Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorGudding, Petter Andreas
dc.contributor.authorKipperberg, Gorm
dc.contributor.authorBond, Craig Andrew
dc.contributor.authorCullen, Kelly
dc.contributor.authorSteltzer, Eric
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-11T07:59:25Z
dc.date.available2018-10-11T07:59:25Z
dc.date.created2018-09-26T13:16:45Z
dc.date.issued2018-01
dc.identifier.citationKipperberg, G. et al. (2018) When a good is a bad (or a bad is a good) - analysis of data from an ambiguous nonmarket valuation setting. Sustainability. 10(1).nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn2071-1050
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2567528
dc.description.abstractThis paper analyses data from a contingent valuation experiment carried out in a context with large degree of preference heterogeneity and valuation ambiguity. Despite this challenge, by implementing estimation of an unrestricted valuation function on pooled data from two elicitation formats, utilizing all preference information available from the survey, we are able to estimate welfare measures with an acceptable degree of statistical confidence. It turns out that an offshore wind farm, a priori believed to constitute a bad that people would be willing to pay to avoid, instead was a good that people would be willing to forego under compensation. This was true on average but not for all study participants. Two key determinants of preferences were spatial proximity to the proposed wind farm and perceptions of the visual impacts of wind turbines. Individuals who would be near and thought wind turbines are “ugly” had a mean willingness to pay to avoid the wind farm of about $508 per household per year. In contrast, those who would be far away and perceived wind turbines to be “beautiful” had a negative mean willingness to pay to avoid the wind farm of about −$595 per household per year.nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.publisherMDPInb_NO
dc.relation.urihttps://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/1/208
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.subjectøkonominb_NO
dc.subjectmiljøverdsettingnb_NO
dc.subjectøkosystemtjenesternb_NO
dc.subjectmiljøkonominb_NO
dc.subjectenvironmental economicsnb_NO
dc.titleWhen a good is a bad (or a bad is a good) - analysis of data from an ambiguous nonmarket valuation settingnb_NO
dc.title.alternativeWhen a good is a bad (or a bad is a good) - analysis of data from an ambiguous nonmarket valuation settingnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.rights.holder© 2018 by the authorsnb_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Samfunnsøkonomi: 212nb_NO
dc.subject.nsiVDP::Economics: 212nb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber16nb_NO
dc.source.volume10nb_NO
dc.source.journalSustainabilitynb_NO
dc.source.issue1nb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/su10010208
dc.identifier.cristin1613999
dc.relation.projectNorges forskningsråd: 255777nb_NO
cristin.unitcode217,14,0,0
cristin.unitnameHandelshøgskolen ved UiS
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal