What Are the Benefits of the Water Framework Directive? Lessons Learned for Policy Design from Preference Revelation

被引:10
作者
Artell, Janne [1 ]
Huhtala, Anni [2 ]
机构
[1] Nat Resources Inst Finland Luke, Helsinki, Finland
[2] VATT Inst Econ Res, Box 1279, Helsinki 00101, Finland
基金
芬兰科学院;
关键词
Hedonic price method; Water quality; Environmental amenities; Valuation; Waterfront properties; IMPLICIT PRICES; QUALITY; VALUATION; PROPERTY;
D O I
10.1007/s10640-016-0049-8
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The Water Framework Directive (WFD) seeks to achieve good ecological status of surface waters across the European Union by 2027. The WFD guidelines explicitly recognize the economics of water management by providing exceptions to water areas with disproportionately high restoration costs. This calls indirectly for estimations of benefits lost due to non-attainment. We employ a hedonic property pricing approach on waterfront recreational properties to estimate the welfare impacts of attaining the good ecological status described by the WFD. The empirical challenge is that the quality measure proposed by the WFD specifically denotes ecological quality, whereas economically measurable water quality values are heavily dependent on recreation impacts. Intuitively, the choice of water quality measure should have an effect on estimating the value of water quality. Our data provide a unique chance to compare three alternative indicators of water quality: (1) a usability-based index, (2) subjectively reported measure and (3) the ecological status determined by the WFD. We find that an improvement in water quality is associated with a statistically significant, non-linear change in recreational property values. We show how the ecological status compares with the other two indicators, and discuss the justifiability of using revealed preference methods when the valued good is defined purely on the basis of ecological criteria.
引用
收藏
页码:847 / 873
页数:27
相关论文
共 40 条
[1]   Modelling asymmetric preferences for water quality in choice experiments with individual-specific status quo alternatives [J].
Ahtiainen, Heini ;
Pouta, Eija ;
Artell, Janne .
WATER RESOURCES AND ECONOMICS, 2015, 12 :1-13
[2]   The Welfare Effects of Misperceived Product Costs: Data and Calibrations from the Automobile Market [J].
Allcott, Hunt .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC JOURNAL-ECONOMIC POLICY, 2013, 5 (03) :30-66
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2012, OHJE PINTAVESIEN EKO
[4]   Lots of value? A spatial hedonic approach to water quality valuation [J].
Artell, Janne .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2014, 57 (06) :862-882
[5]   Subjective vs. objective measures in the valuation of water quality [J].
Artell, Janne ;
Ahtiainen, Heini ;
Pouta, Eija .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2013, 130 :288-296
[6]   Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment [J].
Barberis, Nicholas C. .
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2013, 27 (01) :173-195
[7]   On the environmental effectiveness of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive [J].
Bertram, Christine ;
Rehdanz, Katrin .
MARINE POLICY, 2013, 38 :25-40
[8]   Estimating the demand for protecting freshwater lakes from eutrophication [J].
Boyle, KJ ;
Poor, PJ ;
Taylor, LO .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1999, 81 (05) :1118-1122
[9]   Does the measurement of property and structural characteristics affect estimated implicit prices for environmental amenities in a hedonic model? [J].
Boyle, KJ ;
Taylor, LO .
JOURNAL OF REAL ESTATE FINANCE AND ECONOMICS, 2001, 22 (2-3) :303-318
[10]   Negative externalities on property values resulting from water impairment: The case of the Pigeon River Watershed [J].
Cho, Seong-Hoon ;
Roberts, Roland K. ;
Kim, Seung Gyu .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2011, 70 (12) :2390-2399