Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/feemsi/12231.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Valuing Environmental Factors in Cost-Benefit Analysis Using Data Envelopment Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Kuosmanen, Timo
  • Kortelainen, Mika
Abstract
Environmental cost-benefit analysis (ECBA) refers to social evaluation of investment projects and policies that involve significant environmental impacts. Valuation of the environmental impacts in monetary terms forms one of the critical steps in ECBA. We propose a new approach for environmental valuation within ECBA framework that is based on data envelopment analysis (DEA) and does not demand any price estimation for environmental impacts using traditional revealed or stated preference methods. We show that DEA can be modified to the context of CBA by using absolute shadow prices instead of traditionally used relative prices. We also discuss how the approach can be used for sensitive analysis which is an important part of ECBA. We illustrate the application of the DEA approach to ECBA by means of a hypothetical numerical example where a household considers investment to a new sport utility vehicle.

Suggested Citation

  • Kuosmanen, Timo & Kortelainen, Mika, 2006. "Valuing Environmental Factors in Cost-Benefit Analysis Using Data Envelopment Analysis," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12231, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:feemsi:12231
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.12231
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/12231/files/wp060096.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.12231?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fare, Rolf & Grosskopf, Shawna & Tyteca, Daniel, 1996. "An activity analysis model of the environmental performance of firms--application to fossil-fuel-fired electric utilities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 161-175, August.
    2. Mika Kortelainen & Timo Kuosmanen, 2007. "Eco-efficiency analysis of consumer durables using absolute shadow prices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 57-69, October.
    3. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, October.
    4. R. D. Banker & A. Charnes & W. W. Cooper, 1984. "Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(9), pages 1078-1092, September.
    5. John Mackenzie, 1993. "A Comparison of Contingent Preference Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 593-603.
    6. Donald H. Rosenthal & Robert H. Nelson, 1992. "Why existence value should not be used in cost-benefit analysis," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(1), pages 116-122.
    7. repec:bla:kyklos:v:36:y:1983:i:1:p:112-14 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. William L. Weber & Bruce Domazlicky, 2001. "Productivity Growth and Pollution in State Manufacturing," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(1), pages 195-199, February.
    9. Anna Alberini & James R. Kahn (ed.), 2006. "Handbook on Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1893.
    10. Timo Kuosmanen & Mika Kortelainen, 2004. "Data Envelopment Analysis in Environmental Valuation: Environmental Performance, Eco-efficiency and Cost-Benefit Analysis," Others 0409004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    12. Nash, Christopher A & Pearce, David W & Stanley, John K, 1975. "An Evaluation of Cost-Benefit Analysis Criteria," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 22(2), pages 121-134, June.
    13. Cummings, Ronald G & Harrison, Glenn W & Rutstrom, E Elisabet, 1995. "Homegrown Values and Hypothetical Surveys: Is the Dichotomous Choice Approach Incentive-Compatible?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 260-266, March.
    14. Cherchye, Laurens & Knox Lovell, C.A. & Moesen, Wim & Van Puyenbroeck, Tom, 2007. "One market, one number? A composite indicator assessment of EU internal market dynamics," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 749-779, April.
    15. Robert Dorfman, 1996. "Why Benefit-Cost Analysis Is Widely Disregarded and What to Do About It," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 1-6, October.
    16. Bingham, Gail & Bishop, Richard & Brody, Michael & Bromley, Daniel & Clark, Edwin (Toby) & Cooper, William & Costanza, Robert & Hale, Thomas & Hayden, Gregory & Kellert, Stephen, 1995. "Issues in ecosystem valuation: improving information for decision making," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 73-90, August.
    17. Cropper, Maureen L & Oates, Wallace E, 1992. "Environmental Economics: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(2), pages 675-740, June.
    18. Francisco Pedraja-Chaparro & Javier Salinas-Jimenez & Peter Smith, 1997. "On the Role of Weight Restrictions in Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 215-230, May.
    19. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    20. N. Womer & M.-L. Bougnol & J. Dula & D. Retzlaff-Roberts, 2006. "Benefit-cost analysis using data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 229-250, July.
    21. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    22. R. Allen & A. Athanassopoulos & R.G. Dyson & E. Thanassoulis, 1997. "Weights restrictions and value judgements in Data Envelopment Analysis: Evolution, development and future directions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 73(0), pages 13-34, October.
