lynx   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/988.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic valuation and the natural world

Author

Listed:
  • Pearce, David
Abstract
Economic valuation is controversial largely because its purpose has not been clearly conveyed to non-economists. The purpose of valuation of the natural world is to elicit measures of human preferences for, or against, environmental change. As a procedure, it thus faces two immediate limitations. First, economic values are not the same as intrinsic values - values in things rather than values of things. Economic valuation makes no claim to measure intrinsic values, although through the concept of existence value it may be capable of capturing human perceptions of intrinsic value. Second, measuring preferences focuses on efficiency gains and losses from environmental change. It says little about the distribution of costs and benefits within a time period or between time periods. Within a time period, the use of efficiency gains and losses as a guide to policy or project evaluation assumes that the prevailing distribution of income is socially acceptable, since it is that distribution which weights the measures of willingness to pay. Between time periods, the use of another efficiency concept - the discount rate - biases the outcomes of evaluation in favor of the present, and against future, generations where future costs and benefits are both distant and significant. But economic valuation is useful in several contexts. Project and program appraisal cannot be comprehensive or adequate without it. National environmental policy priorities will be better informed if economic values are known with some degree of certainty. The entire objective of sustainable development almost certainly cannot be interpreted without some idea of the value of environmental services and assets. Empirical work on valuation remains limited, even in the developed world. It is fairly new in the developing world, although many project evaluations have used some form of indirect valuation. Its importance for the development process is that revealed economic values for environmental conservation and environmentally improving projects and policies have often been found to be large. Valuation demonstrates that there is an economic case for protecting the environment and can help improve decision making. In so doing, it could make public choices more cost-efficient, thus allowing limited public income to be optimally spent.

