International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering
Subscribe to IJWREE
Full Name*
Email Address*

Article Number - 95D6F9A48701


Vol.6(11), pp. 287-294 , November 2014
DOI: 10.5897/IJWREE2014.0482
ISSN: 2141-6613



Review

Critical analysis of existing economic tools available for assessing river water quality



Sudevi Basu
  • Sudevi Basu
  • Department of Biotechnology, Sir M Visvesvaraya Institute of Technology, Bangalore ? 562157, Karnataka, India.
  • Google Scholar
Lokesh K.S
  • Lokesh K.S
  • Department of Environmental Engineering, Sri Jayachamarajendra College of Engineering (Autonomous), Mysore ? 570006, Karnataka, India.
  • Google Scholar







 Received: 10 January 2014  Accepted: 30 October 2014  Published: 01 December 2014

Copyright © 2014 Author(s) retain the copyright of this article.
This article is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0


This review paper critically analyzes the economic literature on the approaches of measuring the environmental benefits. It focuses on the economic methodologies that are available for the evaluation of the effects (social costs and benefits) of environmental changes (degradation/preservation) on river water quality. Further, it shows how the monetary valuations of these effects can have an impact in making of economic policy for creating more efficient water quality management for environmentally sustainable aspects. Over 85 papers were reviewed and it was found that the economic assessment tools were studied independently without comparing the impact of one method over the other.  The literature does not provide information on economics of the interventions to protect the river water quality and relate it to the increase in local flora and fauna and decrease in averting costs incurred by local people. Furthermore, the reviewed papers have not economically quantified various pollution control measures to improve water quality in rivers.
 
Key words: River water quality, river pollution control, monetary valuation, economic policy, environmental benefits

Alam K (2006). Valuing the Environment in Developing Countries: Problems and Potentials. Asia Pacific J. Environ. Dev. 13(1&2):27-44.
View
 
Alpizar F, Carlsson F, Martinsson P (2001). Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation. Econ. Issues 8(1):83.110.
 
 
Arana JE, Leon CJ (2007). Repeated Dichotomous Choice Formats for Elicitation of Willingness to Pay: Simultaneous Estimation and Anchoring Effect. Environ. Res. Econ. 36(4):475-497.
Crossref
 
 
Balistreri E, McClelland G, Poe G, Schulze W (2001). Can Hypothetical Questions Reveal True Values? A Laboratory Comparison of Dichotomous Choice and Open-Ended Contingent Values with Auction Values. Environ. Res. Econ. 18(3):275-292.
Crossref
 
 
Birol E, Karousakis K, Koundouri P (2006). Using Economic Valuation Techniques to Inform Water Resources Management: A Survey and Critical Appraisal of Available Techniques and an Application. Sci. Total Environ. 365(1-3):105-122.
Crossref
 
 
Birol E, Das S (2010). Estimating the Value of Improved Wastewater Treatment: The Case of River Ganga, India. J. Environ. Manage. 91:2163-2171.
Crossref
 
 
Bohara AK, Kerkvliet J, Berrens RP (2001). Addressing Negative Willingness to Pay in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation: A Monte Carlo Simulation. Environ. Res. Econ. 20(3):173-195.
Crossref
 
 
Borg NB, Hensher DA, Scarpa R (2009). An Analytical Framework for Joint vs Separate Decisions by Couples in Choice Experiments: The Case of Coastal Water Quality in Tobago. Environ. Res. Econ. 43(1):95-117.
Crossref
 
 
Boxall P, Rollins K, Englin J (2003). Heterogenous Preferences for Congestion During a Wilderness Experience. Res. Energy Econ. 25:177-195.
Crossref
 
 
Boyer T, Polasky S (2004). Valuing Urban Wetlands: A Review of Non – Market Valuation Studies. Wetlands 24(4):744-755.
Crossref
 
 
Brouwer R, Dekker T, Rolfe J, Windle J (2010). Choice Certainty and Consistency in Repeated Choice Experiments. Environ. Res. Econ. 46(1):93-109.
Crossref
 
 
Callan SJ, Thomas JM (2010). Environmental Economics and Management: Theory, Policy and applications, 5th Edition, Nelson Education Ltd., pp 155-168.
 
