United States
            Environmental Protection
            Agency
             Office of Health and Ecological
             Effects
             Washington DC 20460
EPA-600/5-78-014
June 1978
            Research and Development
&EPA
Critical  Review
of Estimating
Benefits of
Air and  Water
Pollution  Control

-------
                RESEARCH REPORTIMG SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and  application of en-
vironmental technology.  Elimination  of traditional grouping  was  consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:

      1.   Environmental Health Effects Research
      2.   Environmental Protection Technology
      3.   Ecological Research
      4.   Environmental Monitoring
      5.   Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
      6.   Scientific  and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
      7   Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
      8.   "Special"  Reports
      9.   Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH EFFECTS RE-
SEARCH series. This series describes projects and studies relating to the toler-
ances of man for  unhealthful substances or conditions. This work is generally
assessed from a medical viewpoint, including physiological or psychological
studies. In addition to toxicology and other medical specialities, study areas in-
clude biomedical instrumentation and health research techniques utilizing ani-
mals — but always  with intended application  to human health  measures.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
                                            EPA-600/5-78-014
      CRITICAL REVIEW OF ESTIMATING

        OF AIR AND WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
                    By

            A. Hershaft (ed.)
            A. M. Freeman III
              T. D. Crocker
              J. B. Stevens
         Contract No. 68-01-2821
            Project Officer
           Thomas E. Waddell
   Office of Research and Development
               Prepared for

  U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF HEALTH AND ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS
   OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
          WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

-------
                              DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research and
Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved
for publication.  Approval does not signify that the contents
necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial
products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                      11

-------
                                  PREFACE

     This report is submitted in fulfillment of U.S.  EPA contract #68-01-
2821.  It contains a critical review of current methods and data employed
in estimating benefits of air and water pollution control.

     In order to provide a balanced perspective in assessing the state-of-
the-art in the "benefits area", the material in this  report is derived from
three types of sources:

     •    Extensive experience by three distinguished consultants in
          conceptualizing and analyzing benefit estimates;
     t    Recent experience in preparation of national  benefit esti-
          mates by the Enviro Control staff; and
     •    A two-day conference on benefit estimation  involving some
          25 participants from a number of government,  academic and
          private research institutions.

     The three consultants on general benefit estimation, air pollution
control, and water pollution control benefits were, respectively:

     •    Dr. A Myrick Freeman III
          Dept. of Economics, Bowdoin College
     t    Dr. Thomas D. Crocker
          Dept. of Economics, University of Wyoming
     •    Dr. Joe B. Stevens
          Dept. of Agricultural and Resource Economics,
          Oregon State University

     The Enviro Control contributions, including preparation of the over-
view, as well as coordination and editing of the three  papers, were made
by Dr. Alex Hershaft, Director of Environmental Studies, with the assis-
tance of Mr. H. Theodore Heintz, Jr., Senior Economic Consultant, and Mr.
Gerald C. Horak, Staff Scientist.  Ms. Anita Calcote  was responsible for
typing and production of the report.  Valuable guidance on  content and
format was provided by Mr. Thomas E. Waddell, the U.S.  EPA  Project Officer.
                                    111

-------
                                  ABSTRACT

     This report provides a critical review of the current state of the
art and future prospects of estimating benefits of air and water pollution
control.  Benefits of controlling air and water pollution arise from
gains resulting from improvements in air and water quality.  Such  gains
can be the reduction of damages caused by pollution or the increase  in
options now feasible because of improved environmental quality.

     This report represents three independent critiques by three  experts.
Benefit assessment methodologies were evaluated for the following benefits
categories:  human health, recreation and aesthetic properties, productivity,
materials, and natural ecosystem perturbations.  Specific  aspects discussed
include the nature and role of benefits, damage functions, valuation of
effects, aggregation of results, and representation of uncertainties.

     The conceptual foundations of  estimating pollution control benefits
were presented and compared with empirical studies.   It was concluded that
while available estimates often do  not adequately reflect  the state of the
art, estimates of pollution control benefits would potentially be very
useful to decision makers.  The conceptual basis provided  by economic theory
for benefit estimation is adequate  in most respects and far ahead of the
corresponding empirical effort.  A  number of studies  are guilty of failing
to list explicitly critical assumptions or to express adequately uncertainty
in the results, while other studies have employed conceptual models that are
inappropriate to the problem at hand or the available data.  It was also
concluded that damage functions underlying benefit estimates are frequently
based on insufficient data and/or inadequate~characterization of exposure
and effects.  National benefits estimates were found  to be based on regional
studies which are frequently inadequate in number and/or quality.

     For improving general estimation of benefits it  is recommended that
funding for benefits estimation research be reassessed in  light of its
potential utility to decision-making process, that a comprehensive national
plan for closely coordinated regional benefit studies be developed and im-
plemented and that ex post evaluation of pollution control benefits  gained
through past and current control  programs be conducted.

                                  iv

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS


PREFACE                                                             iii

ABSTRACT                                                             iv

LIST OF FIGURES                                                      ix

LIST OF TABLES                                                       ix

I.   OVERVIEW                                                       1-1

     A.     PURPOSE AND SCOPE                                       1-1

            1.     Background                                       1-1
            2.     Purpose and Scope                                1-3

     B.     CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS                                  1-5

            1.     Nature and Role of Benefits                      1-5
            2.     Damage Functions                                 1-7
            3.     Valuation of Effects                             1-11
            4.     Aggregation of Results                           1-15
            5.     Representation of Uncertainties                  1-17
            6.     Conclusions and Recommendations                  1-19

     C.     AIR QUALITY BENEFITS                                    1-21

            1.     Current Estimates                                1-21
            2.     Health Benefits                                  I_23
            3.     Aesthetic Benefits                               1-24
            4.     Vegetation and Materials Benefits                1-25
            5.     Recommendations                                  I_26

     D.     WATER QUALITY BENEFITS                                  I_28

            1.     Current Estimates                                1-28
            2.     Recreational Benefits                            1-30
            3.     Aesthetic Benefits                               1-31
            4.     Health and Production Benefits                   I_32
            5.     Conclusions and Recommendations                  1-33

     E.     REFERENCES                                              1-35

II.  BENEFITS OF POLLUTION CONTROL -  A. Myrick Freeman, III       II  1

     A.     INTRODUCTION                                           II  1

     B.     POSSIBILITY AND USEFULNESS OF NATIONAL
            BENEFIT ESTIMATES                                      II-4

            1.     On Possibility                                  11-4
            2.     On Usefulness                                   II-6
            3.     Information Content                             II-S

-------
                             TABLE OF  CONTENTS
                                (continued)
                                                                   Page

     C.      THE THEORY OF BENEFITS                                 11-12

            1.      Efficiency and Equity                           11-12
            2.      Measurement of Benefits                         11-13
            3.      The Estimation Process                          11-14

     D.      CONCEPTUAL PROBLEMS IN BENEFIT ESTIMATION              11-17

            1.      Valuation of Life                               11-17
            2.      Overlaps and Gaps                               11-20
            3.      Temporal Aggregation                            11-23
            4.      Uncertainty of Results                          11-24

     E.      TECHNICAL PROBLEMS IN BENEFIT ESTIMATION               11-27

            1.      Measures of Pollution                           11-27
            2.      Pattern of Exposure                             11-29
            3.      Multicollinearity                               11-30

     F.   PREPARING NATIONAL ESTIMATES                              11-34

            1.      Criteria                                        11-34
            2.      Aggregation from Building Blocks                11-37
            3.      Specific Examples                               11-38

     G.      CONCLUSIONS                                            11-46

     H.      RECOMMENDATIONS                                        II-49

            1.      Basic Data and Analytical Techniques            11-49
            2.      Use of Existing Data                            11-51
            3.      Ex Post Evaluation                              11-53

     I.      REFERENCES                                             11-54

III.  BENEFITS OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL -  Thomas  D.  Crocker        III-l

     A.      INTRODUCTION                                          III-l

            1.      Purpose and Scope                              III-l
            2.      Estimation of Benefits                         111-3
            3.      Organization                                   III-5

     B.      CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS                                III-6

            1.      Motivations for Measuring Benefits             III-6
            2,      Measures of Benefits                           111-8
            3,      Sources of Pollution Control  Benefits           III-ll
                                  VI

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                (continued)
                                                                    Page

     C.     EMPIRICAL PROCEDURES                                  111-16

            1.     Methods of Estimating Benefits                 111-16
            2.     Availability of Data                           III-18
            3.     Expression of Uncertainty in Results           II1-22
            4.     Aggregation Procedures                         111-24

     D.     SHORT-TERM IMPROVEMENTS IN BENEFITS ASSESSMENT        111-29

            1.     General Equilibrium Models of Prop-
                   erty Values                                    111-29
            2.     Household Production Function                  111-31
            3.     Input Productivity Studies                     111-32
            4.     Environmental Quality Indices                  111-34
            5.     Form of Benefit Functions                      111-35
            6.     Interview Studies                              111-35
            7.     Studies of Agricultural  Damages                111-36