    23. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    24. Yaisawarng, Suthathip & Klein, J Douglass, 1994. "The Effects of Sulfur Dioxide Controls on Productivity Change in the U.S. Electric Power Industry," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 76(3), pages 447-460, August.
    25. Timo Kuosmanen & Mika Kortelainen, 2005. "Measuring Eco‐efficiency of Production with Data Envelopment Analysis," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 9(4), pages 59-72, October.
    26. Johansson,Per-Olov, 1993. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of Environmental Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521447928, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marjainé, Szerényi Zsuzsanna & Harangozó, Gábor, 2014. "Mennyit ér a zajterhelés csökkenése?. Zajvédelmi intézkedések értékelése a haszonértékelések átvitelével [The value of silence. An application of benefit-transfer methodology for evaluating noise-c," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 68-91.
    2. Kortelainen, Mika, 2008. "Dynamic environmental performance analysis: A Malmquist index approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 701-715, February.
    3. Andreas Dellnitz & Madjid Tavana & Rajiv Banker, 2023. "A novel median-based optimization model for eco-efficiency assessment in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 322(2), pages 661-690, March.
    4. Mika Kortelainen & Timo Kuosmanen, 2007. "Eco-efficiency analysis of consumer durables using absolute shadow prices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 57-69, October.
    5. Solórzano-Taborga, Pablo & Alonso-Conde, Ana Belén & Rojo-Suárez, Javier, 2018. "Efficiency and Persistence of Spanish Absolute Return Funds || Eficiencia y persistencia de los fondos de retorno absolutos españoles," Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa = Journal of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Quantitative Methods for Economics and Business Administration, vol. 25(1), pages 186-214, Junio.
    6. Kuosmanen, Timo & Kortelainen, Mika & Sipiläinen, Timo & Cherchye, Laurens, 2010. "Firm and industry level profit efficiency analysis using absolute and uniform shadow prices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(2), pages 584-594, April.
    7. George Halkos & Argyro Zisiadou, 2018. "Relating environmental performance with socioeconomic and cultural factors," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 20(1), pages 69-88, January.
    8. Halkos, George & Zisiadou, Argyro, 2016. "Environmental performance index and economic welfare," MPRA Paper 75561, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Mohammad AlHashmi & Gyan Chhipi-Shrestha & Kh Md. Nahiduzzaman & Kasun Hewage & Rehan Sadiq, 2021. "Framework for Developing a Low-Carbon Energy Demand in Residential Buildings Using Community-Government Partnership: An Application in Saudi Arabia," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-36, August.
    10. Bosetti, Valentina & Buchner, Barbara, 2009. "Data Envelopment Analysis of different climate policy scenarios," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1340-1354, March.
    11. Jochem, Patrick & Doll, Claus & Fichtner, Wolf, 2016. "External costs of electric vehicles," MPRA Paper 91602, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Zhang, Cheng & Wang, Qunwei & Shi, Dan & Li, Pengfei & Cai, Wanhuan, 2016. "Scenario-based potential effects of carbon trading in China: An integrated approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 177-190.
    13. Yu, Yan & Wen, Zongguo, 2010. "Evaluating China's urban environmental sustainability with Data Envelopment Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 1748-1755, July.
    14. Luo, Kang & Liu, Yaobin & Chen, Pei-Fen & Zeng, Mingli, 2022. "Assessing the impact of digital economy on green development efficiency in the Yangtze River Economic Belt," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    15. Maietta, Ornella Wanda & De Devitiis, Biagia & Destefanis, Sergio & Suppa, Domenico, 2019. "Human capital and rural development policy: evidence from European FADN regions," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 8(3), December.
    16. Kuosmanen, Timo & Bijsterbosch, Neil & Dellink, Rob, 2009. "Environmental cost-benefit analysis of alternative timing strategies in greenhouse gas abatement: A data envelopment analysis approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1633-1642, April.
    17. Francisco Gildemir Ferreira Silva, 2022. "Brazilian railways separability infrastructure/operations: investigation by production indicators," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(7), pages 1-25, July.
    18. Jason West, 2015. "Capital valuation and sustainability: a data programming approach," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 591-608, October.
