The economic value of urban forest amenities: an application of the contingent valuation method

Arrow, K., Solow, R., Leamer, E., Portney, P., Randner, R., Schuman, H., 1993. Report of the NOAA Panel on contingent valuations. U.S. Federal Register, 15 January, 58, vol. 10, pp. 4601–4614 Bishop, R.C., Heberlein, 1990. The contingent valuation method. In: Johnson, R.L., Johnson, G.V. (Eds.), Economic valuation of natural resources: Issues, Theory and Applications, Westview Press, Boulder, CO Bostedt, G., 1995a. The right of common access and option price – modelling and empirical testing In: Bostedt, G. Benefits of amenities in the forest environment –four papers based on contingent valuation. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of forest Economics, Report 110, dissertation 18, p. 24 Bostedt, G., Mattson, L., 1995b. The value of forests for tourism in Sweden. In: Bostedt, G. Benefits of amenities in the forest environment -four papers based on contingent valuation. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of forest Economics, Report 110, dissertation 18, p. 17 Boyle, 1988, Welfare measurements using contingent valuation: a comparison of techniques, Am. J. Agric. Econ., 70, 20, 10.2307/1241972 Carson, R.T., 1991. Constructed markets. In: Braden, J.B., Kolstad, C.D. (Ed.), Measuring the Demand for Environmental Quality, Elsevier, Amsterdam. pp. 121–162 Carson, R.T., Wright, J., Carson, N., Alberini, A., Flores, N., 1995. Á Bibliography of Contingent Valuation Studies and Papers. Natural Resource Damage Assesment, La Jolla, California, p. 121 Cummings, R.G., Brookshire, D.S., Schulze, W.D., 1986. Valuing Environmental goods. An Assessment of the Contingent Valuation Method, Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa, NJ, p. 270 Darling, 1973, Measuring benefits generated by urban water parks, Land Econ., XLIX, 22, 10.2307/3145326 Dwyer, 1989, Urbanities willingness to pay for trees and forests in receration areas, J. Arboric.., 15, 247 Elsasser, P., 1994. Recreational benefits of forests in Germany -methodological aspects and results of a contigent valuation study. In: Evaluation of forest benefits through a total evaluation of production, environmental,and social functions of forests. Workshop in Prague-Jiloviste, 13–16 September, 1994. Ministry of Agriculture, Branch of Forestry, Prague. Forestry and Game Management Reserach Institute, Jiloviste-Strnady, pp. 28–43 Fredman, P., 1994. A test of non-response bias in a mail contingent valuation survey. Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet. Institutionen för skogekonomi. Arbetsrapport 201. Umeå, p. 17 Freeman III, A.M., 1993. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values. Theory and Methods, Resource for the Future, Washington, DC Grey, G., Deneke, F., 1978. Urban Forestry. Wiley, New York, p. 279 Hanemann, 1994, Valuing the environment through contingent valuation, J. Econ. Prespectives, 8, 19, 10.1257/jep.8.4.19 Hoevenagel, R., Kuik, O., Oosterhuis, F., 1992. Review of valuation studies and their use; Netherlands. In: Navrud, S. (Ed.), Pricing the European Environment. Scandinavian University Press, pp. 100–107 Jensen, F.S., 1995. Forest recreation. In: Hytönen, M. (Ed.), Multiple-use Forestry in the Nordic Countries 1995. METLA, The Finnish Forest Research Institute, pp. 245–278 Joensuun kaupungin tekninen virasto 1996. Viherlaitos. Vertailutiedosto kunnan taajamametsien hoitokustannuksista vv. 1990–1997. Efectia Oy Kahneman, 1992, Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfactions, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 22, 67, 10.1016/0095-0696(92)90019-S Kennedy, P., 1992. A Guide To Econometrics, 3rd edn., The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA., p. 