JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Assessment of Non-market Value of Dokdo
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
  • Journal title : Ocean and Polar Research
  • Volume 33, Issue 3,  2011, pp.223-233
  • Publisher : Korea Institute of Ocean Science & Technology
  • DOI : 10.4217/OPR.2011.33.3.223
 Title & Authors
Assessment of Non-market Value of Dokdo
Yoo, Seung-Hoon; Lee, Joo-Suk; Chung, Young-Keun;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The Korean government has acknowledged the importance of Dokdo Island and has consequently taken various measures for the effective management of it. There has, however, been little quantitative information about the value of Dokdo Island and this study, therefore, attempts to assess the Islands non-market value. To this end, this study estimated the non-market value by MAUT/CVM. The non-market value estimated by MAUT/CVM includes historic value, military value, ecological value, and geological value. According to the results, the values calculated by the price in market is about 10.37 trillion won and the values estimated by MAUT/CVM is about 1.72 trillion won annually.
 Keywords
contingent valuation method;non-market value;Dokdo;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
1.
Measuring the economic benefits of designating Baegnyeong Island in Korea as a marine protected area, International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 2016, 1  crossref(new windwow)
 References
1.
곽승준, 유승훈, 이충기 (2002) 조건부 가치측정법을 이용한 우포늪의 보존가치 추정. 국제경제연구 8(3):203-225

2.
곽승준, 조승국, 유승훈 (2002) 한려해상국립공원 보존의 경제적 가치: 조건부 가치측정법을 이용하여. 경제학연구 50(2):85-104

3.
곽승준, 유승훈, 장정인 (2005) 석호환경의 보존가치 추정: 송지호를 중심으로. Ocean and Polar Res 27(2):161-169 crossref(new window)

4.
곽승준, 유승훈, 장정인 (2006) 컨조인트 분석을 이용한 한강 하구의 가치추정. 경제학연구 54(4):141-161

5.
유승훈 (2007) 섬진강 하구의 환경가치 추정. 환경정책연구 6(1):1-25

6.
장창익 (2004) 독도주변해역의 수산자원. In: 서대구 JC (편) 독도가 한국을 살린다. 백산서당, pp 80-91

7.
박창권 (2005) 독도 근해 해양자원과 전략적 가치. 군사논단 44:6-27

8.
Arrow KR, Solow PR, Portney EE, Leamer RR, Schuman H (1993) Report of the NOAA Panel on Contingent Valuation. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington DC, 66 p

9.
Gregory R, Lichtenstein S, Slovic P (1993) Valuing environmental resources: a constructive approach. J Risk Uncertainty 7:177-197 crossref(new window)

10.
Krinsky I, Robb AL (1986) On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. R Econ Stat 68:715-719 crossref(new window)

11.
Kristrom B (1997) Spike models in contingent valuation. Am J Agr Econ 79:1013-1023 crossref(new window)

12.
Kwak SJ, Yoo SH, Kim TY, (2001) A constructive approach to air-quality valuation in Korea. Ecol Econ 38:327-344 crossref(new window)

13.
Russell CS, Dale V, Lee J, Hadley M, Kane M, Gregory R (2001) Experimenting with multi-attribute utility survey methods in a multi-dimensional valuation problem. Ecol Econ 36:87-108 crossref(new window)

14.
Yoo, SH, Kwak SJ (2002) Using a spike model to deal with zero response data from double bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys. Appl Econ Lett 9: 929-932 crossref(new window)