 
Carr L, Mendelsohn R (2003). Valuing Coral Reefs: A Travel Cost Analysis of the Great Barrier Reef. Ambio 32(5):353-357.
Crossref
 
 
Carlsson F, Frykblom P, Liljenstolpe C (2003). Valuing Wetland Attributes: An Application of Choice Experiments. Ecol. Econ. 47(1):95-103.
Crossref
 
 
Carson RT, Mitchell RC (1993). The Value of Clean Water: The Public's Willingness to Pay for Boatable, Fishable and Swimmable Quality Water. Water Resour. Res. 29(7):2445-2454.
Crossref
 
 
Carson RT, Flores NE, Meade NF (2001). Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence. Environ. Resour. Econ. 19(2):173:210.
 
 
Caulkins PP, Bishop RC, Bouwes NW (1986). The Travel Cost Model for Lake Recreation: A Comparison of Two Methods for Incorporating Site Quality and Substitution Effects. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 68(2):291-297.
Crossref
 
 
Cooper P, Poe GL, Bateman IJ (2004). The Structure of Motivation for Contingent Values: A Case Study of Lake Water Quality Improvement. Ecol. Econ. 50:69-82.
Crossref
 
 
Courant PN. Porter RC (1981). Averting Expenditure and Cost of Pollution. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 8:321-329.
Crossref
 
 
Crooker JR, Herriges JA (2004). Parametric and Semi–Nonparametric Estimation of Wilingness–to–Pay in the Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Framework. Environ. Resour. Econ. 27(4):451-480.
Crossref
 
 
D'arge RC, Shogren JF (1989). Okoboji Experiment: Comparing Non–Market Valuation Techniques in an Unusually Well–Defined Market for Water Quality. Ecol. Econ. 1:251-259.
Crossref
 
 
Diamond PA, Hausman JA (1994). Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number? J. Econ. Perspect. 8(4):45-64.
Crossref
 
 
Doss CR, Taff SJ (1996). The Influence of Wetland Type and Wetland Proximity on Residential Property Values. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 21(1):120-129.
 
 
Douglas AJ, Taylor JG (1999). The Economic Value of Trinity River Water. Water Resour. Dev. 15(3):309-322.
Crossref
 
 
El-Bekkay M, Moukrim A, Benchakroun F (2013). An Economic Assessment of the Ramsar Site of Massa (Morocco) with Travel Cost and Contingent Valuation Methods. Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 7(6):441-447.
 
 
Elsin YK, Kramer RA, Jenkins WA (2010). Valuing Drinking Water Provision as Ecosystem Service in the Neuse River Basin. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage. 136(4):474-482.
Crossref
 
 
Englin J, Cameron TA (1996). Augmenting Travel Cost Models with Contingent Behaviour Data – Poisson Regression Analyses with Individual Panel Data. Environ. Resour. Econ. 7(2):133-147.
Crossref
 
 
Epp DJ, Al-Ani KS (1979). The Effect of Water Quality on Rural Nonfarm Residential Property Values. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 61:529-534.
Crossref
 
 
Farmer MC, Lipscomb CA (2008). Conservative Dichotomous Choice Responses in the Active Policy Setting: DC Rejections below WTP. Environ. Resour. Econ. 39(3):223-246.
Crossref
 
 
Frykblom P, Shogren JF (2000). An Experimental Testing of Anchoring Effects in Discrete Choice Questions. Environ. Resour. Econ. 16(3):329-341.
Crossref
 
 
Garrod G, Willis K (1994). An Economic Estimate of the Effect of a Waterside Location on Property Values, Environ. Resour. Econ. 4(2):209-217.
Crossref
 
 
Halvorsen B (1996). Ordering Effects in Contingent Valuation Surveys – Willingness to Pay for Reduced Health Damage from Air Pollution. Environ. Resour. Econ. 8(4):485-499.
Crossref
 