     E.     STATUS AND PROSPECTS OF BENEFITS ASSESSMENT           111-38

            1.     Status and Role of Benefits Assessment         111-38
            2.     The U.S. EPA Program                           111-40

     F.     REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY                           111-43

     ATTACHMENT.   AN ILLUSTRATION OF SOME  ISSUES IN
                   BENEFITS ASSESSMENT                            111-47

            1.     Introduction                                   111-47
            2.     Presentation of the Problem                    III-48
            3.     Multi-Dimensional Heterogeneity                111-50
            4.     Costs of Market Participation                  111-53
            5.     Institutional and Temporal Constraints         111-54
            6.     Conclusion                                     111-55

IV.   BENEFITS OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL -   Joe B.  Stevens         jy-l

     A.     INTRODUCTION                                           IV-1

     B.     CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS                                 IV-3'

            1.     Role of Benefit-Cost Analysis                   IV-3
            2.     Estimation of Benefits                          IV-5
            3.     Special Considerations                          IV-6
                                   vii

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS
                           (continued)
                                                               Page

C.     GENERAL PROBLEMS                                       IV-10

       1.     State of Damage Functions                       IV-10
       2.     Classification and Aggregation of Benefits      IV-13
       3.     Other Problems                                  IV-14

D.     SPECIFIC PROBLEMS                                      IV-16

       1.     Health Benefits                                 IV-16
       2.     Production Benefits                             IV-18
       3.     Recreation Benefits                             IV-19
       4.     Aesthetic and Ecological Benefits               IV-24
       5.     Property Values                                 IV-27

E.     CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS                        IV-29

F.     REFERENCES                                             IV-33

ATTACHMENT A.  MODEL I                                        IV-35

ATTACHMENT B.-  MODEL 2                                        IV-37
                              viii

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES


Figures                                                             Page

1-1         Hypothetical Damage Function                            1-8

II-l        Classification Scheme for Capture of Effects           11-22

II-2        True and Observed Relationships Between Pollu-
            tion Measure and Mortality Rate                        11-28

II-3        Recreational Benefits of Water Pollution Control       II-44

IV-1        Representation of Consumer's Surplus                  III-9

IV-2        Willingness to Pay for Improvement in Air Quality     111-27
                              LIST OF TABLES
Tables                                                              Page

1-1         Estimated National Damages of Air Pollution
            for 1973                                                1-21

1-2         Availability and Reliability of Information
            on Air Pollution Damages                                1-23

1-3         Estimated National Damages of Water Pollution
            for 1973                                                1-28

1-4         Availability and Reliability of Information on
            Water Pollution Damages                                 1-29
                                    ix

-------
                                I.    OVERVIEW

     This first chapter presents a general  overview of the state-of-the-
art in estimating benefits of air and water pollution control.   The ma-
terial is based on the three papers that follow,  as well  as other sources
referenced at the end of this chapter (Heintz et  al.. 1976 and  Waddell,
1974).  References to specific material  in  the three papers are given,
wherever appropriate, to direct the reader  to additional  information.
This chapter is covered under the headings:  purpose and  scope, concep-
tual foundations, air quality benefits,  and water quality benefits.

A.   PURPOSE AND SCOPE

     This section sets the scene for subsequent discussion by present-
ing the background for this study, its purpose and scope, and the plan
of work.

     1.   Background

          Nearly everyone is now satisfied  that there exists a  causal
     relationship between environmental  pollution and certain damages
     suffered by society.  These may take the form of increased inci-
     dence and prevalence of disease, diminished  recreational expe-
     rience, decreased property values,  reduced crop yields, more fre-
     quent maintenance and replacement of exposed materials, and other,
     less well-identified losses.  This  being the case, a reduction in
     pollution levels should bring about a  corresponding  decrease in
     these damages and produce a set of  benefits  equivalent to  the dif-
     ference in damages before and after the reduction took place.

          Legislators, planning officials,  and'other environmental de-
     cision makers are frequently faced  with the  decision of how much
     to reduce pollutant levels, in the  light of  the associated direct
     costs of pollution control and possible secondary economic impacts.
     In the past, the rationale for these decisions was rather  obvious,
     in that they were often made in response to  popular  sentiment. How-
     ever, as economic conditions have changed for the economy  as a whole,

                                     1-1

-------
as well as for certain industries*  the costs have become more acutely
felt, especially in the wake of the energy crisis.   At the same time,
the beneficial effects of reduced,  or stable, pollution levels were
neither obvious, nor easily-measured.  Clearly, the decision makers
would need a more sensitive too.l  for comparing and trading off the
costs and benefits of various levels and types of pollution control.

     It was this need that gave birth to increased interest in en-
vironmental benefit/cost or tradeoff analysis, including'benefit as-
sessment research.  Admittedly, this research is an inexact science,
primarily because the underlying biological  and physical,relation-
ships need considerable additional  research and because social bene-
fits and costs are diffuse and frequently difficult to quantify, much
less to express in monetary terms.   Even so, the process of logical
and systematic scrutiny inherent in benefit/cost analysis can contri-
bute substantially to the ability of decision makers to improve the
social welfare through more efficient allocation of the limited re-
sources of the public treasury.

     This potential contribution of tradeoff analysis was apparently
recognized by the framers of the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (PL 91-190), primarily in Sections 102 and 204.  Section 102
calls for the "identification and-development of methods and proce-
dures which will ensure that presently unquantified environmental
amenities and values may be given appropriate consideration in deci-
sion making, along with economic and technical considerations."  Sec-
tion 204 charges the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to gather,
analyze, and interpret timely and authoritative information concern-
ing the conditions and trends in the quality of the environment.

     In recent years, there have been a number of estimates of the
benefits of air and water pollution control.  Among the most notable
were the reports on air and water pollution-by Waddell (1974) and
Unger et al. (1974), respectively.   More recent estimates are report-
ed in CEQ's annual report, Environmental  Quality - 1975.  However,
there seems to be a widespread skepticism about the validity of avail-
able benefit estimates.
                                1-2

-------
     With the recent reorganization of the U.S.  EPA's Office of Re-
search and Development, the benefits assessment program is being re-
evaluated.  This report should serve as valuable input into the eval-
uation and re-direction of the benefits research.

2.   Purpose and Scope

     The purpose of this project is to assit decision makers in U.S.
EPA and other Federal agencies by providing a critical review of the
current state of the art and future prospects of estimating benefits
of air and water pollution control.  This should prove valuable
in allocating limited pollution control resources;  assessing the pros-
pects for further benefits research; and in scoping out a viable bene-
fits research effort.

     The specific objectives of this effort are  as  follows:

     •    To assess the current state of the art in estimating
          benefits of air and water pollution control, including
          validity and accuracy of techniques and  data
     •    To assess the future prospects of benefit estimation
     •    To identify fruitful areas for additional research.

     The  scope of this effort can be formulated in terms of the pollu-
tants, benefit categories, affected populations, geographic areas, and
time horizon.  The benefit categories for air and water pollution are
listed below:

     Air  pollution:                  Water pollution:
          Human health               •    Human health
          Vegetation                 •    Production (municipal, in-
          Materials                       dustrial, and agricultural
          Aesthetics                      supplies; commercial fish-
          Other (animals,                 eries and materials)
          ecological risks,          «    Recreation
          etc.)                      «    Aesthetics and property
                                          values
                                1-3

-------
     The remainder of this chapter discusses the conceptual founda-
tion of estimating pollution control  benefits and summarizes air and
water quality benefit discussions as  presented in the subsequent chap-
ters.
                                1-4

-------
B.   CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS

     This section addresses the conceptual foundation of estimating pol-
lution control benefits as presented in the three papers.  Detailed re-
ferences to the papers are provided throughout.  The topical headings are:
nature and role of benefits, damage functions, valuation of effects, ag-
gregation of results, representation of uncertainties, and conclusions and
recommendations.

     1.   Nature and Role of Benefits^

          Benefits of controlling air and water pollution arise from gains
     resulting from improvements in air and water quality.  Such gains can
     be  the reduction of damages caused by pollution or the increase in op-
     tions now feasible because of improved environmental quality.  The'cor-
     responding economic damages result in "out of pocket" losses by increas-
     ing the costs of using air and water, by decreasing their use or acti-
     vities depending on their use, and by increasing the costs of avoiding
     or  repairing  the effects of pollution.  A basic concept in benefit eval-
     uation is  "willingness to pay," defined as the highest price that indi-
     viduals would be willing to pay to obtain the improvement in air or wa-
     ter quality resulting from a given pollution control program.  Econo-
     mists prefer  to evaluate benefits in monetary terms, because this pro-
     vides a common measure of all types of benefits and costs.

