Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7470/jkst.2012.30.4.007

A Study on Estimating the Benefits by Pedestrian Environment Improvement Using CVM  

Kim, Jang-Wook (Department of Demand Analysis, KORAIL Research Institute)
Kang, Soon-Yang (Department of transportation planning, Dae Han Consultants Co., Ltd.)
Kim, Kyung-Tae (Department of Transportation Engineering, University of Seoul)
Kang, Young-Kyun (Research & Development Division, Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co., Ltd.)
Publication Information
Journal of Korean Society of Transportation / v.30, no.4, 2012 , pp. 7-19 More about this Journal
Abstract
In this study of estimating the benefits of environmental materials, the CVM method used in environmental economics was applied to estimate the value of pedestrian environment improvement. After finding the Willingness To Pay (WTP) level of residents through CVM, this study attempts to calculate quantitative benefits from the pedestrian environment improvement. In this study, a survey targeting the inhabitants in Seongbuk-gu adjacent to a business area was carried out for pedestrian environment improvement considering form of payment, willingness to pay and such by establishing and showing several virtual scenarios depicting a quiet and comfortable pedestrian environment. As a result, the willingness to pay level of the Seongbuk-gu residents was 627 won of surcharge for pedestrian environment improvement per month. Additionally, the annual total benefits by pedestrian environment improvement was estimated within a range from 1,247,516,820 won to 286,305,110 won.
Keywords
CVM(Contingent Valuation Method); Probit Model; Double-Bounded Approach; Terminal Decision Method; WTP;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Cameron T. and D. James(1987), Efficient Estimation Methods for Closed-ended Contingent Valuation Surveys, Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol.69, pp.269- 276.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Cameron T. and J. Quggin(1994), Estimation Using Contingent Valuation Data from a Dichotonomous Choice with Follow-Up Questions, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.27, pp.218-234.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Carson R.(1997), Contingent Valuation: Theoretical Advances and Empirical Tests Since the NOAA Panel," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.79, pp.1501- 1507.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Carson R. and R. Mitchell(1993), The Value of Clean Water: The Public's Willingness to Pay for Boatable, Fishable and Swimmable Quality Water, Water Resources Research, Vol.29, pp.2445-2454.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Alebrini A(1995), Efficiency vs. Bias of Willingness to Pay Estimates: Bivariate and Interval-Data Models, Jof Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.29, No.2, pp.169-181.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Arrow K. and R. Lind(1970), Uncertainty and the Evaluation of Public Investment Decisions, American Economic Review, Vol.60, pp.364-378.
7 Greene W.(1992), Econometric Analysis, Macmillan Publishing Company.
8 Desvousges W. V. K. Smith and A. Fisher(1987), Option Price Estimates for Water Quality Improvements: A Contingent Valuation Study for the Monongahela River, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.14, pp.248-267.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Freeman III, A. M.(1993), The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods, Resource for the Future, Washington D.C.
10 Georgiou S., D. Whittington, D. Pearce and D. Moran(1997), Economic Values and the Environment in the Developing World, Edward Elgar, Press.
11 Greene W.(1998), LIMDEP-Version 7.0, Econometric Software, INC.
12 Hanemann W.(1984), Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiment with Discrete Response, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.66, pp.332-341.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Hanemann W., J. Loomis and B. Kaninnen (1991), Statistical Efficiency of Double- Bounded Dichotonomous Choice Contingent Valuation, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol.73, pp.1255-1263.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Hanley N. and C. Spash(1993), Cost- Benefit Analysis and the Environment, Edward Elgar Press.
15 Jakbesson K. and A. Dragun(1996), Contingent Valuation and Endangered Species, Edward Elgar Press.
16 Bishop R., P. Champ and D. Mullarkey (1995), Contingent Valuation, in the Handbook of Environmental Economics, eds. D. W. Bromely, Blackwell Publisher.
17 Arrow K., R. Solow, P. Portney, E. Leamer, R. Radner and H. Shuman(1993), Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation, Federal Register, US. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Vol.58, pp.4601-4614.
18 Ben-Akiva M. and S. Lerman(1994), Discrete Choice Analysis, MIT Press.
19 Bergstrom J. J. Stoll and A. Randall(1989), Information Effects in Contingent Markets, American Journal of Agricultural Economcis, Vol.70, pp.685-691.
20 Brent R.(1995), Applied Cost-Benefit Analysis, Edward Elgar Press.
21 Cameron T.(1988), A New Paradigm for Valuing Non-Maket Goods Using Referendum Data: Maximum Likelihood Estimation by Censored Logistic Regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol.15, pp.355-379.   DOI
22 Cameron T. A.(1991), Interval Estimates of Non-Market Resource Values from Referendum Contingent Valuation Surveys, Land Economics, Vol.67, No.4, pp.413-421.   DOI   ScienceOn