 
Hanley N, Wright RE, Adamowicz V (1998). Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment, Environ. Resour. Econ. 11(3-4):413-428.
Crossref
 
 
Hanley N., Bell D, Farizo BA (2003). Valuing the Benefits of Coastal Water Quality Improvements Using Contingent and Real Behaviour. Environ. Resour. Econ. 24(3):273-285.
Crossref
 
 
Hanley N, Wright RE, Alvarez-Farizo B (2006). Estimating the Economic Value of Improvements in River Ecology Using Choice Experiments: An Application to the Water Framework Directive. J. Environ. Manage. 78:183-193.
Crossref
 
 
Hanemann WM (1994). Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation. J. Econ. Perspect. 8(4):19-43.
Crossref
 
 
Hanemann WM (1991). Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept – How Much Can They Differ? Am. Econ. Rev. 81(3):635-647.
 
 
Hellerstein DM (1993). Intertemporal Data and Travel Cost Analysis. Environ. Resour. Econ. 3(2):193-207.
Crossref
 
 
Higgins A, Pearson L, Laredo L (2009). Modeling the Financial Value of the Maroochy River to Property Values: An Application of Neural Networks. J. Water Resour. Prot. 4:237-248.
Crossref
 
 
Hokby S, Soderqvist T (2003). Elasticities of Demand and Willingness to Pay for Environmental Services in Sweden. Environ. Resour. Econ. 26(3):361-383.
Crossref
 
 
Hosking S (2011). The Recreational Value of River Inflows into South African Estuaries. Water SA 37(5):711-717.
Crossref
 
 
Imandoust SB, Gadam SN (2007). Are People Willing to Pay for River Water Quality, Contingent Valuation. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 4(3):401-408.
Crossref
 
 
Ivehammar P (2009). The Payment Vehicle Used in CV Studies of Environmental Goods Does Matter. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 34(3):450-463.
 
 
Johansson P (1996). Commodity Prices as Payment Vehicles in Valuation Experiments, Environ. Resour. Econ. 8(2):247-254.
Crossref
 
 
Johnston RJ (2007). Choice Experiments, Site Similarity and Benefits Transfer. Environ. Resour. Econ. 38(3):331-351.
Crossref
 
 
Jorgensen BS, Syme GJ, Bishop BJ, Nancarrow BE (1999). Protest Responses in Contingent Valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 14(1):131-150.
Crossref
 
 
Kealy MJ, Bishop RC (1986). Theoretical and Empirical Specifications Issues in Travel Cost Demand Studies. Am. J. Agric. Econ. pp. 660-667.
Crossref
 
 
Koundouri P, Pashardes P (2003). Hedonic Price Analysis and Selectivity Bias: Water Salinity and Demand for Land. Environ. Resour. Econ. 26(1):45-56.
Crossref
 
 
Kristrom B (1993). Comparing Continuous and Discrete Contingent Valuation Questions. Environ. Resour. Econ. 3(1):63-71.
Crossref
 
 
Kwak SJ, Russel CS (1994). Contingent Valuation in Korean Environmental Planning: A Pilot Application to the Protection of Drinking Water Quality in Seoul. Environ. Resour. Econ. 4(5): 511-526.
Crossref
 
 
Lansford NH, Jones LL (1995). Recreational and Aesthetic Value of Water using Hedonic Price Analysis. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 20(2):341-355.
 
 
Legget CG, Bockstael NE (2000). Evidence of the Effects of Water Quality on Residential Land Prices. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 39:121-144.
Crossref
 
 
Lindhjem H, Navrud S (2009). Asking for Individual or Household Willingness to Pay for Environmental Goods: Implication for Aggregate Welfare Measures. Environ. Resour. Econ. 43(1):11-29.
Crossref
 
 
Loomis JB (1997). Panel Estimators to Combine Revealed and Stated Preference Dichotomous Choice Data. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 22(2):233-245.
 