          However, many types of damages are not amenable to quantification
     in  monetary terms, because of their nature and the state-of-the-art of
     available measurement methods.  These difficult-to-measure benefits
     probably account for a substantial portion of the total value of pol-
     lution control to society.  This is the case with "psychic" damages,
     so  labeled because they relate to the pleasure or displeasure asso-
     ciated with the use of the environment.  Psychic damages include de-
     creased pleasure and increased pain and anxiety from the use of pollu-
                                                     i
     ted air or water, as well as the loss of non-user values.

          Non-user values arise with people who have no  immediate plans of
     making direct use of an environmental amenity, but are nevertheless

                                     1-5

-------
willing to pay for its preservation for a variety of reasons.   In
the case of option value, they wish to ensure an option of being
able to use it in the future.  Vicarious or bequest values describe
the benefits experienced by people who would provide these environ-
mental amenities to their heirs or others.  Preservation value is
associated with the desire to preserve a unique natural resource.
Finally, risk aversion refers to the willingness of people to pay
for decreasing or averting the risk of a catastrophic or irreversi-
ble damage, such as the flooding of arable land or extinction of a
biological species.   (Heintz, Hershaft, Horak, 1976).

     Over time, as the underlying benefit analyses become more reli-
able,  estimates of pollution control benefits should provide for es-
tablishment of more efficient environmental policies.  However, equity
considerations, as well as various political, institutional, and tech-
nical  issues  also enter into the decision making process.  A thorough
tradeoff  analysis would integrate all of these factors.

      Other  contributions of  benefit estimation may be listed as fol-
 lows  (Chapter II  pp.  6-8;  IV 3-4):
      •    Enhanced  understanding of the problem, the underlying
           factors,  and  potential solutions
      t    Development of  an  analytical framework for entering
           inputs  from other  sources
      •    Establishment of reasonable environmental quality stan-
           dards.
      Estimation  of  pollution control benefits ideally should follow
 the sequence of  steps  listed below  (Heintz et al., 1976; II 53-65):

      t    Project pollutant emissions on the basis of population
           levels and economic activity for the area and time pe-
           riod under consideration
      •    Estimate  reduction of pollutant emissions attributable
           to implementation of given control policy
                               1-6

-------
     •    Estimate improvements in environmental  quality asso-
          ciated with stipulated reduction of emissions
     t    Estimate reduction fn adverse effects associated with
          improvement in environmental  quality
     •    Estimate regional benefits (in monetary terms if pos-
          sible) of reductions in adverse effects and other con-
          siderations
     •    Extrapolate and aggregate regional  benefit'estimates
          across all relevant regions and time periods of in-
          terest to obtain national estimates.
     The first two steps involve the projection of a suitable eco-
nomic scenario and evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of various
administrative and technological pollution control fixes.   The third
step requires the use of complex models of the diffusion and assimi-
lation of specific pollutants within their respective media.  The re-
maining steps rely on (1) the development of damage functions and (2)
economic benefit analysis.  These two topics form the basis of this
report and receive closer scrutiny in the pages that follow.

2.   Damage Functions

     Damage functions provide a quantitative expression of the rela-
tionship between exposure to specific pollutants.  The type and ex-
tent of the associated effect can then be estimated based  on a tar-
get population, or "population at risk".   Despite their crucial role
in the formulation of benefits of pollution control, damage functions
have been treated lightly in the three papers that follow  (Chapters
II, III and IV), because the essence of damage functions is more phy-
sical and biological than economic.   Thus, most of the material pre-
sented in this section is abstracted from Hershaft et al.  (1976).

     A typical S-shaped damage function,  showing the damage corres-
ponding to a given exposure to a specific pollutant, is presented in
Figure 1-1.   The ordinate may represent either the number  of individ-
uals affected or severity of effect.   The abscissa indicates the dos-
age in terms of time at a given ambient concentration, or  in terms of
                                1-7

-------
   ambient  concentration for a fixed period of time.  The lower portion
   of the curve suggests that, up to a certain exposure value, known as
   a  "threshold level", no damage is observed, while the upper portion
   indicates that there exists a damage saturatipn level (e.g., total
   destruction of the target population) beyond which increased expo-
   sure  levels do not produce additional damage.  The middle, quasi-
   linear portion is very useful in that any data points here can be
   readily  interpolated, and the frequent assumption about linearity
   of a  damage function is most valid in this sector.
O)
en
I
to
Q
                             With
                           Controls
Without
Controls
                                                         Saturation
                                                            Level
Exposure
                Figure  1-1.   Hypothetical Damage Function

        Exposure is typically measured in terms of ambient concentra-
   tion  levels and their duration and it may be expressed as "dosage"
   or  "dose".  Dosage is the integral of the time and ambient concen-
   tration  to which the subject has been exposed, whereas dose repre-
                                  1-8

-------
sents that portion of the dosage that has been actually instrumental
in producing the observed damage.   The damage can become manifest in
a number of ways and can be expressed in either physical and biologi-
cal, behavioral response, or economic terms.   If the effect is  physi-
cal or biological, the resultant relationship is known as a physical
or biological damage function, or a dose-effect function.  In an eco-
nomic damage function, on the other hand, the effect is expressed in
monetary terms.  Economic damage functions can be developed by  assign-
ing dollar values to the effects of a physical or biological damage
function, or by direct correlation of economic damages with ambient
pollutant levels.

     In reporting a damage function, one needs to specify the pollu-
tant (or surrogate), the dose rate, the effect, and the "population
at risk".  Dose rate, or the rate at which ambient concentration var-
ies with time, has a major influence on the nature and severity of
the resultant effect.  For example, long-term exposure to relatively
low concentrations of air pollutants'may result in manifestations of
chronic disease9 characterized by extended duration of development,
delayed detection, and long prevalence.  Short-term exposure to high
concentration levels, on the other hand, may produce acute symptoms,
characterized by quick response and ready detection, as well as chron-
ic cumulative, or delayed effects.

     Specification of the population at risk involves the characteri-
zation of the nature and magnitude of the exposed population.  Damage
functions, when extrapolated on the basis of population at risk, serve
to define the total damages produced by a given level of exposure by
multiplying the corresponding unit damage (e.g., increased mortality)
for the specified population at risk (e.g., white males over 65) by
the total number of units within this population.  Detailed popula-
tion characteristics also permit investigators to adjust their  results
to reflect the influence of various intrinsic (e.g., age, race, sex)
and extrinsic (e.g., general  health, occupation, income, and education)
variables in assessing the specific effects of air pollutants (e.g.,
increased incidence of lung cancer).  Finally, population-at-risk in-
                               1-9

-------
formation can provide useful guidance for allocating pollution con-
trol resources by identifying areas with particularly susceptible
populations exposed to relatively hazardous levels of pollutants.
(Takacs and Shea, 1975).

     The data required to develop physical or biological  damage
functions are obtained primarily through epidemiological, field,
clinical, toxicological, or other laboratory investigations.  The
first approach involves the comparative examination of the effects
of pollutants on selected segments of population exposed  to differ-
ent levels of pollution, in order to deduce the nature and magni-
tude of the likely effect.  Field observations represent  a similar
approach to assessment of effects on animals, vegetation, and ma-
terials, and they are characterized by similar analytical tech-
niques and concerns.  Clinical studies are concerned with the ef-
fects of exposure on human subjects.  Toxicological investigations
involve deliberate administration of controlled doses of  pollutants
to animal, and occasionally, human subjects, and observation of the
resulting effects.  Laboratory studies represent essentially the
same approach for determining effects of pollutants on plants and
materials.

     The three principal techniques for analyzing the relationship
between exposure and effect indices in epidemiological studies are
known as cross tabulation, multivariate regression, and non-paramet-
ric or distribution-free analysis.  Cross tabulation is the simplest
of the three.  Multivariate regression provides a rapid indication
of the degree of association between a large number of independent
and dependent variables and is readily programmable for computer op-
eration.   However, its validity is heavily contingent on  a fairly
precise a priori  definition of the relationship between each indepen-
dent and the dependent variables and on precise measurement of the
independent variables.  Thus, this technique is especially vulnerable
to the poor precision in measurement and reporting of air pollution
levels, for example, for a given segment of population.  Non-para-
metric analysis,  on the other hand, is free of these assumptions,
                              I-IO

-------
but requires laborious data reduction for each of the many pairs of
independent and dependent variables and interposition of expert judg-
ment at each step of the process.

     In the development of damage functions on the basis of epidemi-
ological or field studies, it is important, albeit complex, to iso-
late or control the influence of cofactors and covariates.  The for-
mer may be defined as factors that act in concert with the indepen-
dent variables (e.g., relative humidity or cigarette smoking and pol-
lutant level).  Covariates, on the other hand, may be thought of as
factors that vary jointly with the principal dependent variable.  The
interference of cofactors and covariates with results of the analysis
can be reduced by holding them constant or with the aid of statistical
techniques.  When this cannot be done, it is frequently assumed that
the distribution of these factors in the target population is suffi-
ciently uniform to avoid vitiating the basic conclusions.

