Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Benefit Transfer Method× | Contingent Valuation Method× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Taloustiede | Taloustiede |
| Menetelmäperhe | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 1992 | 1963 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Applied environmental-economics practice (formalized by Boyle & Bergstrom; Rosenberger & Loomis) | Robert K. Davis (early use); methodology codified by the NOAA panel |
| Tyyppi≠ | Secondary valuation: transferring existing estimates to a new policy site | Survey-based stated-preference valuation method |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Rosenberger, R. S., & Loomis, J. B. (2003). Benefit transfer. In P. A. Champ, K. J. Boyle, & T. C. Brown (Eds.), A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Kluwer/Springer. ISBN: 9780792364986 | Hanemann, W. M. (1994). Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4), 19–43. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | Benefit Transfer, Value Transfer, Unit Value Transfer, Benefit Function Transfer | CVM, Stated-Preference Valuation, Willingness-to-Pay Survey, Survey-Based Non-Market Valuation |
| Liittyvät≠ | 4 | 2 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Benefit transfer is the practice of estimating the economic value of a nonmarket good — clean water, a recreation site, an endangered species, an avoided health risk — at a new 'policy site' by adapting value estimates from one or more existing 'study sites' where primary valuation research was already conducted. Because original contingent-valuation, choice-experiment, or hedonic studies are expensive and slow, analysts facing limited time and budgets transfer existing results, ranging from simply borrowing a single dollar value (unit value transfer) to transplanting an entire estimated valuation function (function transfer) or predicting from a meta-regression of many prior studies. | The contingent valuation method (CVM) is a survey-based stated-preference technique for estimating the economic value people place on goods that are not traded in markets — clean air, an endangered species, a wilderness area, the existence of a natural resource. Respondents are presented with a carefully constructed hypothetical scenario and asked how much they would be willing to pay for a described change in provision; their answers are used to estimate mean or median willingness to pay, including non-use (existence) values that no market reveals. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|