Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:08:40.946Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Valuation of the Woopo Wetland in Korea: a contingent valuation study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2007

SEUNG-JUN KWAK ,
SEUNG-HOON YOO  and
CHUNG-KI LEE
SEUNG-JUN KWAK
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Korea University, 5-1 Anam-Dong, Sungbuk-Ku, Seoul, 136-701, Korea. Tel: +82-2-3290-2217. Fax: +82-2-3290-2535. Email: [email protected]
SEUNG-HOON YOO
Affiliation:
School of Business and Economics, Hoseo University, 268 Anseo-Dong, Cheonan, Chungnam, 330-713, Korea. Tel: +82-41-560-8344. Fax: +82-41-563-0135. Email: [email protected]
CHUNG-KI LEE
Affiliation:
BK21 Economics Group, Korea University, 5-1 Anam-Dong, Sungbuk-Ku, Seoul, 136-701, Korea. Tel: +82-2-3290-1632. Fax: +82-2-3290-2718. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A contingent valuation (CV) method was performed to estimate the conservation value of the Woopo Wetland, Ramsar site, in Korea. The CV survey was rigorously designed to comply with the guidelines for best-practiced CV studies. Respondents overall accepted the hypothetical market and were willing to pay a significant amount (2,731 to 3,960 Korean won = USD 2.10 to 3.05), on average, per household annually to conserve the wetland. These findings have important implications for efforts to consider environmental quality in policy decisions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Environment and Development Economics , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , April 2007 , pp. 323 - 328
Copyright
© 2007 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This work was supported by the Brain Korea 21 Project. We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. However, responsibility for errors and omissions rests with the authors.