     Finally, it should be noted that epidemiological and  field stud-
ies and observations can only indicate an association between expo-
sure to pollution and the observed effect, suggesting the  existence
of a causal relationship.  Such a relationship can then be tested by
clinical, toxicological and laboratory studies.

3.   Valuation of Effects

     Estimation of economic benefits of a given improvement in en-
vironmental quality involves either conversion of the associated
reduction of adverse physical and biological effects into  monetary
terms, or direct determination of the user's willingness to pay for
the improvement.  The three common methods to estimating benefits
of pollution control are:
     •    Alternative cost
     «    Opportunity cost
     ®    Willingness to pay.
                                1-11

-------
     The alternative cost method is employed most frequently,  be-
cause of its rapid applicability and avoidance of complex  economic
analysis.  This involves development of a damage function, leading
to estimation of the total damages corresponding to exposure of the..
target population over a specified period.  Because there  is no pro-
vision for substitution or any other mitigative adjustment by the
target population, the damage estimate may be excessive.   (Ill 16).

     Opportunity cost, on the other hand, is estimated on  the basis
of the cost of substitution and other adjustment opportunities .open
to the target population.  This formulation presumes that  ownership
to the environmental good is held by the target population, which  is
then entitled to trade it away for a substitute good.

     Finally, the willingness-to-pay method is based on the deter-
mination of how much the affected population is willing to pay to
avoid the particular environmental degradation.  Here, the title is
presumed to be vested in the perpetrators of environmental degrada-
tion, rather than the target population.  (Ill 17).

     An alternative formulation of approaches to estimation of pol-
lution control benefits is as follows (IV 5-6):
     ©    Market prices, if a market for these goods and ser-
          vices exists and the additional  output does not af-
          fect price significantly
     ®    Simulated market prices (especially useful for esti-
          mation of recreation and aesthetic benefits)
     c    Changes in net income of producers for consumers,  if
          outcome represents an intermediate good (useful  for
          production benefits)
     ®    Cost of most likely alternatives for obtaining same
          objective.

     In spite of general reliance on simulated markets,  some market
price data are also useful  in estimation of benefits.  These data
need to be germane, relatively free of price imperfections,  and  ad-
                               1-12

-------
justed to long-term expected levels.  Technological externalities
should be included and monetary externalities should be excluded
in estimating these benefits.  Finally, the annual changes in bene-
fit streams should be identified for the various benefit categories.
(IV 5-9).

     Estimation of benefits on the basis of willingness to pay en-
tails the intermediate steps of estimating changes in user behavior
associated with anticipated reductions in the adverse effect and the
marginal willingness to pay associated with these changes.  Changes
in user behavior reflect the user's perception of environmental  qual
ity.  Moreover, they are affected by local socioeconomic conditions.
(IV 10-11).

     The benefits associated with a change in environmental  quality
are defined by the area under the demand curve over the applicable
range, but, since environmental amenities are generally not  bought
and sold in the marketplace, there may not be any direct way of  es-
timating the shape of the demand curve by conventional  econometric
techniques.  Instead, discreet market values may need to be  inferred
from individual responses to changes in environmental quality.  The
techniques for drawing these inferences are known as market  demand
analysis, net productivity, net factor income, travel cost studies,
land value studies, and personal interviews.  (II 15-16).

     Another representation of the relationship between changes  in
environmental quality and the user's utility or welfare is known as
"consumer's surplus".  This is defined as the difference between
what an individual is willing to pay and the market price.  Determi-
nation of consumer's surplus can be affected by an alternative for-
mulation of the problem.  (Ill 9-10).

     An important element in estimation of pollution control bene-
fits is the aversion of grave environmental risks brought about  by
pollution.   The value of risk aversion can be measured through ob-
servation of individual  behavior, or through lottery games.   The
                               1-13

-------
f-irst method is preferred,  because it is more realistic,  permits
construction and testing of behavior models,  and provides for  ap-
plication of opportunity cost or willingness-to-pay formulations.
(Ill 19-21).

     In closing this discussion, it is important to bear  in  mind
that the data required to implement these valuation steps are  fre-
quently difficult to obtain and that some of  the economic concepts,
such as the value of human  life, or non-user  benefits,  have  not been
adequately defined.   Thus,  judgmental estimates  need to be frequently
substituted for hard data and a balance must  be  struck  between the  de-
sirable and available data  and techniques.  In such cases, it  is  very
important to>state explicitly all assumptions, the reasons for their
                                                                •
selection, and the implications of choosing different assumptions.
Otherwise, the estimate can easily be misleading and discredit the
entire benefit estimation process.  (II 5-8).

     Usefulness of benefit  estimates is governed by their adherence
to the following provisions (II 9-11):

     •    Consistent terminology
     •    Clearly defined pollutant levels
     •    Clearly identified pollutants and sources
     •    Appropriate degree of detail
     •    Clearly defined relationships between  pol-
          lutant levels and human values.

     The term "costs" should apply to pollution  control resources;
"damages" should refer to the total loss to society due to a pollu-
ted environment; "benefits" should represent  the gains  realized by
society from a given improvement in environmental quality.  Similar-
ly, the quality levels being compared should  be  already defined as
those "with" and "without"  controls, rather than those  "before" and
"after" applications of controls, to avoid time-related complications,
such as inflation.  (II 9-10).
                               1-14

-------
     The pertinent pollutants and their sources should be clearly
identified with the environmental improvement sought, to avoid gaps
and overlaps in the estimation procedure.  Moreover, policy deci-
sions should be based primarily on marginal benefits associated with
efects of the particular decision, rather than on average or total
benefits that would accrue in the absence of pollution.  (II 9-10).

     Benefit estimates corresponding to a given environmental  im-
provement should be expressed in monetary terms and should be based
on individual behavior and preference.   Empirical measures and tech-
niques should be appropriate to the specified theoretical model  and
available data.  Finally, these estimates should reflect the regional
and temporal variations in both economic and environmental  variables.
(II 9-11, 34-35).

     The type and degree of geographic, temporal, and economic de-
tail should be tailored to the specific needs of the user.   For ex-
ample, only a rough estimate may be needed to make an initial  deci-
sion, with more detailed estimates being provided for more refined
future decisions.  (II 11).

4.   Aggregation of Results

     Most benefit estimation studies address a specific geographic
location, group of pollutants, population at risk, and time period.
Extension of these results to the national level and some future
time frame requires the aggregation of the regional  estimates  and
projection of a number of variables^ including ambient levels, popu-
lations at risk, personal incomes, and costs of damages.  In aggre-
gating over several variables, it is important to specify the  order
in which the variables are being aggregated.  (Ill 24-28).

     The benefit categories for which the data are collected are
often dictated by availability of information sources and analyti-
cal expediency, rather than the needs for a uniform and self-con-
sistent framework.   Consequently, different studies evaluate dam-
                                I 15

-------
ages that are not necessarily additive,  or even comparable,  and  care-
ful interpretive techniques must be applied to the results of  such
studies to prevent gross overlaps or omissions of damage estimates.
Moreover, in aggregating such fractional results, it has not been
possible to reflect the potential impacts of changes ;'n individual
components on one another, nor the impact of the general adjustments
of the economy and the resulting reduction in damages.   (Heintz  et al.,
1976).

     Aggregation of benefit estimates entails a tradeoff of  detailed
information about form and structure in  return for treatability  and
ease of comprehension.  Attempts to apply aggregated national  esti-
mates to local pollution control decisions can introduce substantial
errors, because the information lost in  the aggregation process  can-
not be recovered.  In principle, national estimates may be developed
directly, rather than by aggregation of  local studies.   (Ill 24-28).
However, additional research in this area is necessary.

     Overlaps and gaps between categories of benefits may arise  when
two types of effects (e.g., health effects and property values,  in
the case of air pollution, and recreation benefits and property  val-
ues, in the case of water pollution) are estimated by different  meth-
ods which may count the same benefit component twice or fail to  cap-
ture certain other components.  It is important, therefore,  to at-
tempt removal of the excess count and to inpute a value for  the  mis-
sing component.  Another problem is the  inconsistency in quality of
estimates for different benefits categories.  (II 20-23; IV  13-14).

     If the benefits of interest accrue  over a number of years,  then
it may be useful to compute the present  value of the total  stream of
benefits with the aid of an appropriate  discount rate and time hori-
zon.  This approach becomes less effective when the projected  effects
extend over a very long time period that spans several  generations
(intergenerational effects), because of  the large reduction  factor.
For example, using a discount rate of 5  percent, the current benefit
of an effect occurring 200 years hence is reduced by a  factor  of
                               1-16

-------
6 x 10  .   In such cases, the consideration of intergenerational
equity should outweigh that of intertemporal efficiency.  Another
problem in computing the present value of the stream of benefits
is the differential growth rates.  (II 23-24; IV 13-14).

