California’s long-running Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) program represents a unique policy approach for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. It mandates that manufacturers sell passenger cars and trucks that have zero tailpipe emissions, which in today’s market are electrified vehicles, including battery electric and fuel cell vehicles. The policy, when it was initiated in 1990, was technology forcing because such zero emission vehicles had not yet been produced. We discuss the motivation for such a technology policy and briefly summarize the 30-year history of this evolving program. We examine evidence on the extent of innovation in electrification technologies under the program and trends in battery and vehicle costs and sales. We review the flexibility granted under the ZEV credit-trading program and estimate the value of ZEV credits traded among manufacturers. Finally, given the continuing uncertainty about costs, technology improvements, and consumer acceptance, we argue that there is a need for additional transparency and flexibility if the policy is to continue. One approach we suggest is that regulators build a safety valve mechanism into the credit trading market.
{"title":"Pushing New Technology into the Market: California’s Zero Emissions Vehicle Mandate","authors":"V. McConnell, Benjamin Leard","doi":"10.1086/713055","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/713055","url":null,"abstract":"California’s long-running Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) program represents a unique policy approach for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. It mandates that manufacturers sell passenger cars and trucks that have zero tailpipe emissions, which in today’s market are electrified vehicles, including battery electric and fuel cell vehicles. The policy, when it was initiated in 1990, was technology forcing because such zero emission vehicles had not yet been produced. We discuss the motivation for such a technology policy and briefly summarize the 30-year history of this evolving program. We examine evidence on the extent of innovation in electrification technologies under the program and trends in battery and vehicle costs and sales. We review the flexibility granted under the ZEV credit-trading program and estimate the value of ZEV credits traded among manufacturers. Finally, given the continuing uncertainty about costs, technology improvements, and consumer acceptance, we argue that there is a need for additional transparency and flexibility if the policy is to continue. One approach we suggest is that regulators build a safety valve mechanism into the credit trading market.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"15 1","pages":"169 - 179"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/713055","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49264267","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mary F. Evans, K. Palmer, Joseph E. Aldy, M. Fowlie, Matthew J. Kotchen, A. Levinson
As of late 2020, the Trump administration had initiated almost 100 rollbacks of US environmental regulations. A careful assessment of the benefits and costs of rolling back an existing regulation can and should inform such decisions. When assessing the potential rollback of an existing regulation, analysts can often learn from the regulation’s implementation through retrospective analysis as well as from advances in scientific knowledge. We discuss recent actions concerning the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) to illustrate the potential lessons from doing so. In the case of MATS, advances in science have shed light on broader exposure pathways and previously unquantified health effects, suggesting that the benefits of reducing mercury emissions may exceed previous estimates. At the same time, changes in the energy sector have altered the mix of fuels used to produce electricity, which impacts both the benefits and the costs of the regulation.
{"title":"The Role of Retrospective Analysis in an Era of Deregulation: Lessons from the US Mercury and Air Toxics Standards","authors":"Mary F. Evans, K. Palmer, Joseph E. Aldy, M. Fowlie, Matthew J. Kotchen, A. Levinson","doi":"10.1086/712887","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/712887","url":null,"abstract":"As of late 2020, the Trump administration had initiated almost 100 rollbacks of US environmental regulations. A careful assessment of the benefits and costs of rolling back an existing regulation can and should inform such decisions. When assessing the potential rollback of an existing regulation, analysts can often learn from the regulation’s implementation through retrospective analysis as well as from advances in scientific knowledge. We discuss recent actions concerning the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) to illustrate the potential lessons from doing so. In the case of MATS, advances in science have shed light on broader exposure pathways and previously unquantified health effects, suggesting that the benefits of reducing mercury emissions may exceed previous estimates. At the same time, changes in the energy sector have altered the mix of fuels used to produce electricity, which impacts both the benefits and the costs of the regulation.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"15 1","pages":"163 - 168"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/712887","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45432432","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Since the 1950s, as environmental challenges have evolved, so too have economic views on natural resource scarcity. This article discusses three distinct phases in this evolution. From the 1950s to the 1970s, the “resource depletion era,” the environment was viewed mainly as a source of key natural resources and a sink for waste, and thus the focus of economics was on whether there are physical “limits” on the availability of resources as economies expand and populations grow. From the 1970s to the end of the twentieth century, the “environmental public goods era,” attention shifted to the state of the environment and processes of environmental degradation, such as climate change, deforestation, watershed degradation, desertification, and acid rain, that result in the loss of global and local environmental public goods and their important nonmarket values. From 2000 to the present, the “ecological scarcity era,” there has been growing concern about the state of the world’s ecosystems and earth system processes, and thus the focus has shifted back to possible limits to economic and population expansion, although the emphasis now is on potential “planetary boundary” constraints on human activity.
