意愿价值法评估生态服务价值的有效性与可靠性及实例设计研究

doi:10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2007.11.1134

地球科学进展 ›› 2007, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (11): 1134 -1140. doi: 10.11867/j.issn.1001-8166.2007.11.1134

张翼飞 ^1,2,3，赵敏 ¹

1.上海师范大学城市生态与环境修复重点实验室，上海 200234；2.复旦大学环境科学与工程系，上海 200433；3.波尔州立大学自然资源与环境管理系，印第安那州 47306，美国

收稿日期:2007-08-15 修回日期:2007-10-09 出版日期:2007-11-10
通讯作者: 张翼飞（1975-），女，江苏连云港人，讲师，博士生,主要从事资源与环境经济学教学与科学研究工作.E-mail: zhangyifei99@163.com E-mail:zhangyifei99@163.com
基金资助:
上海市哲学社会科学规划课题“意愿价值法在生态系统服务价值评估中的基础研究”（编号：2007EZH002）；上海市青年科技启明星项目“上海森林碳储量与碳价值评估”（编号：05QMX1443）；上海市旅游资源与文化创新基地资助项目子项目“上海市景观水体生态服务价值评估”（编号：CLA601）资助.

Review on the Validity and Reliability of CVM in Evaluation of Ecosystem Service and a Case Design Study

ZHANG Yi-Fei ^{1, 2,3}, ZHAO Min ¹

1.Key Laboratory of Urban Ecological and Environmental Restoration Key Labortory, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234,China; 2.Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China；3.Department of Natural Resource and Environmental Management,Ball State University,Muncie,IN 47306, USA

Received:2007-08-15 Revised:2007-10-09 Online:2007-11-10 Published:2007-11-10

下载PDF ( 1629 )

意愿价值评估法（CVM）以新古典经济学需求理论为基础，通过构造假想市场使生态服务价值的评估成为可能。但是，经验研究中出现了与新古典经济理论及其预期不一致的异常现象，致使CVM的有效性与可靠性受到广泛质疑，而成为目前国际CVM研究的主要方向。对国际、国内CVM有效性与可靠性的研究进展进行了综述，重点梳理了国际上对WTP的内容依赖性、WTP与WTA的显著差异及可靠性与效益转移等方面的经验研究；而国内由于缺乏该方面的系统研究，制约了CVM在我国生态价值评估及环境公共政策制定中的应用。为此，在前期开展的实例研究基础上，设计了适合我国社会经济特征和生态环境特点的CVM有效性与可靠性研究的技术路线和多重调查方案，以期推动CVM在我国的进一步发展与应用。

关键词: 生态服务价值, 有效性和可靠性, 意愿价值评估法, 新古典需求理论

Allocating appropriate funds to the provision of non-market public goods must be based on appropriately measuring the benefits gained. The Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) is a technique based on stated individual preferences, which has been extensively used for assigning monetary values to goods such as those provided by the ecosystem. But due to the hypothetical market it employs, the validity and reliability of the method has been controversial especially since 1993. This paper is a review on the above field. This paper can be divided into the following three parts. (1) CVM has been primarily developed by economists and is founded on neo-classical demand theory. Its core assumption is that the preferences of consumers are stable. But the present abundant literature has shown that results of CVM often appear to be inconsistent with this core assumption and the expectations of economic theory. The dependence of CV outcomes on the hypothetical situation the respondent is to value (content dependence) and the often large divergences between WTP and WTA measures of benefits raise question about whether measured benefits in one study can be transferred to other locations or situations. This paper cites many CVM case studies to illustrate these anomalies and summarize different explanation;(2) Based on a general review of CVM research in China, the authors points out that the absence of tests of validity and reliability will hamper the future application and practicality of costbenefit analysis;(3) The paper puts forward multiple schemes for establishing CVM's validity and reliability testing which are in accordance with the ecosystem characteristics and social structure particularities in China based upon a previous case study about the ecological restoration of urban river in Shanghai. The scheme provides some direction and suggestions for future research in China. Improving validity and reliability is the key for CVM to being applied in practice and to making a decisive input to policymaking. In spite of not reaching a conclusion it is a hot problem in developed countries but not in China. Despite the different social circumstance, further studies including this paper are necessary and urgent for the application of CVM in China.

Key words: Ecosystem service value, Validity and reliability. , Contingent valuation method, Neo-classic demand theory

中图分类号:

