SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Andrews K, Montgomerie R, Hanley ND, Black AR. 2002. Costs and benefits of the Water Framework Directive in Scotland. www.scotland.gov.uk/library4/ERAD/EPU/00015179.aspx (summary). Accessed 10 November 2004.
  • Barton D. 2002. The transferability of benefits transfer. Ecological Economics 42: 147164.
  • Bateman I, Carson R, Day B, Hanemann M, Hanley N, Hett T, Jones-Lee M, Loomes G, Mourato S, Ozdemiroglue E, Pearce D, Sugden R, Swanson J. 2002. Economic valuation with stated preference techniques. Cheltenham (UK): Edward Elgar. 458 p.
  • Black AR, Bragg OM, Caudwell CM, Duck RW, Findlay AM, Hanley ND, Morrocco SM, Reeves AD, Rowan JS. 2002a. Heavily Modified Waters in Europe: Case study on the river Tummel. Edinburgh (UK): SNIFFER. Report SR(02)11C.
  • Black AR, Bragg OM, Caudwell CM, Duck RW, Findlay AM, Hanley ND, Morrocco SM, Reeves AD, Rowan JS. 2002b. Heavily Modified Waters in Europe: Case study on the Galloway River Dee. Edinburgh (UK): SNIFFER. Report SR(02)11D.
  • Black AR, Bragg OM, Caudwell CM, Duck RW, Findlay AM, Hanley ND, Morrocco SM, Reeves AD, Rowan JS. 2002c. Heavily Modified Waters in Europe: Case study on the Forth Estuary. Edinburgh (UK): SNIFFER. Report SR(02)11B.
  • Cahill C, Legg WG. 1990. Estimation of agricultural assistance using producer and consumer subsidy. OECD Economic Studies 13: 1343.
  • Day B, Hanley N, Bergland O. 2001. Nonparametric and semiparametric approaches to analyzing payment ladder contingent valuation data: Bathing water quality improvements in Scotland. Working paper. Glaskow (UK): Economics Department, University of Glasgow.
  • Dunkerley J. 1999 Valuation of an environmental improvement: A contingent valuation study. Working Papers in Economics 9901, Dundee (UK): Abertay University.
  • ENDS. 2004. Getting to grips with the Water Framework Directive. http://www.endsdirectory.com/articles/index.cfm?action=200402. Accessed 1 December 2004.
  • European Commission. 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC. Official Journal of the European Communities L327: 22/12/2000.
  • Haab T, McConnell K. 2003. Valuing environmental and natural resources. Cheltenham (UK): Edward Elgar. 326 p.
  • Hanley N, Spash C. 1993. Cost-benefit analysis and the environment. Cheltenham (UK): Edward Elgar. 278 p.
  • Hanley N, Faichney R, Munro A, Shortle J. 1998. Economic and environmental modeling for pollution control in an estuary. J Environ Manag 52: 211225.
  • Hanley N, Mourato S, Wright R. 2001. Choice modeling approaches: A superior alternative for environmental valuation? J Economic Surveys 15: 453462.
  • Hanley N, Wright R, Alvarez-Farizo B. 2004. Estimating the economic value of improvements in river ecology using choice experiments: An application to the Water Framework Directive. Stirling (UK): Mimeo, Economics Department, University of Stirling.
  • Kampa E, Hansen W. 2004. Heavily Modified Water Bodies: Synthesis of 34 case studies in Europe. Heidelberg (D): Springer-Verlag. 322 p.
  • OECD. 2004. Agricultural policies in OECD countries: At a Glance—2004 edition. Paris (FR). 140 p.
  • Pearce D, Groom B, Hepburn C, Koundouri P. 2003. Valuing the future: Recent advances in social discounting. World Economics 4: 121141.
  • Rozan A. 2004. Benefit transfer: A comparison of WTP for air quality between France and Germany. Environmental & Resource Economics 29: 295306.
  • SAC. 2000. Farm management handbook. Edinburgh (UK): Scottish Agricultural College. 99 p.
  • SEPA. 1999. Improving Scotland's water environment Stirling (UK). 72 p.
  • SEPA. 2005. Water Framework Directive: River basin characterization. http://www.sepa.org.uk/wfd/character/. Accessed 23 May 2005.
  • Sheraga J, Sussman F. 1998. Discounting and environmental management. In: FolmerH, TietenbergT, editors. The international yearbook of environmental and resource economics. Cheltenham (UK): Edward Elgar. p 2342.
  • Stavins R. 1998. What can we learn from the grand policy experiment? Lessons from SO2 allowance trading. J Econ Perspect 12: 6988.
  • Weitzman M. 1998. Why the far future should be discounted at the lowest possible rate. J Environ Econ and Manag 36: 201208.