5.   Representation of Uncertainties

     Uncertainties about benefit estimates arise from errors in
the four intermediate steps of the estimation process:
     t    Specification
     t    Measurement
     •    Valuation
     •    Aggregation.
     Errors of aggregation are associated with attempts to extra-
polate national values from regional  estimates or future values
from current or past estimates.  They arise from geographic and
temporal variability of user behavior and market conditions.   Er-
rors of valuation are due to the difficulty of assigning monetary
values to certain physical, biological, aesthetic, or psychic ef-
fects.  (Ill 22-23).

     Errors of specification include any type of error in specify-
ing the functional form of the relationship under study or in ac-
counting for important variables.   A particularly common and  grave
error of specification is committed in attempting to extrapolate a
complete functional relationship from a few data points that  are
barely adequate to characterize a small portion of the curve.   Even
if one were willing to make an assumption about the overall shape
of the function, there is frequently no way of knowing which  portion
is represented by these data points.   (Hershaft et al., 1976).

     Errors of measurement may be incurred in the course of the fol-
lowing steps of the benefit estimation process:

     •    Location of monitoring station and subjects
     •    Sampling and analysis
                               1-17

-------
     •    Averaging and aggregation of ambient pollu-
          tant levels
     •    Determination of effect
     •    Impact of covariates
     •    Characterization of population at risk.

     If the errors of measurement of the independent variables  are
relatively small, occur at random, and follow a normal,  or Gaussian
distribution about the mean value of each variable,  then the total
error of all the independent variables can be computed by standard
statistical techniques.  However, this is seldom the case, because
measurement of such independent variables as pollutant level, meteo-
rological conditions, and socioeconomic characteristics  is subject
to errors that are both large and biased.  The advantages of this
statistical approach include an opportunity to incorporate more in-
formation in the reported results and the assignment of a probabil-
ity to the various outcomes.  (Hershaft et al., 1976;  II 24-26; III
23-24).

     Envelopes characterizing errors and uncertainties of benefit
estimates can be also obtained by more practical  means,  including:

     •    Replicating a specific study using new data or
          methods
     •    Providing ranges of values of the more important
          variables
     •    Combining results of several studies
     •    Applying "best" and "worst" case assumptions.

     Replication and data manipulation are essentially empirical
techniques of determining the errors and corresponding confidence
bands.  Combining the results of several studies is  a rare and  un-
certain opportunity, in light of the great variety of conditions
and populations that often characterize the different efforts.   Ap-
plication of "best" and "worst" case assumptions is  more an argu-
mentative than a statistical technique.  The lower boundary, or best

                                1-18

-------
case, is established by attributing all reasonable portions of the
effect to any plausible cofactors and covariates and associating on-
ly the residual effects with pollutant exposure.  The upper boundary,
or worst case, is determined by Inverting this procedure and assuming
a minimal impact of other variables.  (Hershaft et al.. 1976).


6.   Conclusions and Recommendations


     A number of major conclusions emerge from the discussion of con-
ceptual foundations of estimating pollution control benefits:
     •    Estimates of pollution control benefits would poten-
          tially be very useful to decision makers (II 46)

     •    However, available estimates do not adequately re-
          flect the state of the art (II 48)

     •    The conceptual basis provided by economic theory for
          benefit estimation is adequate in most respects and
          far ahead of the corresponding empirical effort (II
          46)

     •    Nevertheless, a number of studies have employed con-
          ceptual models that are inappropriate to the problem
          at hand or the available data

     •    A number of studies have failed to list explicitly
          critical assumptions or to express adequately un-
          certainty in the results

     t    National benefit estimates are based on regional
          studies which are frequently inadequate in number
          and/or quality

     •    Damage functions underlying benefit estimates are
          frequently based on insufficient data and/or inade-
          quate characterization of exposure and effects (II
          27-30)

     •    Benefits assessment research has been accorded a
          relatively low priority by the U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency, perhaps because of skepticism
          about its value, or the public health and ecosys-
          tems focus of environmental legislation (III 40-
          41)

     •    Past U.S.  EPA research strategy has been charac-
          terized by short-term, piecemeal studies which
          are not conducive to the accumulation of a con-
          sistent and comprehensive data base useful  in
          decision making (III 41-42)

                               1-19

-------
          Some aspects of benefit estimation  are  subject  to
          value and equity judgments,  rather  than applica-
          tion of economic theory (II  47-48;  IV  13-15)

               relative merits of different distributions
               of benefits among population groups

               adverse consequences of present actions  on
               future generations
     Recommendations for improving general  estimation of benefits

are as follows:
     •    Reassess funding for benefits estimation research
          in light of its potential  utility to decision-mak-
          ing process and the uncertainties permeating other,
          currently funded national  assessment programs (III
          41-42)

     •    Develop and implement a comprehensive national  plan
          for closely coordinated regional  benefit studies
          that is well  grounded in economic theory and pro-
          vides for consistent aggregation  and expression of
          the uncertainty of all  estimates  (III 42)

     •    Develop and implement a comprehensive program of
          ex post evaluation of pollution control  benefits
          gained through past and current control  resources
          (II 53)

     •    Convene a group of experts every  few years to de-
          velop comprehensive estimates of  national  benefits
          of pollution control (II 52)

     t    Employ scientists from other  disciplines in plan-
          ning and implementing benefits estimation studies
          (IV 25).
                               1-20

-------
C.   AIR QUALITY BENEFITS

     This section presents an overview of the discussion on benefits
of air pollution control contained primarily in Chapter III,   Speci-
fic references to this chapter are provided wherever appropriate.   The
topics covered are:   current estimates, health benefits, aesthetic ben-
efits, vegetation and materials benefits, and recommendations.

      1.    Current Estimates

          The latest estimates of national air pollution damages have
      been compiled by Heintz et al. (1976).  These are equivalent to
      benefits that would accrue annually from reduction of air pollu-
      tion to threshold  levels.  Table 1-1 summarizes the benefit es-
      timates for the four major classes of benefits, in terms of best
     estimates and corresponding ranges.   The latter were derived
     largely through a proportional representation of the ranges  quo-
     ted by Waddell  (1974).
     Table 1-1.   Estimated National Damages of Air Pollution for 1973
                                ($ billion)
Damage Category
Health
Aesthetic
Vegetation
Materials
Total
Best Estimate
5.
9.
2.
1.
20.
7
7
9
9
2
Range
Low
2.
5.
1.
0.
9.
0
7
0
8
5'
High
9.4
13.7
9.6
2.7
35.4
     Source:  Heintz et al., 1976

          To gain a proper perspective of these estimates, it is im-
     portant to recognize that they do not reflect all of the potential
     damages from air pollution.  There are a number of categories of
                                    1-21

-------
potential damages for which estimates are^not available.   The most
important of these is the threat to preservation of the natural
environment, including unique ecosystems and species.   But,  even
within the categories for which estimates are available,  the
existing monetary measures tend to understate the total damages.
For example, the estimated health damages reflect the  direct and
indirect costs of illness, such as health care costs and  lost earn-
ings, but do not reflect the value of lost leisure time or the
psychic costs of illness and death.

     In combining estimates from different classes of  damages,
care has been taken to minimize double counting.  For  example,
studies of the differences in residental property values  asso-
ciated with differences in air pollution reflect primarily the
aesthetic and soiling effects, rather than health effects.  This
is based on the argument that the aesthetic effects are experi-
enced directly in everyday life, whereas health effects are
mostly long-term, and are not distinguishable by the general
population from other causes of illness.  Although improved  edu-
cation may be altering people's awareness of the health effects
of air pollution, it is not likely that this has been  signifi-
cantly reflected in past property values, on which these benefit
estimates have been based.

     The damage estimates presented here are based on  the inter-
pretation of the results of numerous studies of varying scope,
methodology, and data quality.  The availability and reliability
of information from these studies is indicated in Table 1-2.  It
will be noted that effects data are most available for effects of
SO , oxidarits, and particulates and for the damage categories of
  /\
human health and vegetation.
                               1-22

-------
         Table 1-2.   Availability and Reliability of In-
                      formation on Air Pollution Damages
Damage
Categories
Human Health
Aesthetics
Vegetation
Materials

NOX
SF
U
IF
SF
Oxi-
dants
SF
SF
IG
IF

S0x
IG
IG
IF
IG

CO
SG
U
SG
SP

HC's
SF
U
SF
SP
Parti -
culates
IG
IF
SF
SG

Other
IF
U
SF
U
Source:  Heintz et al., 1976
          Availability
          A - ample
          I - insufficient
          S - scarce
          U - unavailable
Reliability
E - excellent
G - good
F - fair
P - poor
2.   Health Benefits

     The key consideration in estimation of health benefits  of air
pollution control is the valuation of human life.   This  can  be ac-
complished by the Thaler-Rosen or the productivity method.   The for-
mer estimates the average value of human life as  somewhat in excess
of $200,000 on the basis of individual  preference  for higher wages
versus more risky occupations.  The problem with  this method lies
in the fact that willingness to pay for preservation of  human life
rises steeply with proximity of death.   (II 17-18).