Suggested Citation

  • Pearce, David, 1992. "Economic valuation and the natural world," Policy Research Working Paper Series 988, The World Bank.
    • Handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:988
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1992/10/01/000009265_3961003110152/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bergstrom, John C. & Stoll, John R. & Titre, John P. & Wright, Vernon L., 1990. "Economic value of wetlands-based recreation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 129-147, June.
    2. Nordhaus, William D, 1991. "A Sketch of the Economics of the Greenhouse Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 146-150, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. García-Amado, Luis Rico & Pérez, Manuel Ruiz & Escutia, Felipe Reyes & García, Sara Barrasa & Mejía, Elsa Contreras, 2011. "Efficiency of Payments for Environmental Services: Equity and additionality in a case study from a Biosphere Reserve in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2361-2368.
    2. Nicola Lansdell & Lata Gangadharan, 2003. "Comparing Travel Cost Models And The Precision Of Their Consumer Surplus Estimates: Albert Park And Maroondah Reservoir," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 399-417, December.
    3. -, 2010. "The economics of climate change in Central America: summary 2010," Sede de la CEPAL en Santiago (Estudios e Investigaciones) 35229, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    4. Easter, K. William & Archibald, Sandra O., 1998. "Benefit-Cost Analysis In U.S. Environmental Regulatory Decisions," Conference Papers 14475, University of Minnesota, Center for International Food and Agricultural Policy.
    5. Voxi Heinrich S. Amavilah, 2005. "The National Wealth of Selected Countries - A Descriptive Essay," Development and Comp Systems 0508007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Timilsina,Govinda R. & Stern,David S. & Das,Debasish Kumar, 2021. "How Much Does Physical Infrastructure Contribute to Economic Growth ? An Empirical Analysis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9888, The World Bank.
    7. Bright E. Okogu & Fatih Birol, 1994. "Valuing Carbon Sequestration Services of Developing Countries' Forests," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 12(4), pages 355-368, December.
    8. Raffaello Gervigni, 1998. "Incremental Cost in the Convention on Biological Diversity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(2), pages 217-241, March.
    9. Alessandra Arcuri, 2005. "A Different Reason for “De-Coasing” Environmental Law and Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 225-246, September.
    10. Rafat Alam & Nguyen Quyen, 2018. "The conversion of biodiversity-rich land and ecosystem services," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(1), pages 157-178, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Allen, James C. & Bergstrom, John C., 2003. "Measuring Values For Wetlands Protection In A Developing Country From Domestic And International Citizen Groups," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22009, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    2. Hermine Vedogbeton & Robert J. Johnston, 2020. "Commodity Consistent Meta-Analysis of Wetland Values: An Illustration for Coastal Marsh Habitat," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(4), pages 835-865, April.
    3. Dmitry A. Ruban & Natalia N. Yashalova, 2022. "Pro-environmental behavior prescribed by top companies of the world," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 7918-7935, June.
    4. Svendsen, Gert Tinggaard, 1998. "A general model for CO2 regulation: the case of Denmark," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 33-44, January.
    5. Nils Ohlendorf & Michael Jakob & Jan Christoph Minx & Carsten Schröder & Jan Christoph Steckel, 2021. "Distributional Impacts of Carbon Pricing: A Meta-Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 78(1), pages 1-42, January.
    6. Philippe De Lombaerde & Anja de Kimpe, 2000. "Global trade interdependence and the Co2 emission elasticity with respect to economic growth in Japan, the United States and western Europe," Ensayos de Economía 9472, Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede Medellín.
    7. Richard S.J. Tol, 2021. "Estimates of the social cost of carbon have not changed over time," Working Paper Series 0821, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    8. Makropoulou, Vasiliki & Dotsis, George & Markellos, Raphael N., 2013. "Environmental policy implications of extreme variations in pollutant stock levels and socioeconomic costs," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 417-428.
    9. Wallace E. Oates & Paul R. Portney, 1992. "Economic Incentives and the Containment of Global Warming," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 18(1), pages 85-98, Winter.
    10. Bockstael, N. & Costanza, R. & Strand, I. & Boynton, W. & Bell, K. & Wainger, L., 1995. "Ecological economic modeling and valuation of ecosystems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 143-159, August.
    11. Toledo, David & Briceño, Tania & Ospina, German, 2018. "Ecosystem service valuation framework applied to a legal case in the Anchicaya region of Colombia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 352-359.
    12. Pittel, Karen & Rübbelke, Dirk T.G., 2008. "Climate policy and ancillary benefits: A survey and integration into the modelling of international negotiations on climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 210-220, December.
    13. Markandya Anil & Rübbelke Dirk T.G., 2004. "Ancillary Benefits of Climate Policy / Sekundäre Nutzen der Klimapolitik," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 224(4), pages 488-503, August.
    14. Dongsheng Yan & Ningru Wang & Yimeng Guo & Xiangwanchen Wang & Wei Sun, 2024. "Economic Growth Targets, Innovation Transformation, and Urban Carbon Emissions: An Empirical Study of the Yangtze River Delta," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, October.
    15. Rickels, Wilfried & Merk, Christine & Honneth, Johannes & Schwinger, Jörg & Quaas, Martin & Oschlies, Andreas, 2019. "Welche Rolle spielen negative Emissionen für die zukünftige Klimapolitik?," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 261840, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    16. Rickels, Wilfried & Merk, Christine & Honneth, Johannes & Schwinger, Jörg & Quaas, Martin F. & Oschlies, Andreas, 2019. "Welche Rolle spielen negative Emissionen für die zukünftige Klimapolitik? Eine ökonomische Einschätzung des 1,5°C-Sonderberichts des Weltklimarats," Kiel Working Papers 2116, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    17. Ing-Marie Gren & Carl Folke & Kerry Turner & Ian Batemen, 1994. "Primary and secondary values of wetland ecosystems," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(1), pages 55-74, February.
    18. Herwig Immervoll & Cathal O’Donoghue & Jules Linden & Denisa Sologon, 2023. "Who pays for higher carbon prices?: Illustration for Lithuania and a research agenda," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 283, OECD Publishing.
    19. Caetano, Marco Antonio Leonel & Gherardi, Douglas Francisco Marcolino & Yoneyama, Takashi, 2008. "Optimal resource management control for CO2 emission and reduction of the greenhouse effect," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 213(1), pages 119-126.
    20. Paul Baer & Clive L Spash, 2008. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of Climate Change: Stern Revisited," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-07, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:988. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Roula I. Yazigi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dvewbus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.
    Лучший частный хостинг