 
Loomis J, Brown T, Lucero B, Peterson G (1997). Evaluating the Validity of the Dichotomous Choice Question Format in Contingent Valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 10(2):109-123.
Crossref
 
 
Loomis J, Kent P, Strange L, Fausch K, Covich A (2000). Measuring the Total Economic Value of Restoring Ecosystem Services in an Impaired River Basin: Results from a Contingent Valuation Survey. Ecol. Econ. 33(1):103-117.
Crossref
 
 
Mahan BL, Polasky S, Adams RM (2000). Valuing Urban Wetlands: A Property Price Approach. Land Econ. 76(1):100-113.
Crossref
 
 
McKean JR, Johnson D, Taylor RG, Johnson RL (2005). Willingness to Pay for Non Angler Recreation at the Lower Snake River Reservoirs. J. Leis. Res. 37(2):178-194.
 
 
Meyerhoff J, Liebe U (2008). Do Protest Responses to a Contingent Valuation Question and a Choice Experiment Differ? Environ. Resour. Econ. 39(4):433-446.
Crossref
 
 
Michael JA, Reiling SD (1997). The Role of Expectations and Heterogeneous Preferences for Congestion in the Valuation of Recreation Benefits. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 166-173.
 
 
Monarchova J, Gudas M (2009). Contingent Valuation Approach for Estimating the Benefits of Water Quality Improvement in the Baltic Seas. Environ. Res. Eng. Manage. 47(1):5-12.
 
 
Morkbak MR, Christensen T, Gyrd-Hansen D (2010). Choke Price Bias in Choice Experiments. Environ. Resour. Econ. 45(4):537-551.
Crossref
 
 
Morrison MD, Blamey RK, Bennett JW (2000). Minimizing Payment Vehicle Bias in Contingent Valuation Studies. Environ. Resour. Econ. 16(4):407-422.
Crossref
 
 
Murphy JJ, Stevens TH, Yadav L (2010). A Comparison of Induced Value and Home–Grown Experiments to Test for Hypothetical Bias in Contingent Valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 47(1):111-123.
Crossref
 
 
Nallathiga R, Paravasthu R (2010). Economic value of conserving river water quality: Results from a contingent valuation survey in Yamuna River Basin, India. Water Pol. 12(2):260-271.
Crossref
 
 
Navrud S, Pruckner GJ (1997). Environmental valuation – To use or not to use? A comparative study of the United States and Europe. Environ. Resour. Econ. 10:1-26.
Crossref
 
 
Olmstead SM (2010). The Economics of water quality. Rev. Environ. Econ. Pol. 4(1):44-62.
 
 
Ortacesme V, Ozkan B, Karaguzel O (2002). An estimation of the recreational use value of Kursunlu waterfall nature park by the individual travel cost method. Turk. J. Agric. For. 26(1):57-62.
 
 
Park T, Loomis JB, Creel M (1991). Confidence intervals for evaluating benefits estimates from dichotomous choice contingent valuation studies. Land Econ. 67(1):64-73.
Crossref
 
 
Poe GL, Welsh MP, Champ PA (1997). Measuring the difference in mean willingness to pay when dichotomous choice contingent valuation responses are not independent. Land Econ. 73(2):255-267.
Crossref
 
 
Poor PJ, Pessagno KL, Paul RW (2007). Exploring the hedonic value of ambient water quality: A local watershed–based study. Ecol. Econ. 60(1):797-806.
Crossref
 
 
Pruss-Ustun A, Bos R, Gore F, Bartram J (2008). Safer water, better health: costs, benefits and sustainability of interventions to protect and promote health. World Health Organization, Geneva, pp. 1-53.
 