{"title":"The Evolution of Economic Views on Natural Resource Scarcity","authors":"E. Barbier","doi":"10.1086/712926","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/712926","url":null,"abstract":"Since the 1950s, as environmental challenges have evolved, so too have economic views on natural resource scarcity. This article discusses three distinct phases in this evolution. From the 1950s to the 1970s, the “resource depletion era,” the environment was viewed mainly as a source of key natural resources and a sink for waste, and thus the focus of economics was on whether there are physical “limits” on the availability of resources as economies expand and populations grow. From the 1970s to the end of the twentieth century, the “environmental public goods era,” attention shifted to the state of the environment and processes of environmental degradation, such as climate change, deforestation, watershed degradation, desertification, and acid rain, that result in the loss of global and local environmental public goods and their important nonmarket values. From 2000 to the present, the “ecological scarcity era,” there has been growing concern about the state of the world’s ecosystems and earth system processes, and thus the focus has shifted back to possible limits to economic and population expansion, although the emphasis now is on potential “planetary boundary” constraints on human activity.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"15 1","pages":"24 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/712926","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45153747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nature can be thought of as a form of capital (natural capital) that provides essential contributions to human health, prosperity, and well-being. However, economic activity that leads to climate change, loss of biodiversity, and other ecosystem degradation has resulted in risky and costly losses of natural capital. Economics has a central role to play in analyzing the value of natural capital and in designing incentives to conserve and restore it. This symposium features perspectives on key research frontiers and advances in the economics of natural capital. The articles in the symposium focus on three crucial issues. Fisher, de Wit, and Ricketts explore the relationship between land quality—notably, its forest cover and biodiversity—and human health, highlighting the current lack of economic tools and approaches to evaluate alternative interventions to achieve public health outcomes. Barbier and Di Falco examine the relationship between land as a productive asset—its quality and ongoing degradation—and living standards in developing countries. Brandon et al. review efforts to bring natural capital into the system of national accounts and national economic policy making. Together, these articles highlight recent advances as well as the challenges that remain to reversing the decline of natural capital and achieving sustainable development.
自然可以被认为是一种资本(自然资本)，它为人类的健康、繁荣和福祉做出了重要贡献。然而，导致气候变化、生物多样性丧失和其他生态系统退化的经济活动导致了自然资本的风险和代价高昂的损失。经济学在分析自然资本的价值和设计保护和恢复自然资本的激励措施方面发挥着核心作用。本次研讨会的特点是对自然资本经济学的关键研究前沿和进展的看法。研讨会的文章集中在三个关键问题上。Fisher, de Wit和Ricketts探讨了土地质量(尤其是森林覆盖和生物多样性)与人类健康之间的关系，强调了目前缺乏经济工具和方法来评估实现公共健康结果的替代干预措施。Barbier和Di Falco研究了土地作为一种生产性资产(其质量和持续退化)与发展中国家生活水平之间的关系。Brandon等人回顾了将自然资本纳入国民核算体系和国民经济政策制定的努力。这些文章共同强调了最近的进展，以及在扭转自然资本下降和实现可持续发展方面仍然存在的挑战。
{"title":"An Introduction to the Economics of Natural Capital","authors":"S. Polasky, G. Daily","doi":"10.1086/713010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/713010","url":null,"abstract":"Nature can be thought of as a form of capital (natural capital) that provides essential contributions to human health, prosperity, and well-being. However, economic activity that leads to climate change, loss of biodiversity, and other ecosystem degradation has resulted in risky and costly losses of natural capital. Economics has a central role to play in analyzing the value of natural capital and in designing incentives to conserve and restore it. This symposium features perspectives on key research frontiers and advances in the economics of natural capital. The articles in the symposium focus on three crucial issues. Fisher, de Wit, and Ricketts explore the relationship between land quality—notably, its forest cover and biodiversity—and human health, highlighting the current lack of economic tools and approaches to evaluate alternative interventions to achieve public health outcomes. Barbier and Di Falco examine the relationship between land as a productive asset—its quality and ongoing degradation—and living standards in developing countries. Brandon et al. review efforts to bring natural capital into the system of national accounts and national economic policy making. Together, these articles highlight recent advances as well as the challenges that remain to reversing the decline of natural capital and achieving sustainable development.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"15 1","pages":"87 - 94"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/713010","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43877889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Given the Trump administration’s emphasis on repealing regulations, this article discusses issues related to conducting benefit–cost analyses of regulatory repeal. In particular, the article develops analyses of the repeal and modification of six major rules issued by the Obama administration and compares them to analyses conducted by the Trump administration. The results illustrate the sensitivity of these analyses to several key analytical components, including the social cost of methane emissions and the upper-bound estimates of catastrophic accidents, and also illustrate that the Trump administration’s ranking of the six rules using its preferred metric—the cost savings of repeal—differs from a ranking that uses net benefits. Recommendations are provided for improving regulatory impact analyses, including those conducted for regulatory repeal.