[1]Veisten K. Contingent valuation controversies: Philosophic debates about economic theory[J].Journal of Socio-Economics, 2007, 36(2): 204-232.
[2]Caldwell B J. Beyond Positivism: Economic Methodology in the 20th Century [M].New York, London: Routledge, 1994: 10-13.
[3]Samuelson P. Consumption theory in terms of revealed preference [J]. Economica,1948, 15: 243-253.
[4]Solow R M. How did economics get that way and what way did it get?[J]. Daedalus,1997, 126(1): 39-58. 
[5]Freeman A M. Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods [M]. Washington DC, Resources for the Future,1993:52-68.
[6]Kealy M J, Montgomery M, Dovidio J F. Reliability and predictive validity of contingent values: Does the nature of the good matter?[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 1990, 19: 244-263.
[7]Bateman I J, Georgiou S, Landford I H, et al. Investigating the characteristics of expressed preferences for reducing the impacts of air pollution: A contingent valuation experiment[R].CSERGE Working Paper EDM 02-02, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, University of East Anglia. 2002: 1-89.
[8]Kahneman D, Knestch J L. Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1992, 22: 57-70.
[9]Carson R T, Flores N E, Meade N F. Contingent valuation: Controversies and evidence[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2001, 19: 173-210.
[10]Hoehn J P. Valuing the multidimensional impacts of environmental policy: Theory and methods[J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 1991, 73: 289-299.
[11]Mitchell R C, Carson R T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method[M].Washington DC,Resources for the Future, 1989: 85-102.
[12]Carson R T. Contingent valuation surveys and tests of insensitivity to scope[C]//Kopp R J, Pommerehne W W, Schwarz N,eds. Determining the Value of Non-marketed Goods: Economic, Psychological, and Policy Relevant Aspects of Contingent Valuation Methods.Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers,1997:127-163.
[13]Veisten K, Hoen H F, Navrud S, et al. Scope insensitivity in contingent valuation of complex environmental amenities[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2004, 73(4): 317-331.
[14]Hanley N, Spash C, Walker L. Problems in valuing the benefits of biodiversity protection[J].Environmental and Resource Economics,1995, 5: 249-272.
[15]Loomis J B. Comparative reliability of the dichotomous choice and open-ended contingent valuation techniques[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1990, 18: 78-85.
[16]Venkatachalam L. The contingent valuation method: A review[J]. Environmental Impact Assessment Review,2004, 24: 89-124.
[17]Xu Zhongmin, Zhang Zhiqiang, Cheng Guodong. The updated development and application of contingent valuation method[J]. Advances in Earth Science, 2003, 18(3): 455-462.[徐中民,张志强,程国栋.条件价值评估法的发展与应用[J]. 地球科学进展，2003,18(3):455-462.]
[18]Schulze W D, McClelland G, Waldman D, et al. Sources of bias in contingent valuation[C]//Bjornstad D J, Kahn J R, eds. The Contingent Valuation of Environmental Resources: Methodological Issues and Research Needs. Brookfield: Edward Elgar, 1996: 97-116.
[19]Hanemann W M, Kanninen B. The statistical analysis of discrete-response CV data[C]//Bateman I J, Willis K G, eds. Valuing Environmental Preferences. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999: 302-341.
[20]Vossler C A, Poe G L. Analysis of contingent valuation data with multiple bids and response options allowing respondents to express uncertainty: A comment[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2005, 49(1): 197-200.
[21]Bergstrom J, Stoll J, Randall A. Information effects in contingent markets[J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,1989,71(3):685-691.
[22]Whitehead J, Blomquist G. Measuring contingent values for wetlands: Effects of information about related environmental goods[J]. Water Resources Research,1991,27:2 523-2 531.
[23]Douglas M. Contingent valuation: Environmental polling or preference engine?[J]. Ecological Economics,2006, 60(1): 299-307.
[24]Willig R D. Consumer's surplus without apology[J]. American Economic Review,1976, 66: 589-597.
[25]Randall A, Stoll J R. Consumer's surplus in commodity space[J]. American Economic Review,1980, 70: 449-457.
[26]Hanemann W M. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: How much can they differ?[J]. American Economic Review,1991, 81: 635-647.
[27]Horowitz J K, McConnell K E. A review of WTA/WTP studies[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,2002, 44: 426-447.
[28]Murphy J J, Stevens T H, Weatherhead D. Is cheap talk effective at eliminating hypothetical bias in a provision point mechanism?[J]. Environmental and Resource Economics,2005, 30(3): 327-343.
[29]Carson R T, Flores N E, Martin K M, et al.Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: Comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods[J].Land Economics,1996, 72(1): 80-99.
[30]Smith V K. Nonmarket valuation of environmental resources: An interpretative appraisal[J]. Land Economics,1993, 69:1-26.
[31]Morrison M, Bergland O. Prospects for the use of choice modeling for benefit transfer[J]. Ecological Economics,2006, 60: 420-428.
[32]Downing M,Ozuna J T. Testing the reliability of the benefit function transfer approach[J]. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management,1996, 30: 316-322.
[33]Xue Dayuan. Valuation on non-use values of biodiversity by contingent valuation method in Changbai Mountain Biosphere Reserve in China[J]. China Environmental Science, 2000, 20(2): 141-145. [薛达元.长白山自然保护区森林生态系统间接经济价值评估[J].中国环境科学，2000,20(2):141-145.]
[34]Zhang Yifei, Meng Weihua, Zhang Lei. Analysis of Effects on Residents’ Demand for Urban Public Eco-System Services based on A Case Study[C]//The Proceeding of International Conference on Engineering, Services and Knowledge Management (the Management track of WiCOM2007). IEEE,2007,09: 233-237.
[35]Xu Zhongmin, Zhang Zhiqiang, Long Aihua, et al.Comparison and application of different contingent valuation methods in measuring total economic value of restoring Ejina Banner's ecosystem services[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica,2003, 23(9): 1 841-1 850.[徐中民，张志强，龙爱华,等. 额济纳旗生态系统服务恢复价值评估方法的比较和应用[J].生态学报，2003，23(9):1 841-1 850.]
[36]Zhang Zhiqiang, Xu Zhongmin, Long Aihua, et al.Measuring the economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Zhangye city of Heihe river basin—Comparison and application of continuous and discrete contingent valuation survey[J]. Journal of natural resources, 2004, 19(2): 230-239.[张志强, 徐中民, 龙爱华,等. 黑河流域张掖市生态系统服务恢复价值评估研究——连续型和离散型条件价值评估方法的比较应用[J]. 自然资源学报，2004，19(2):230-239.]
[37]Zhang Yin. The valuation of ecological tourism resource in natural reserve—A case study of Jiuzaigou natural reserve[D]. Beijing: Peking University,2004.[张茵.自然保护区生态旅游资源的价值评估——以九寨沟自然保护区为例[D]. 北京：北京大学，2004.]
[38]Jin Jianjun, Wang Zhishi. Economic valuation of solid waste management in Macao—A comparison studies of choice experiment model method and contingent valuation method[J]. China Environmental Science,2005, 25(6): 751-755. [金建君，王志石. 澳门固体废物管理的经济价值评估——选择试验模型法和条件价值法的比较[J].中国环境科学，2005，25(6)：751-755.]
[39]Zhang Yifei, Liu Yuhui. Study on residents' willingness to pay and factors for urban public eco-environmental services a case study of CVM applied in water quality improvement of urban river in Shanghai[J]. Journal of China University of Geosciences(Social Sciences),2006, 4(3): 198-204. [张翼飞，刘宇辉.城市景观河流生态修复的产出研究及有效性可靠性检验[J].中国地质大学学报:社会科学版，2007，7(2):39-44.]
[40]State Environmental Production Administration of China. Environmental Quality Standards of Surface Water (GB3838-2002)[S]. 2002.[国家环境保护总局.地表水环境质量标准(GB3838-2002)[S].2002. ]
[41]Hanemann W M.Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete response data:Reply[J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,1989,71(4):1 057-1 061.
[42]Zhao Jun, Yang Kai. Study on the parametric models and measures in welfare estimation of natural resources：Comparison of theory and application[J].Journal of natural resources,2004, 19(6): 795-803. [赵军，杨凯.自然资源福利计量的参数模型与表征尺度：理论与应用比较[J]. 自然资源学报，2004，19(6):795-803.]
[43]Li C Z. Semiparametric Estimation of the Binary Choice Model for Contingent Valuation[J]. Land Economics,1996, 72(4): 462-473.