    19. Saowalak Roongtawanreongsri & Prakart Sawangchote & Sara Bumrungsri & Chaisri Suksaroj, 2016. "Economic Benefit of Management Options for a Suburban Forest in South Thailand," EEPSEA Research Report rr20160341, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Mar 2016.
    20. Susaeta, Andres & Rossato, Fabricia Gladys, 2021. "Efficiency of pulp and paper industry in the production of pulp and bioelectricity in Brazil," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    21. Welch, Eric & Barnum, Darold, 2009. "Joint environmental and cost efficiency analysis of electricity generation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2336-2343, June.
    22. Manyama, Mkama Thomas & Hepelwa, Aloyce Shaban & Nahonyo, Cuthbert Leonard, 2021. "GIS Based Environmental Cost−Benefit Analysis of Built Environment at Dar es Salaam Coastline Metropolitan," African Journal of Economic Review, African Journal of Economic Review, vol. 9(2), April.
    23. Kuosmanen, Timo & Kuosmanen, Natalia, 2009. "How not to measure sustainable value (and how one might)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 235-243, December.
    24. Jaller, Miguel & Harvey, John T. & Saremi, Sogol & Ambrose, Hanjiro & Butt, Ali A., 2018. "Development of a Freight System Conceptualization and Impact Assessment (Fre‐SCANDIA) Framework," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt05g8p7tn, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kuosmanen, Timo & Bijsterbosch, Neil & Dellink, Rob, 2009. "Environmental cost-benefit analysis of alternative timing strategies in greenhouse gas abatement: A data envelopment analysis approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1633-1642, April.
    2. Mika Kortelainen & Timo Kuosmanen, 2007. "Eco-efficiency analysis of consumer durables using absolute shadow prices," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 57-69, October.
    3. George Halkos & George Papageorgiou, 2016. "Spatial environmental efficiency indicators in regional waste generation: a nonparametric approach," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 62-78, January.
    4. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    5. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    6. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    7. Kortelainen, Mika, 2008. "Dynamic environmental performance analysis: A Malmquist index approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 701-715, February.
    8. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2008. "A survey of data envelopment analysis in energy and environmental studies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 189(1), pages 1-18, August.
    9. Halme, Merja & Korhonen, Pekka, 2000. "Restricting weights in value efficiency analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 126(1), pages 175-188, October.
    10. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Finn Førsund, 2013. "Weight restrictions in DEA: misplaced emphasis?," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 271-283, December.
    12. Yang, Hongliang & Pollitt, Michael, 2010. "The necessity of distinguishing weak and strong disposability among undesirable outputs in DEA: Environmental performance of Chinese coal-fired power plants," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4440-4444, August.
    13. Trinks, Arjan & Mulder, Machiel & Scholtens, Bert, 2020. "An Efficiency Perspective on Carbon Emissions and Financial Performance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    14. Makiko Nakano & Shunsuke Managi, 2012. "Waste generations and efficiency measures in Japan," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 14(4), pages 327-339, October.
    15. Emrouznejad, Ali & De Witte, Kristof, 2010. "COOPER-framework: A unified process for non-parametric projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1573-1586, December.
    16. Korhonen, Pekka & Tainio, Risto & Wallenius, Jyrki, 2001. "Value efficiency analysis of academic research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(1), pages 121-132, April.
    17. Pereira de Souza, Marcus Vinicius & Souza, Reinaldo C. & Pessanha, José Francisco M. & da Costa Oliveira, Carlos Henrique & Diallo, Madiagne, 2014. "An application of data envelopment analysis to evaluate the efficiency level of the operational cost of Brazilian electricity distribution utilities," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 169-174.
    18. Pérez, Karen & González-Araya, Marcela C. & Iriarte, Alfredo, 2017. "Energy and GHG emission efficiency in the Chilean manufacturing industry: Sectoral and regional analysis by DEA and Malmquist indexes," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 290-302.
    19. Halkos, George & Petrou, Kleoniki Natalia, 2019. "Treating undesirable outputs in DEA: A critical review," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 97-104.
    20. Burnett, Royce D. & Hansen, Don R., 2008. "Ecoefficiency: Defining a role for environmental cost management," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 551-581, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Environmental Economics and Policy;

    JEL classification:

    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:feemsi:12231. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feemmit.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.