     The productivity, or human capital method values each  life at
the present value of the expected stream of the individual's future
earnings.  The difficulties here are the conversion of a probabilis-
tic estimate into a specific stream of  earnings and the  failure to
value lives of people who receive no compensation  for their  labor
(e.g., housewives, children, retirees,  volunteers).   It  should be
                               1-23

-------
noted also that there is no logical  connection between value of fu-
ture earnings and willingness to pay.   (II 18-19).           •  '
         f.
                                                    1           •
     The household production function is an analytical  framework
that can be applied in estimating health benefits of pollution con-
trol.  This theory views the consumer as combining  market purchased
goods and his own resources to produce a given state of health.  The
major advantage of this method is that it provides  for dealing with
the inadequacies of previous methods, such as failure to take into
account the value of leisure and uncompensated time as well  as indi-
vidual adjustment to pollution.  (Ill 31-32).

3.   Aesthetic Benefits

     Estimation of aesthetic benefits of air pollution control en-
compasses a number of the concepts discussed in Section B.  This is
illustrated in Chapter III Attachment, which discusses a case study
involving the impact of air pollution on the outdoor recreational
market in San Bernardino, California.   These concepts may be de-
scribed as (III 46-54):
     •    Multidimensional heterogeneity
     •    Cost of market participation
     •    Institutional and temporal constraints.
     The first term refers to the fact that outdoor recreational
sites exhibit substantial differences in a number of dimensions
(e.g., size, topography, vegetation, facilities, congestion, ac-
cessibility).  The second concept deals with the relatively high
cost of participating in the outdoor recreation market due to tra-
vel requirements, search for a suitable site, and purchase of spe-
cial implements (e.g., hiking boots and backpacks).  Finally, the
market is subject to a number of controls exercised by public in-
stitutions, such as health and safety regulations and restrictions
on attendance, as well as constraints on the time schedule avail-
able for recreation.  (Ill 49-53).
                               1-24

-------
     Another aspect of aesthetic benefits is reflected in property
values.  An improved method of obtaining an aggregated national es-
timate of property value changes has been developed.  This method
does not assume that the same set of weights applied to each locale,
time period, and household, nor does it ignore the manner of distri-
bution.  Moreover, it is soundly grounded in economic theory and is
capable of capturing several elusive features of the market.  (Ill
29-30).

4.   Vegetation and Materials Benefits

     Estimates of air pollution damages to agricultural crops have
focused on the physical measures of damage and have ignored the ef-
fect of the resulting changes in output on the unit price.  Yet,
models of agricultural markets that are capable of capturing these
price effects are generally available and should be applied to the
estimation of crop damages (III 36).

     Past studies of production damages of air pollution have fo-
cused on materials damages and have neglected the involvement of
these inputs in the production process.  It appears desirable, in
this connection, to assess the effects of air pollution on labor
supply and productivity.  The findings should be transferable to
other cases of occupational exposure.  (Ill 33).

     Past attempts to construct indices of air pollution control
benefits failed, because they viewed benefit changes as nearly syn-
onymous with changes in ambient concentrations, and social valua-
tions were based almost exclusively on air quality standards.  This
representation could be improved by viewing ambient quality as a
factor of production, e.g., changes in morbidity characteristics
associated with certain pollutant levels.  (Ill 34).

     Results of interviews to ascertain individual preferences are
frequently biased by the interviewees' anticipation of how their
responses will be used.  Nevertheless, differences in willingness
to pay for various pollution levels may provide a valid representa-

                               1-25

-------
tion of the marginal  willingness to pay, which is of primary impor-
tance in policy decisions.  Moreover, techniques have been developed
for eliciting truthful responses about preference orderings.  (Ill
35-36).
5.   Recommendations


     The following research projects are recommended to improve es-

timation of air pollution control benefits:


     •    Apply the household production function framework to
          obtain health benefits of pollution control (III 31-
          32)

     t    Conduct research on value of human life along two ap-
          proaches (II 50):

               determination of willingness to pay for small
               changes in probability of death

               determination of the value implicit in public
               decisions involving public safety

     •    Assess effects of air pollution on labor supply and
          productivity (III 32-33)

     •    Prepare improved estimates of benefits derived from
          available property value studies and conduct new
          studies (II 52; III 29-30)

     •    Apply available models of agricultural markets to es-
          timation of crop damages (III 36)

     •    Investigate improved methods of assessing wi'llingness
          to pay through interviews (III 35-36).
      Benefit estimation would also  gain from the following recom-
mendations designed to improve development of air pollution damage
functions (Hershaft et al., 1976).


      •    Determine how well air quality measurements at the
          monitoring station represent the ambient quality af-
          fecting the population at risk

      •    Determine the impact of mobility and shielding of
          the subjects on their exposure
                                1-26

-------
Develop a composite index of exposure representing
both prevailing and extreme values

Define current air quality monitoring requirements
for potential future damage studies

Assess and improve the accuracy and reliability of
various methods for determining morbidity

Develop a method for determining changes in life
expectancy due to exposure to air pollutants

Provide uniform guidance for designing studies of
the effects of air pollutants on vegetation

Conduct studies on the following effects of air pol
lutants:

     specific effects of NOp and nitrates

     specific effects of different types of
     sulfates

     chronic effects of low-level exposures to
     specific pollutants

     carcinogenic, teratogenic, and mutagenic
     effects of specific pollutants

     effect of oxidants on yields of major
     crops

     effects on paints, cement, rubber, plas-
     tics, and wood

     effects on climate and local weather con-
     di tions.
                     1-27

-------
D.    .WATER QUALITY BENEFITS

     This section presents an overview of the discussion  on  benefits  of
water pollution control  contained primarily in Chapter IV.   Again,  spe-
cific references to this chapter are provided wherever appropriate.   The
topics covered are:  current estimates, recreation benefits, aesthetic
and ecological benefits, health benefits, production benefits,  and  con-
clusions and recommendations.

     1.    Current Estimates

          The latest estimates of national  water pollution  damages  have
     been compiled by Heintz et al.  (1976).   These are equivalent to  ben-
     efits that would accrue annually from reduction of water pollution
     to  "threshold" levels.  Table 1-3 summarizes these estimates for
     four major classes  of damages,  in terms  of best estimates  and  the
     corresponding ranges.  The latter reflect the substantial  uncer-
     tainty associated with £hese estimates.
     Table 1-3.    Estimated National  Damages  of Water Pollution for 1973
                                ($ billions)
Damage Category
Outdoor Recreation
Aesthetic and Ecological
Health
Production
(including municipal ,
industrial , agricultur-
al supplies, commercial
fisheries, and materials
damage)
Total
Best Estimate
6.3
1.5
0.6
1.7





10.1
Low
2.5
0.6
0.3
1.1





4.5
Range
High
12.6
2.8
1.0
2.3





18.7
     Source:   Heintz et al., 1976
                                    1-28

-------
     Since the largest damages are in the recreational, aesthetic,
and ecological categories, the total estimates strongly reflect the
uncertainties inherent in the currently available data and techniques
for estimating the monetary value of these uses of water.  The esti-
mation of recreation damages depends'upon understanding the behavior
of recreationists when confronted with a complex set of choices con-
cerning types of recreation, travel, sites, and the quality of the
recreational experience.  In determining aesthetic and ecological
damages, it is necessary to consider the value which individuals
place on viewing or preserving waterways of high quality.

     A broad spectrum of studies have been reviewed to obtain infor-
mation on water pollution control damages.  Table 1-4 reports on the
availability and reliability of the information contained in these
studies.
        Table 1-4.   Availability and Reliability of Infor-
                     mation on Water Pollution Damages
Pollutant
Acidity
BOD
Col iform Bacteria
Floating Solids
Hardness
Nutrients
Odor
Oil
Pesticides
Sediment
Temperature
TDS and Salinity
TSS and Turbidity
Toxic Metals
General Pollution
Outdoor
Recreation
SF
IF
SF
IF
U
SP
U
SP
U
IF
IF
U
SF
SP
AF
Aesthetic and
Ecological
U
SP
U
U
U
U
U
SP
U
IF
SP
U
U
U
SP
Health
U
U
SP
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
U
SP
Production
Losses
SP
IF
SP
SP
IP
SP
U
SP
U
IF
SP
IF
SP
SP
IF
Source:  Heintz et al., 1976   Availability:
                               A - ample
                               I   insufficient
                               S   scarce
                               U - unavailable
Reliabi1ity:
E   excellent
G   good
F -  fair
P -  poor
                               1-29

-------
2.    Recreational  Benefits

     Estimates of recreational  benefits are based largely on
studies of the behavior of recreationists faced with changing wa-
ter quality.   The analysis attempts to predict how recreational
patterns and the resulting values gained by recreationists would
be affected by changes in water quality parameters.  Unfortunately,
damage functions relating these changes are very sketchy.  (IV
11, 20).

