東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Comparing values for a private envir...

University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Comparing values for a private environmental good, xeriscape: Hedonic price method versus contingent valuation method.

Record Type:	Language materials, printed : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Comparing values for a private environmental good, xeriscape: Hedonic price method versus contingent valuation method./
Author:	Rollins, Carole Ann.
Description:	191 p.
Notes:	Adviser: Helen Neill.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International69-06B.
Subject:	Economics, General. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3319137
ISBN:	9780549695059

Comparing values for a private environmental good, xeriscape: Hedonic price method versus contingent valuation method.
Rollins, Carole Ann.

Comparing values for a private environmental good, xeriscape: Hedonic price method versus contingent valuation method. - 191 p.

Adviser: Helen Neill.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 2008.

The hedonic price method (HPM) and the contingent valuation method (CVM) are two valuation techniques used to estimate and report benefits of public and private environmental goods. Both methods are used in comparison studies for public goods, but not for private goods. The purpose of this study is to extend the knowledge of economic valuation for a private good by comparing a reported value from a contingent valuation survey with an estimate from the HPM using the application of xeriscape landscaping in residential settings. Market data were collected from 500 residential locations in Clark County, Nevada; of this sample, 250 homes had xeriscape landscaping, and the remaining 250 homes did not. Surveys were mailed to these locations, and a copy of the survey was also made available on the Internet. A total of 49 respondents was obtained. The key findings are that (a) market participants value xeriscape landscaping; (b) survey respondents value xeriscape landscaping; and (c) a benefit estimate for the private environmental good using the HPM is greater than a benefit reported using the CVM, confirming results from past studies of public goods. This study contributes to the literature by exploring the literature gap in welfare measurement when using two methods and making comparisons and helps to further identify the advantages and limitations of the HPM and CVM valuation techniques.

ISBN: 9780549695059Subjects--Topical Terms:

1017424
Economics, General.

Comparing values for a private environmental good, xeriscape: Hedonic price method versus contingent valuation method.
LDR:02351nam 2200289 a 45 001 855672
005 20100708
008 100708s2008 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9780549695059
035 $a (UMI)AAI3319137
035 $a AAI3319137
040 $a UMI $c UMI
100 1 $a Rollins, Carole Ann. $3 1022321
245 1 0 $a Comparing values for a private environmental good, xeriscape: Hedonic price method versus contingent valuation method.
300 $a 191 p.
500 $a Adviser: Helen Neill.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 69-06, Section: B, page: 3483.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 2008.
520 $a The hedonic price method (HPM) and the contingent valuation method (CVM) are two valuation techniques used to estimate and report benefits of public and private environmental goods. Both methods are used in comparison studies for public goods, but not for private goods. The purpose of this study is to extend the knowledge of economic valuation for a private good by comparing a reported value from a contingent valuation survey with an estimate from the HPM using the application of xeriscape landscaping in residential settings. Market data were collected from 500 residential locations in Clark County, Nevada; of this sample, 250 homes had xeriscape landscaping, and the remaining 250 homes did not. Surveys were mailed to these locations, and a copy of the survey was also made available on the Internet. A total of 49 respondents was obtained. The key findings are that (a) market participants value xeriscape landscaping; (b) survey respondents value xeriscape landscaping; and (c) a benefit estimate for the private environmental good using the HPM is greater than a benefit reported using the CVM, confirming results from past studies of public goods. This study contributes to the literature by exploring the literature gap in welfare measurement when using two methods and making comparisons and helps to further identify the advantages and limitations of the HPM and CVM valuation techniques.
590 $a School code: 0506.
650 4 $a Economics, General. $3 1017424
650 4 $a Environmental Sciences. $3 676987
650 4 $a Landscape Architecture. $3 890923
690 $a 0390
690 $a 0501
690 $a 0768
710 2 $a University of Nevada, Las Vegas. $3 1017627
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 69-06B.
790 $a 0506
790 1 0 $a Neill, Helen, $e advisor
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2008
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3319137