{"title":"The Economics of Regulatory Repeal","authors":"A. Krupnick, A. Fraas, Justine Huetteman","doi":"10.1086/713076","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/713076","url":null,"abstract":"Given the Trump administration’s emphasis on repealing regulations, this article discusses issues related to conducting benefit–cost analyses of regulatory repeal. In particular, the article develops analyses of the repeal and modification of six major rules issued by the Obama administration and compares them to analyses conducted by the Trump administration. The results illustrate the sensitivity of these analyses to several key analytical components, including the social cost of methane emissions and the upper-bound estimates of catastrophic accidents, and also illustrate that the Trump administration’s ranking of the six rules using its preferred metric—the cost savings of repeal—differs from a ranking that uses net benefits. Recommendations are provided for improving regulatory impact analyses, including those conducted for regulatory repeal.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"15 1","pages":"1 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/713076","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43059106","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
After a decade of improvement, annual average fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in the United States increased in both 2017 and 2018. These increases are worrisome, because studies have shown that PM2.5 increases premature mortality risk (e.g., Lelieveld et al. 2015), and this risk accounts for the largest share of monetary damages from air pollution (US EPA 1999, 2010a; Muller, Mendelsohn, and Nordhaus 2011). Based on data for 2009–2018, this article documents US trends in PM2.5 and their implications for mortality. We find that nationally, PM2.5 levels fell by 27.4 percent from 2009 to 2016 and then increased 5.7 percent from 2016 to 2018. We explore channels through which the PM2.5 increases may have occurred, including increases in economic activity, increases in wildfires, and decreases in Clean Air Act enforcement actions. The evidence suggests that all three may have played roles in the observed increase. Although further research is needed on the causes of the increase in PM2.5, we find that these trends have significant health implications, with premature deaths from PM2.5 rising by 9,700 between 2016 and 2018, representing damages of $89 billion (in $2018). In the remainder of the article, we present our results concerning trends in PM2.5; discuss our analysis of the contribution of economic activity, wildfires, and regulatory enforcement actions to these trends; and identify the implications of these trends for mortality.