     Most national benefit estimates are based on a few partial
studies of local recreational  patterns.  This presents two sour-
ces of uncertainty.   First, there is considerable variation in
the relationship between water quality and consumer behavior from
one geographic location to another.  Second, local studies cannot
account for the large number of options open to the recreationist,
i.e., how deterioration of water quality at one site affects his
behavior at other sites.  (IV 19-20).

     Two other points are worth noting.  Most studies consider only
two pollution levels:  the current and the one meeting water qua-
lity standards.  Instead, a range of pollution levels should be
examined to determine that level  where marginal costs become equal
to marginal benefits.  In addition to the usual efficiency grounds,
improvement of water quality for recreation could be justified on
other grounds, such as compensation to those who can not afford  to
recreate elsewhere,  preservation of future options, and national
pride.  (IV 20-21).

     Water pollution affects recreation by reducing the quality
of the recreational  experience, by causing the consumer to re-
create less often, and by causing him to incur higher travel costs
to enjoy substitute sites.  The last of these components is mea-
sured most readily.   However, the use of travel costs for this
purpose is susceptible to the following complications   (IV 21-22);
                               1-30

-------
     •    Unusual income elasticities
     •    Impact on travel of highway construction,
          crowding,  and gasoline prices
     •    Inertia in recreational preference
     t    Transfer of recreation from a more dis-
          tant, but more desirable site to a
          closer site, as a result of pollution of
          the distant site.
     Two conceptual models estimating national recreational bene-
fits by aggregation of site and situation-specific results have
been developed.  The first examines the conceptual links between
quality, quantity, and price of the recreational experience.  The
second model demonstrates the usefulness of a "reduction in travel
cost" construct and specifies data requirements.  (IV 23-24, Attach-
ment A and B).

3.   Aesthetic Benefits

     The state of the art in estimating aesthetic and ecological
benefits is even more limited than that for estimating the recrea-
tional  benefits.  Effect of water quality on aesthetic and ecologi-
cal concerns and the resultant consumer behavior modification are
difficult to measure, because they are not well  reflected in market
transactions.  Consequently, such estimates are  based on personal
interviews which seek to determine the value placed  by consumers
on these concerns.   It is widely suspected that  the  interviewees
are attempting to affect the results of the interview by their re-
sponses, i.e., that there is a substantial Disparity between what
they say they would do and what they would actually  do.   Although
psychologists and other behavioral scientists have been  able to
cope with this problem, their expertise has not  been brought to
bear on these studies.   (IV 25).

     It is difficult to draw general  conclusions from current empi-
rical  work, because it focuses on high-quality,  unique environmen-
tal services, rather than medium or low-quality  services.  Moreover,
                               1-31

-------
there is some question whether estimates of option values should
be incorporated in benefit estimates, in light of their softness
and consequent weakening of the validity of total benefit esti-
mates.  (IV 26-27).

     Changes in property values have been .employed to estimate
aesthetic benefits of water pollution control.  These changes
have been regarded with some suspicion, because it was felt that
they reflect a redistribution of wealth, rather than a net addi-
tion to national productivity or efficiency benefits.  On the
other hand, property value changes may reflect an actualized op-
tion demand which should be included as an efficiency benefit, be>
cause it indicates that buyers seek to insure a continued future
supply of environmental services for private use.  (IV 27-28).

     The use of property value changes to estimate the aesthe-
tic benefits suffers from several  limitations.  One is the diffi-
culty of avoiding double counting of benefits with those in the
recreational category.  Moreover,  there is a general  scarcity of
property value data which can be adequately linked to water qua-
lity levels.  (IV 28).

4.   Health and Production Benefits

     Improvements in estimating health benefits hinge on a more
precise definition of the   relationship between water quality
and the incidence of waterborne diseases, such as hepatitis, gas-
troenteritis, salmonellosis, and typhoid.  The key problem in
quantifying health benefits is how best to deal with uncertain,
long-term relationships, such as the' presence and effects of car-
cinogens.   Also, determination of the value of human  life is
complicated by the fact that society may be willing to expand the
effective willingness to pay of an individual beyond  his future
earnings.   (IV 16-17).
                               1-32

-------
     Production benefits 'aYise from water pollution control, be-
cause water is a direct input to many production activities.  These
activities may be divided to include municipal, industrial, and ag-
ricultural water supplies, commercial fishing, and materials damage
categories.  Available estimates of these benefits have been made
with the aid of the alternative cost, or technical coefficient ap-
proach.  This approach is based on estimating the additional cost
incurred in these production activities, because of water pollution
and assumes that the reduction in such costs would be proportional
to the reduction in pollution levels.  The costs addressed include
treatment of water before-use, maintenance and repair of equipment,
and decreased production.  (Heintz et a!., 1976).

     Production benefit estimates obtained under this approach suf-
fer from the failure to consider substitutions and other market ad-
justments made by the producer to mitigate the effects of pollution
on production activities.  Another problem lies in the assumption
that marginal costs of treating man-made pollutants are equivalent
to the -prorated portion of the average cost of treating both man-
made and natural pollutants.  This may lead to over estimation of
the benefits due to control of man-made pollution.  A problem in
the estimation of agricultural damages on the basis of crop prices
is due to distortions brought about by price support for farm pro-
ducts and other institutional manipulations.  (IV 18-19).

5.   Conclusions and Recommendations

     The following conclusions are drawn from the preceding dis-
cussion:
     t    The theoretical framework for estimation of water
          pollution control benefits is far more advanced
          than the corresponding empirical work (IV 29)
     •    Estimates of national benefits of consumption
          losses (e.g., recreation, aesthetics) are much
          less firm than those for production losses and
          prospects for improvement of this situation are
          not good (IV 29)
                               1-33

-------
     •    Reduction of travel costs offers a- potential  for as-
          sessing recreational benefits at a higher level  of
          aggregation (IV 30-31)
     The following actions aire recommended to improve estimation
of water pollution control benefits:
     t    Prepare more complete and valid behavioral response
          functions, including demand curves for specific re-
          creation sites (II 50; IV 30)

     •    Establish a long-term "behavioral  monitoring system"
          that would measure simultaneously  basic economic and^
          ecological factors, objective and  perceived water qua-
          lity parameters,  recreational activity, and property
          values (IV 31-32)

     •    App],y the new models to the estimation of recrea-
          tional benefits (IV 23-24, Attachments A and B)

     •    Improve interview techniques for estimating aesthetic
          benefits by seeking help from behavioral scientists
          (III 35-36; IV 25)

     t    Prepare improved  damage functions  defining the
          relationship between water quality and the inci-
          dence of waterborne diseases (IV 16)

     •    Prepare improved  estimates of the  value of human
          life (II 50; IV 17-18).
                               1-34

-------
REFERENCES
Heintz, H. T., Jr., A. Hershaft, and G. C. Horak, National  Damages
    of Air and Water Pollution Control, U.S.  Environmental  Protec-
    tion Agency (Contract No. 68-01-2821), September 1976.

Hershaft, A., et al.. Critical Review of Air Pollution Dose-Effect
    Functions, Council on Environmental Quality (Contract No. 5-
    AC012). March 1976.

Takacs, I., and G. B. Shea, Human Population at Risk to Various^
    Levels of Air Pollutants. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
    (Contract No. 68-01-2820), February 1975.

Unger, S. G., et a!., National Estimates of Water Quality Benefits,
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Contract No. 68-01-2997]",
    November 1974.

Waddell, T. E., The Economic Damages of Air Pollution, U.S. Environ-
    mental Protection Agency, EPA-600/5-74-012, May 1974.
                               1-35

-------
                     II.   BENEFITS OF POLLUTION CONTROL
                           A. Myrick Freeman, III
                               Bowdoin College
A.   INTRODUCTION
     The issues to be discussed in this paper can be stated most con-
cisely in the form of four questions.  First, "would national estimates
of benefits from controlling air and water pollution be useful to public
officials and others concerned with evaluating pollution control policy
alternatives?"  Second, "is it possible to use the available economic the-
ory, empirical techniques, and data base to make national estimates which
can be supported on logical and scientific grounds?"  The third and fourth
questions presuppose generally affirmative answers to the first two ques-
tions.  The third is, "do available estimates of national pollution control
benefits adequately reflect the present state of the art?"  And finally,
"what can be done to produce better estimates of national benefits?"

     It is perhaps misleading to present the "possible" and "useful" ques-
tions as if they were entirely separable.  The way the questions are asked
implies the possibility of a simple yes or no answer.  But what is "possi-
ble" depends upon the resources and effort devoted to the exercise of mea-
surement.  And this in turn depends upon the expected usefulness or utility
of the information being sought.  The importance of the question and the
likelihood that more information will improve the decision determine the
value of additional information such as estimates of national benefits.
Policy makers should seek more information on national benefits as long as
the marginal value of the improved benefit measure exceeds the marginal re-
source cost of obtaining it.