[1]	张永民. 生物多样性的保育及可持续利用对策[J]. 地球科学进展, 2009, 24(6): 662-667.
[2]	张永民. 生态系统变化：工商业面临的机遇和挑战[J]. 地球科学进展, 2009, 24(4): 452-457.
[3]	周杨明,于秀波,于贵瑞. 生态系统评估的国际案例及其经验[J]. 地球科学进展, 2008, 23(11): 1209-1217.
[4]	李延梅. 美国国家生态观测网络的大陆战略[J]. 地球科学进展, 2008, 23(11): 1218-1219.
[5]	张永民，赵士洞. 生态系统与人类健康[J]. 地球科学进展, 2008, 23(6): 644-650.
[6]	张永民，赵士洞，郭荣朝. 全球湿地的状况、未来情景与可持续管理对策[J]. 地球科学进展, 2008, 23(4): 415-420.
[7]	张永民，赵士洞. 全球荒漠化的现状、未来情景及防治对策[J]. 地球科学进展, 2008, 23(3): 306-311.
[8]	张永民,赵士洞. 多尺度评估的贡献及经验教训[J]. 地球科学进展, 2007, 22(8): 851-856.
[9]	张永民,赵士洞. 生态系统可持续管理的对策[J]. 地球科学进展, 2007, 22(7): 748-753.
[10]	张永民,赵士洞. 全球生态系统服务未来变化的情景[J]. 地球科学进展, 2007, 22(6): 605-611.
[11]	张永民,赵士洞. 全球生态系统服务的状况与趋势[J]. 地球科学进展, 2007, 22(5): 515-520.
[12]	顾峰雪,[曹明奎],于贵瑞,陶波,温学发,刘允芬,张雷明. 典型森林生态系统碳交换的机理模拟及其与观测的比较研究[J]. 地球科学进展, 2007, 22(3): 313-321.
[13]	牛栋,李正泉,于贵瑞. 陆地生态系统与全球变化的联网观测研究进展[J]. 地球科学进展, 2006, 21(11): 1199-1206.
[14]	李有斌,安黎哲,张雷,陈拓. 转基因植物释放的潜在生态学效应[J]. 地球科学进展, 2006, 21(6): 641-647.
[15]	黄铁青;牛栋. 中国生态系统研究网络（CERN）：概况、成就和展望[J]. 地球科学进展, 2005, 20(8): 895-902.

阅读次数

全文

摘要