrated for one case study, the approach can be adapted to many decision settings.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15763,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management\",\"volume\":\"131 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103148\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069625000324\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Economics and Management","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069625000324","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
The value of a value: The benefits of improved decision making informed by non-market valuation
Information on non-market values has the potential to improve decision making but approaches to measure these values are costly and may be inaccurate. This study develops a Bayesian value of information (VOI) model to evaluate when and if the benefit of conducting a non-market valuation (NMV) study exceeds the cost, and which method of those considered delivers the highest expected net benefit. The approach is illustrated using a water quality improvement decision, with VOI estimated for stated preference, revealed preference and benefit transfer methods, the first two implemented at varying degrees of best practice. Information on the anticipated accuracy of each valuation method is derived via structured expert-elicitation. Results show that the net VOI from NMV studies varies widely and depends on multiple factors, including project scale, the quality of existing knowledge, the accuracy of NMV methods, the type of values measured (e.g., use versus nonuse values) and the costs of applying each method. Findings suggest that familiar narratives regarding the value of NMV estimates may be too simplistic, suggesting that a more nuanced approach to study application is warranted. Although demonstrated for one case study, the approach can be adapted to many decision settings.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Environmental Economics and Management publishes theoretical and empirical papers devoted to specific natural resources and environmental issues. For consideration, papers should (1) contain a substantial element embodying the linkage between economic systems and environmental and natural resources systems or (2) be of substantial importance in understanding the management and/or social control of the economy in its relations with the natural environment. Although the general orientation of the journal is toward economics, interdisciplinary papers by researchers in other fields of interest to resource and environmental economists will be welcomed.