经过十年的改善，美国的年平均细颗粒物(PM2.5)在2017年和2018年都有所增加。这些增长令人担忧，因为研究表明PM2.5增加了过早死亡风险(例如，leeleveld等人，2015年)，而这种风险占空气污染造成的经济损失的最大份额(美国环保署1999,2010;Muller, Mendelsohn, and Nordhaus 2011)。基于2009-2018年的数据，本文记录了美国PM2.5的趋势及其对死亡率的影响。我们发现，在全国范围内，PM2.5水平从2009年到2016年下降了27.4%，然后从2016年到2018年上升了5.7%。我们探索了PM2.5增加可能发生的渠道，包括经济活动的增加、野火的增加和《清洁空气法》执法行动的减少。有证据表明，这三者都可能在观测到的增加中发挥了作用。虽然还需要进一步研究PM2.5增加的原因，但我们发现，这些趋势对健康有重大影响，2016年至2018年期间，PM2.5导致的过早死亡人数增加了9700人，造成的损失为890亿美元(按2018年美元计算)。在文章的剩余部分，我们将展示我们关于PM2.5趋势的研究结果;讨论我们对经济活动、野火和监管执法行动对这些趋势的贡献的分析;并确定这些趋势对死亡率的影响。
{"title":"Recent Increases in Air Pollution: Evidence and Implications for Mortality","authors":"Karen Clay, Nicholas Z. Muller, Xiao Wang","doi":"10.1086/712983","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/712983","url":null,"abstract":"After a decade of improvement, annual average fine particulate matter (PM2.5) in the United States increased in both 2017 and 2018. These increases are worrisome, because studies have shown that PM2.5 increases premature mortality risk (e.g., Lelieveld et al. 2015), and this risk accounts for the largest share of monetary damages from air pollution (US EPA 1999, 2010a; Muller, Mendelsohn, and Nordhaus 2011). Based on data for 2009–2018, this article documents US trends in PM2.5 and their implications for mortality. We find that nationally, PM2.5 levels fell by 27.4 percent from 2009 to 2016 and then increased 5.7 percent from 2016 to 2018. We explore channels through which the PM2.5 increases may have occurred, including increases in economic activity, increases in wildfires, and decreases in Clean Air Act enforcement actions. The evidence suggests that all three may have played roles in the observed increase. Although further research is needed on the causes of the increase in PM2.5, we find that these trends have significant health implications, with premature deaths from PM2.5 rising by 9,700 between 2016 and 2018, representing damages of $89 billion (in $2018). In the remainder of the article, we present our results concerning trends in PM2.5; discuss our analysis of the contribution of economic activity, wildfires, and regulatory enforcement actions to these trends; and identify the implications of these trends for mortality.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"175 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/712983","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"60720103","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Public lands can provide a wide range of environmental benefits. Granting protective status to these lands generally imposes restrictions on resource development and extraction activities and thus often generates conflict and debate among public and private stakeholders. In the United States, this is especially the case for national monuments, which are areas that contain significant historic, prehistoric, cultural, and/or geologic resources. In this article, I describe the controversy surrounding national monument designations, particularly in the western United States. I describe the history and status of national monuments, discuss the evidence concerning the benefits and costs of national monuments and other protected lands, and examine public land conflicts in the U.S. west in the context of economic trends in rural communities. I conclude with a discussion of the future outlook for national monuments and public lands in the United States.
{"title":"Feature—Public Land Conflicts and Controversies: The Designation of National Monuments in the Western United States","authors":"M. Walls","doi":"10.1093/reep/reaa010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/reaa010","url":null,"abstract":"Public lands can provide a wide range of environmental benefits. Granting protective status to these lands generally imposes restrictions on resource development and extraction activities and thus often generates conflict and debate among public and private stakeholders. In the United States, this is especially the case for national monuments, which are areas that contain significant historic, prehistoric, cultural, and/or geologic resources. In this article, I describe the controversy surrounding national monument designations, particularly in the western United States. I describe the history and status of national monuments, discuss the evidence concerning the benefits and costs of national monuments and other protected lands, and examine public land conflicts in the U.S. west in the context of economic trends in rural communities. I conclude with a discussion of the future outlook for national monuments and public lands in the United States.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"14 1","pages":"352 - 364"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/reep/reaa010","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42209096","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nutrient pollution is one of the leading causes of declines in surface water quality both in the United States and globally. This article discusses three important issues that influence the effectiveness of recent U.S. policies that ban the use of phosphates in household and commercial products and, ultimately, these policies’ ability to improve water quality. First, the U.S. production of phosphates for household and commercial products and other industrial uses has fallen to less than 5 percent of total phosphate production in recent decades, with agricultural use accounting for the remaining 95 percent. Thus, current policies that target household and industrial uses over agriculture have limited ability to address the larger nutrient pollution problem. Second, the behavioral responses of consumers to variations in the spatial and temporal characteristics of these policies reduce their effectiveness because households can purchase products containing phosphates at different locations or at different times of the year. Third, the interactions of these policies with regulations at wastewater treatment facilities will determine the extent to which reductions in phosphate at the household and commercial levels will result in reductions in the amount of phosphates that are emitted into waterways.
