Open this publication in new window or tab >>Show others...
2024 (English)In: Environmental Values, ISSN 0963-2719, E-ISSN 1752-7015, Vol. 33, no 2, p. 163-188Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]
A frequent justification in the literature for using stated preference methods (SP) is that they are the only methods that can capture the so-called total economic value (TEV) of environmental changes to society. Based on follow-up interviews with SP survey respondents, this paper addresses the implications of that argument by shedding light on the construction of TEV, through respondents' perspective. It illuminates the deficiencies of willingness to pay (WTP) as a measure of value presented as three aggregated themes considering respondents' unintentionality, their retraction once they understood that their WTP could be decisive in cost-benefit analysis and the inherent incompleteness of WTP. We discuss why the TEV discourse persists, how it conceals rather than reveals broader notions of value and in what ways our results support the development of alternative approaches that truly endorse plurality in environmental valuation and decision-making.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
SAGE Publications, 2024
Keywords
CBA, non-use values, non-market valuation, neoclassical economics, ecological economics, deliberation, qualitative research, ethics, performativity
National Category
Economics
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-346326 (URN)10.1177/09632719241231509 (DOI)001205570000002 ()
Note
QC 20240513
2024-05-132024-05-132024-05-13Bibliographically approved