Skip to page content
USDA Forest Service
  
Treesearch

Research & Development Treesearch

 
Treesearch Home
About Treesearch
Contact Us
Research & Development
Forest Products Lab
International Institute of Tropical Forestry
Northern
Pacific Northwest
Pacific Southwest
Rocky Mountain
Southern Research Station
Help
 

Science.gov - We Participate


USA.gov  Government Made Easy


Global Forest Information Service

US Forest Service
P.O. Box 96090
Washington, D.C.
20090-6090

(202) 205-8333

You are here: Home / Search / Publication Information
Bookmark and Share

Publication Information

View PDF (1.9 MB)

Title: Multiple good valuation [Chapter 7]

Author: Brown, Thomas C.; Peterson, George L.;

Date: 2003

Source: In: Champ, Patricia A.; Boyle, Kevin J.; Brown, Thomas C., eds. The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources, Volume 3: A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Boston , MA: Kluwer Academic Press. p. 221-258.

Publication Series: Book Chapter

Description: Assume for the moment that you are the supervisor of the Roosevelt National Forest (it’s located near our town of Fort Collins, Colorado). You have been asked by the Chief of the Forest Service how you would spend a specified increase in your budget. You could spend the increase on such projects as improved campgrounds, better roads for reaching the backcountry, reduction in forest fuels to lower the risk of wildfire, and watershed management to lower erosion and thereby improve fish habitat. You know your chances of getting an increase depend on how well you support your proposal. You can design options that use up the budget increase, but you don’t have good information about the benefits of, or even the public preferences for, the options. You know what the vocal interest groups want, but you would like your proposal to have some quantitative justification that reflects the values of the wider citizenry who care about the National Forest. You examined the economic analyses that had been done about forest resources in the area and found no studies for most of the major resources you manage. You don’t have time for separate valuation studies of each of the options. However, you could commission a single study directly comparing the values people place on the options - a multiple good valuation study. Furthermore, because the options cost the same amount, a preference ordering of the options is all you need to choose the best one. That option might then become the focus of an economic valuation study, which would allow a benefit-cost comparison.

Keywords: multiple good valuation study, benefit-cost comparison

Publication Notes:

  • We recommend that you also print this page and attach it to the printout of the article, to retain the full citation information.
  • This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain.
  • You may send email to rmrspubrequest@fs.fed.us to request a hard copy of this publication. (Please specify exactly which publication you are requesting and your mailing address.)

XML: View XML

Citation:


Brown, Thomas C.; Peterson, George L. 2003. Multiple good valuation [Chapter 7]. In: Champ, Patricia A.; Boyle, Kevin J.; Brown, Thomas C., eds. The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Resources, Volume 3: A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Boston , MA: Kluwer Academic Press. p. 221-258.

 


 [ Get Acrobat ]  Get the latest version of the Adobe Acrobat reader or Acrobat Reader for Windows with Search and Accessibility

USDA logo which links to the department's national site. Forest Service logo which links to the agency's national site.