{"title":"Policy Brief—The Effectiveness of Phosphate Bans in the United States","authors":"David A Keiser","doi":"10.1093/reep/reaa003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/reaa003","url":null,"abstract":"Nutrient pollution is one of the leading causes of declines in surface water quality both in the United States and globally. This article discusses three important issues that influence the effectiveness of recent U.S. policies that ban the use of phosphates in household and commercial products and, ultimately, these policies’ ability to improve water quality. First, the U.S. production of phosphates for household and commercial products and other industrial uses has fallen to less than 5 percent of total phosphate production in recent decades, with agricultural use accounting for the remaining 95 percent. Thus, current policies that target household and industrial uses over agriculture have limited ability to address the larger nutrient pollution problem. Second, the behavioral responses of consumers to variations in the spatial and temporal characteristics of these policies reduce their effectiveness because households can purchase products containing phosphates at different locations or at different times of the year. Third, the interactions of these policies with regulations at wastewater treatment facilities will determine the extent to which reductions in phosphate at the household and commercial levels will result in reductions in the amount of phosphates that are emitted into waterways.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"14 1","pages":"331 - 338"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/reep/reaa003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44373970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The health of many marine, coastal, freshwater, and other aquatic ecosystems is inextricably linked to decisions about the management of water quality and quantity. In this article we review the economic literature aimed at quantifying the impacts of water resource management on aquatic species in the United States and the potential welfare gains of managing water and aquatic species systems jointly. Existing studies consider multiple water uses, such as agricultural irrigation and hydropower generation, as well as different societal benefits from aquatic species, such as commercial and recreational fishing and endangered species preservation. These studies use a variety of methodologies, including stated and revealed preference techniques, bioeconomic modeling, and reduced-form econometrics. We conclude with a discussion of future directions for research that could increase understanding of the trade-offs between water and aquatic species management outcomes and identify gains from the joint management of water resources and aquatic species in the United States.
{"title":"The Economics of the Joint Management of Water Resources and Aquatic Species in the United States","authors":"Kailin Kroetz, Y. Kuwayama, Caroline Vexler","doi":"10.1093/reep/reaa005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/reaa005","url":null,"abstract":"The health of many marine, coastal, freshwater, and other aquatic ecosystems is inextricably linked to decisions about the management of water quality and quantity. In this article we review the economic literature aimed at quantifying the impacts of water resource management on aquatic species in the United States and the potential welfare gains of managing water and aquatic species systems jointly. Existing studies consider multiple water uses, such as agricultural irrigation and hydropower generation, as well as different societal benefits from aquatic species, such as commercial and recreational fishing and endangered species preservation. These studies use a variety of methodologies, including stated and revealed preference techniques, bioeconomic modeling, and reduced-form econometrics. We conclude with a discussion of future directions for research that could increase understanding of the trade-offs between water and aquatic species management outcomes and identify gains from the joint management of water resources and aquatic species in the United States.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"14 1","pages":"194 - 215"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44946636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article discusses best practices for implementing recreation demand models. We focus on insights that research and experience provide for the typical recreation application, where the analyst uses individual-level data to measure the value of changes in recreation site access or quality at one or more destinations. We examine issues related to data collection, pre-analysis tasks, modeling, and assessing quality, in addition to a discussion of future research needs. Our focus is on understanding best practices when the analyst’s goal is to present accurate estimates of economic value of recreation site access or quality, and so we prioritize practical steps rather than describing the frontiers of methodological research in recreation demand modeling.
{"title":"Best Practices for Implementing Recreation Demand Models","authors":"Frank Lupi, D. Phaneuf, Roger H. von Haefen","doi":"10.1093/reep/reaa007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reep/reaa007","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses best practices for implementing recreation demand models. We focus on insights that research and experience provide for the typical recreation application, where the analyst uses individual-level data to measure the value of changes in recreation site access or quality at one or more destinations. We examine issues related to data collection, pre-analysis tasks, modeling, and assessing quality, in addition to a discussion of future research needs. Our focus is on understanding best practices when the analyst’s goal is to present accurate estimates of economic value of recreation site access or quality, and so we prioritize practical steps rather than describing the frontiers of methodological research in recreation demand modeling.","PeriodicalId":47676,"journal":{"name":"Review of Environmental Economics and Policy","volume":"14 1","pages":"302 - 323"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/reep/reaa007","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48115279","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：