409 Kiinteistöjen arviointikäsikirja, 1991. Suomen kiinteistöarviointiyhdistys ry ja Rakennustieto Oy Kuik, O., Navrud, S., Pearce, D.W., 1992. Benefit estimation and environmental decision-making. In: Navrud, S. (Ed.), Pricing the European Environment. Scandinavian University Press, pp. 274–287 Kuntien maapolitiikka ja sen vaikutukset asukkaiden ja yritysten sijoittumiseen eräissä Etelä-Karjalan kunnissa, 1987. Etelä-Karjalan Ydinalueen neuvottelukunta. Etelä-Karjalan seutukaavaliiton liittohallitus, p. 141 Loomis, 1993, Some empirical evidence on embedding effects in contingent valuation of forest protection, J. Environ. Econ. Manage., 24, 45, 10.1006/jeem.1993.1025 Löfström, I., 1990. Kaupunkien ja kuntien metsien hoito. Summary: Management of municipal forests. Ympäristöministeriön ympäristönsuojeluosaston selvitys 87. 118 pp Löfström, I., 1998. The principles of urban forestry in Finland 1987–1995, Ph.D dissertation, Manuscript, p. 80 Maddala, G.S., 1983. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics, Cambridge University Press, p. 401 Mendelsohn, R., Markstrom, D., 1988. The use of travel cost and hedonic methods in assessing environmnetal benefits. In: Peterson, G.L., Driver, B.L., Gregory, R. (Ed.), Amenity Resource Valuation. Integrating Economics With Other Disciplines, Venture Publishing, State Collage, pp. 53–64 Miller, R.W., 1997. Urban Forestry. Planning and Managing Urban Green Spaces, 2nd edn, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, p. 502 Mitchell, R.C., Carson, R.T., 1993. Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation method. Resources for the Future, Washington, p. 453 Mäntymaa, E., Ovaskainen, V., Sievänen, T., 1992. Review of valuation studies and their use in Finland. In: Navrud, S. (Ed.), Pricing The European Environment, Scandinavian University Press, pp. 84–99 Mäntymaa, E., 1997. Essays on environmental benefits and hypothetical markets. Department of Economics. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis, G2, p. 135 Navrud, S., 1992. Pricing the European Environment. Scandinavian University Press, p. 287 Pope III, 1990, Value of wilderness designation in Utah, J. Environ. Manage., 30, 157, 10.1016/0301-4797(90)90013-M Portney, 1994, The contingent valuation debate: Why economists should care, J. Econ. Perspectives, 8, 3, 10.1257/jep.8.4.3 Pukkala, T., 1998. MONSU metsäsuunnitteluohjelma. Ohjelmiston toiminta ja käyttö, p. 61 Robinette, C., 1972. Plants, People and Environmental Quality. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Washington DC Suomalaisten elinympäristö: toiveet ja todellisuus 1992. Suomen maakuntien liiton julkaisu A:2. Helsinki, p. 181 Oksanen-Peltola, L., 1994. Metsän arvon määrittäminen. Tapion taskukirja. Metsäkeskus Tapio. Metsälehti. 22. painos. Helsinki, pp. 403–428 Turner, K.R., Pearce, D., Bateman, I., 1994. Environmental Economics. An Elementary Introduction. Harvester Wheatsheaf, p. 328 Tyrväinen, L., 1994. Estimating the Value of Urban Forests: Possibilities and Constraints. Scandinavian Forest Economics 35. Proc. Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics. Gilleleje, Denmark, November 1993, pp. 337–350 Tyrväinen, L. 1997. The amenity value of the urban forest: An application of the hedonic pricing method. Landscape and Urban Planning, 37, (3–4), p. 211–222 Veisten, K., Hoen, H., Navrud, S., Strand, J., 1993. Valuing biodiversity in Norwegian forests: A contingent valuation study with multiple bias testing. Memorandum from Department of Economics 7, University of Oslo, p. 21 Whitehead, 1991, Environmental interest group behaviour and self selection bias in contingent valuation mail survey, Growth Change, 22, 10, 10.1111/j.1468-2257.1991.tb00538.x