Bamwesigye, D. Expressed Preference Methods of Environmental Valuation: Non-Market Resource Valuation Tools. Preprints2019, 2019070116. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201907.0116.v1
APA Style
Bamwesigye, D. (2019). Expressed Preference Methods of Environmental Valuation: Non-Market Resource Valuation Tools<strong> </strong>. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201907.0116.v1
Chicago/Turabian Style
Bamwesigye, D. 2019 "Expressed Preference Methods of Environmental Valuation: Non-Market Resource Valuation Tools<strong> </strong>" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints201907.0116.v1
Abstract
The objective of this paper was to give an overview of the expressed preference (EP) techniques of environmental valuation. These methods offer estimation of the value of a resource not necessarily willingness to pay (WTP) or willingness to Accept (WTA) compensation rather upper and lower values. The method of measuring individuals’ willingness to pay is usually based on contingent valuation method (CVM). This research focuses on defining, categorizing, and applicability of various environmental valuation techniques that have been and can be applied in attaching value to a given resource using expressed/Revealed preference methods. The study serves as a supplementary synthesis and discussion to the board of knowledge of resource valuation methods. More specifically, selected methods to discussed herein include; contingent valuation method, hedonic pricing model, travel cost method, trade-off game method, the costless-choice method, Delphi method, Replacement Cost Method, Relocation Cost Method, Opportunity cost method, and Cost-benefit Method. In the last part, applicability of the methods is fully illustrated to support future studies on resource valuation.
Social Sciences, Tourism, Leisure, Sport and Hospitality
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
