This setting lets you change the way you view articles. You can choose to have articles open in a dialog window, a new tab, or directly in the same window.
Open in Dialog
Open in New Tab
Open in same window
Open in New Tab
Open in same window

Journal of Economic Perspectives: Vol. 26 No. 4 (Fall 2012)
JEP Volume. 26, Issue 4 |
Previous ArticleNext Article
Sign up for Email Alerts Follow us on Twitter
Full-text Article (Complimentary)
View Comments on This Article (0) | Login to post a comment
Previous ArticleNext Article
Expand
Quick Tools:
Print Article Summary Email Link to this Article Export CitationSign up for Email Alerts Follow us on Twitter
Explore:
From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?
Article Citation
Kling, Catherine L.,
Daniel J. Phaneuf, and
Jinhua Zhao. 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?."
Journal of Economic Perspectives,
26(4): 3-26.
DOI: 10.1257/jep.26.4.3
DOI: 10.1257/jep.26.4.3
Abstract
On March 23, 1989, the Exxon Valdez ran aground in Alaska's Prince William Sound and released over 250,000 barrels of crude oil, resulting in 1300 miles of oiled shoreline. The Exxon spill ignited a debate about the appropriate compensation for damages suffered, and among economists, a debate concerning the adequacy of methods to value public goods, particularly when the good in question has limited direct use, such as the pristine natural environment of the spill region. The efficacy of stated preference methods generally, and contingent valuation in particular, is no mere academic debate. Billions of dollars are at stake. An influential symposium appearing in this journal in 1994 provided arguments for and against the credibility of these methods, and an extensive research program published in academic journals has continued to this day. This paper assesses what occurred in this academic literature between the Exxon spill and the BP disaster. We will rely on theoretical developments, neoclassical and behavioral paradigms, empirical and experimental evidence, and a clearer elucidation of validity criteria to provide a framework for readers to ponder the question of the validity of contingent valuation
and, more generally, stated preference methods.
Article Full-Text Access
Full-text Article (Complimentary)
Authors
Kling, Catherine L. (IA State U)
Phaneuf, Daniel J. (U WI)
Zhao, Jinhua (MI State U)
Phaneuf, Daniel J. (U WI)
Zhao, Jinhua (MI State U)
JEL Classifications
K32: Environmental, Health, and Safety Law
L71: Mining, Extraction, and Refining: Hydrocarbon Fuels
Q26: Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
Q51: Valuation of Environmental Effects
L71: Mining, Extraction, and Refining: Hydrocarbon Fuels
Q26: Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
Q51: Valuation of Environmental Effects
Comments
View Comments on This Article (0) | Login to post a comment