 
Remoundou K, Koundouri P (2009). Environmental effects on public health: An economic perspective. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Hlth. 6:2160-2178.
Crossref
 
 
Rogers P, de Silva R, Bhatia R (2002). Water is an economic good: How to use prices to promote equity, efficiency, and sustainability. Water Pol. 4:1-17.
Crossref
 
 
Shrestha RK, Stein TV, Clark J (2007). Valuing nature–based recreation in public natural areas of the Apalachicola River Region. Florida. J. Environ. Manage. 85(4):977-985.
Crossref

 
 
 
Soderqvist T (1998). Why give up money for the baltic seas? Motives for people's willingness (or reluctance) to pay. Environ. Resour. Econ. 12(2):249-254.
Crossref
 
 
Spash CL (2000). Ecosystems, contingent valuation and ethics: The case of wetland recreation. Ecol. Econ. 34(2):195-215.
Crossref
 
 
Spash CL (2000). Multiple value expression in contingent valuation: Economics and ethics. Environ. Sci. Technol. 34:1433-1438.
Crossref
 
 
Steinnes DN (1992). Measuring the economic value of water quality: The case of Lakeshore land. Ann. Reg. Sci. 26:171-176.
Crossref
 
 
Strazzer E, Genius M, Scarpa R, Hutchinson G (2003). The effect of protest votes on the estimates of WTP for use values of recreational sites. Environ. Resour. Econ. 25(4):461-476.
Crossref
 
 
Svento R (1993). Some notes on trichotomous choice discrete valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 3(6):533-543.
Crossref
 
 
Taylor LO, Morrison MD, Boyle KJ (2010). Exchange rules and the incentive compatibility of choice experiments. Environ. Resour. Econ. 47(2):197-220.
Crossref
 
 
Timmins C, Murdock J (2007). A revealed preference approach to the measurement of congestion in travel cost models. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 53:230-249.
Crossref
 
 
Turpie J, Joubert A (2001). Estimating potential impacts of a change in river quality on the tourism value of Kruger National Park: An application of travel cost, contingent and conjoint valuation methods. Water SA 27(3):387-398.
Crossref
 
 
Viscusi WK, Huber J, Bell J (2008). The economic value of water quality. Environ. Resour. Econ. 41(2):169-187.
Crossref
 
 
Vossler CA, McKee M (2006). Induced value tests of contingent valuation elicitation mechanisms. Environ. Resour. Econ. 35(2):137-168.
Crossref
 
 
Ward FA, Michelsen A (2002). The economic value of water in agriculture: Concepts and policy applications. Water Pol. 4:423-446.
Crossref
 
 
Watanabe M, Asano K (2009). Distribution free consistent estimation of mean WTP in dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 44(1):1-10.
Crossref
 
 
Whitehead JC, Blomquist GC (1991). Measuring contingent values for wetlands: Effects of information about related environmental goods. Water Resour. Res. 27(10):2523-2531.
Crossref
 
 
Whittington D (2002). Improving the performance of contingent valuation studies in developing countries. Environ. Resour. Econ. 22(1-2):323-367.
Crossref
 
 
Tu Z (2013). Contingent valuation methodology: Evaluation of benefits of improving water quality in the Lake Tai Region. Undergrad. Econ. Rev. 10:1, 8:1-11.
 
 
Yoo SH, Yang HG (2001). Application of sample selection model to double–bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation studies. Environ. Resour. Econ. 20(2):147-163.
Crossref
 
 
Zhai G, Suzuki T (2009). Evaluating economic value of coastal waterfront in Tokyo Bay, Japan with willingness–to–accept measure. Water Resour. Manage. 23(4):633-645.
Crossref
 

 


APA Basu, S., Lokesh, K. S. (2014). Critical analysis of existing economic tools available for assessing river water quality. International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, 6(11), 287-294.
Chicago Sudevi Basu and Lokesh K. S. "Critical analysis of existing economic tools available for assessing river water quality." International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering 6, no. 11 (2014): 287-294.
MLA Sudevi Basu and Lokesh K. S. "Critical analysis of existing economic tools available for assessing river water quality." International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering 6.11 (2014): 287-294.
   
DOI 10.5897/IJWREE2014.0482
URL http://academicjournals.org/journal/IJWREE/article-abstract/95D6F9A48701

Subscription Form