Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37094166›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2023

Perspectives on valuing water quality improvements using stated preference methods.

Ian J Bateman, Bonnie Keeler, Sheila M Olmstead, John Whitehead

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ian J BatemanLand, Environment, Economics and Policy Institute, Department of Economics, University of Exeter Business School, Exeter, EX4 4PU, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2791-6137
Bonnie KeelerCenter for Science, Technology and Environmental Policy, Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455.
Sheila M OlmsteadLyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78713-8925.ORCID 0000-0002-9572-943X
John WhiteheadDepartment of Economics, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC 28608.ORCID 0000-0001-7639-5246

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/V011588/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Improvements to the quality of freshwater rivers and lakes can generate a wide array of benefits, from "use values" such as recreational boating, fishing, and swimming to "nonuse values" such as improved outcomes for aquatic biodiversity. Bringing these nonmarket values into decision-making is crucial to determining appropriate levels of investment in water quality improvements. However, progress in the economic valuation of water quality benefits has lagged similar efforts to value air quality benefits, with implications for water policy. New data sources, modeling techniques, and innovation in stated preference survey methods offer notable improvements to estimates of use and nonuse benefits of improved water quality. Here, we provide a perspective on how recent applications of stated preference techniques to the valuation of the nonmarket benefits of water quality improvements have advanced the field of environmental valuation. This overview is structured around four key questions: i) What is it about water quality that we seek to value? ii) How should we design and implement the surveys which elicit individuals' stated preferences? iii) How do we assess the validity of the findings provided by such studies? and iv) What are the contributions of these valuation exercises to public policy? In answering these questions, we make reference to the contributions provided by the papers in this Symposium.

Indexed as

BiodiversityQuality ImprovementHumansLakesSurveys and QuestionnairesWater Qualityeconomicsstated preferencevaluationwater quality

Identifiers

PMID37094166
PMCPMC10160984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.