     Section B continues the discussion of the possibilities and usefulness
of national estimates of benefits in somewhat more detail.  While the ques-
tions posed at the outset focus primarily on national estimates of benefits,
it is not possible to provide complete answers without some reference to
the problems and possibilities for estimating benefits for individual pollu-
tion control projects, river basins, and air sheds.  Generally, national es-
timates of benefits involve some form of extrapolation or aggregation based

                                    II-l

-------
on parameters and relationships derived from more narrowly focused studies
of a particular region or pollution control project.  Of necessity then,
the evaluation of the possibility of national estimates must consider the
                 M» \                                   .
theory and practiced benefit estimation in general.  This is the top.ic
of Section C.

     Secion D discusses three conceptual problems in benefit estimation.
The representation of uncertainty through the use of probabilistic state-
ments and confidence intervals is recommended.  The willingness to pay
versus forgone earning approaches for valuing human life are discussed.
The latter seems to be unsatisfactory on both conceptual and empirical
grounds.  In the absence of definitive estimates of willingness to pay,
it is suggested that decision makers experiment with explicit assumptions
or value judgments about the value of life.  The problem of temporal ag-
gregation of benefit streams over time is discussed in terms of the prin-
ciple of discounting and present value.  The problem of intergenerational
effects seems to raise questions which are probably fundamentally ethical
in nature.

     Section E reviews a number of problems in the empirical techniques
and data for benefit estimation.  Topics covered include overlap and gaps
among categories, the effect of multi-collinearity on measurement and pre-
diction, -the biases due to misspecification of variables, and the problem
of adequately summarizing air pollution data collected over a substantial
interval of time.  The section concludes with a review of the adequacy of
available data and technique for dealing wHh air pollution data, property
value effects, health effects of air pollution, recreation benefits, and
benefits from increased industrial productivity and reduced vegetation and
materials damages.

     Section F discusses the process of developing national estimates of
benefits from the building blocks of region-specific, pollutant-specific,
and effect-specific studies.  Specific suggestions are made for estimating
national mortality changes from cross-section regressions of mortality ver-
sus air pollution and aggregating the information contained in property value!
studies for individual cities.  Also the problem of national recreation benel
fit estimation is discussed.

                                   II-2

-------
     Section G makes a number of specific recommendations for improving
estimation techniques and for additional  research.   The final section is
devoted to some concluding observations.
                                  II-3

-------
B.    POSSIBILITY AND USEFULNESS OF NATIONAL BENEFIT  ESTIMATES

     The feasibility, or possibility,  and usefulness of national  benefit
estimates are the cardinal  issues in this critical assessment.   They are
examined here along with the corollary issue of information content.

     1.    On Possibility

          Since the nation  is simply the aggregation of its regions, how-
     ever! defined (as air sheds, river basins, or political subdivisions),
     the possibility of developing national benefit  estimates  hinges on
     our ability to make estimates of  particular classes of benefits in a
     specific region.  Data from particular regions  constitute the building
     blocks of national estimates.  If nothing meaningful  can  be said about
     the benefits of a specific pollution control plan in  a particular re-
     gion, then no meaningful aggregation to the national  level  is possible.

          Estimating benefits is essentially an ecpnomic process.  The dis-
     cipline of economics is the source of the concept of  benefits; and the
     definition of benefits and the conceptual basis of their  measurement
     are derived from a type of economic model.  Yet benefit estimates must
     be built upon a non-economic base.  For example, health benefits due
     to air pollution control must be  built upon scientific knowledge of
     the relationship between pollutant concentrations and human health.
     In recreation and fisheries, benefits stemming  from water pollution
     control may require knowledge of  the relationship between pollutant
     levels and biological  productivity.  It is clear that lack of informa-
     tion in some non-economic areas severely limits our ability to make
     estimates of economic  benefits.  But aside from acknowledging the exis-
     tence of this problem, no more will be said here.  Rather our atten-
     tion will be devoted to the economic aspects of benefit estimation.

          Suppose the Administrator of EPA wished to know the  magnitude
     of the benefits to be  expected from a particular pollution control
     program.  If asked, could the economist specify what  economic the-
                                  II-4

-------
ory and models he would use, what data he would like to have, and
what empirical techniques he would apply to the data to obtain ben-
efit estimates?  The answer is a qualified "yes".  After completing
a review of the available techniques for measuring the benefits of
water pollution control for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
I concluded:  "The economic theory and analytical techniques for
evaluating benefits for most types of uses are relatively well devel-
oped.  At least, this is the case for the most significant classes
of user benefits (Freeman, 1975)."

     The qualifications are threefold.  First, some of the data the
economist would like to have is non-economic, e.g. dose-response
functions, physical damage functions, and these data may not be
available.  Second, in the economic realm there are still  major un-
resolved theoretical and empirical issues with respect to valuing
human life and health effects and various forms of non-user benefits
such as aesthetics and option value.  And third, the kind of economic
data that the economist would 1 ike to have are seldom already avail-
able or easily obtainable at modest cost.  Major data gathering ef-
forts would be required to obtain the primary economic data called
for by the correct theoretical models.  Lacking data in the ideal
form, the economist must resort to second best theoretical constructs
and utilize  sophisticated econometric techniques in an attempt to
wrest some modicum of useful information from the limited and imper-
fect body of data.

     Because of the several  qualifications, successful benefit esti-
mation, either at the local  or national  level, requires striking a
balance between rigorous theory and correct empirical technique on
the one hand and pragmatism and informed judgment on the other.
Where there are gaps in knowledge concerning key parameters and rela-
tionships, and where it is not possible to devote resources to clos-
ing these gaps within the scope of the existing research effort, it
may be appropriate to make an informed assumption about the unknown
relationship in order to push the analysis through to its conclusion.
                             II-5

-------
This procedure is valid provided that:   the assumption is made ex-
plicitly and openly; the basis for choosing the assumed value ra-
ther than some alternative is fully discussed; and the implications
of alternative assumptions are made clear through sensitivity analy-
sis on the outcome or carrying confidence limits through to the fi-
nal outcome.  The necessity for making  assumptions may stem from ig-
norance concerning empirical  relationships, e.g., dose-response re-
lationships for air pollutants, or inherent problems of evaluation,
e.g., the valuation of human life.  These issues are discussed in
more detail in a recent National Academy of Sciences Report to U.S.
EPA (National Academy of Sciences, July 1975, esp. Chapter 6, and
Appendix 8).

     If the practice of benefit estimation were highly developed,
the estimation of benefits at the national level would proceed sim-
ply by estimating benefits separately for each region or basin, and
then summing them over the nation as a  whole.  But this is clearly
not the case.  The real question for policy analysts is how far can
one depart from the ideal of rigorous and theoretically precise es-
timation' for all sites, moving toward the bastardized but pragmatic
process of first approximation, reasonable assumption, and judgment,
and still  obtain estimates which are considered reasonable and use-
ful for the questions at hand.  It is hard to provide an answer to
this question in the abstract.  As was  indicated in the introduction,
this depends in part on the resources available to support adequate
investigation, and in part on the kinds of policy questions being
posed and the value of additional information.

2.   On Usefulness

     Useful to whom?  To officials responsible for environmental
policy planning and decision making.  Benefit estimates are useful
if they provide an improved information base for environmental de-
cision making.  Achieving air and water pollution control object-
ives established by Congress will involve massive expenditures both
through the public sector and private sectors.  There is a poten-
tial for substantial gains through more effective utilization of

                             II-6

-------
the resources devoted to pollution control via the judicious use
of benefit-cost analysis in evaluating policy alternatives.  It
must be emphasized that benefit-co'st analysis as we use the term
is not a rule for decision making.  Environmental decision makers
may have other objectives besides the simple economic efficiency
objective which underlies the benefit-cos-t rule.  For example de-
cision makers may be concerned with equity considerations, inter-
generational effects, or risk aversion, none of which can be incor-
porated in a simple equation for decision making purposes.  Also,
it is seldom feasible to provide the full range of complete and
accurate benefit and cost information to the decision maker which
would be required for the unqualified acceptance of the benefit
cost rule.  Rather, questions of uncertainty and information gaps
are 1ikely to exist.

     Benefit-cost analysis can be very valuable as a framework and
a set of procedures to help organize available information.  In this
way, benefit cost analysis does not dictate choices, nor does it re-
place the ultimate authority and responsibility of decision makers.
Rather, it is a tool for organizing and expressing certain kinds of
information on the range of alternative courses, of action.  It is in
the context of this framework for arraying information that the use-
fulness of national .benefit estimates must be assessed.

     Although the major thrust of Federal pollution control policies
has already been established by the U.S. Congress, there are still
many important decisions to be made.  Also, looming problems may
force reconsideration of major elements of existing policies.   Most
of these issues involve either an implicit or explicit weighing of
benefits versus costs.  For example, U.S. EPA and U.S. Congress are
weighing proposals to change the emissions standards and/or the time-
table for compliance for automobiles.  National  Secondary Air Quality
Standards require at least an implicit balancing of benefits versus
costs.   And to defend effluents standards based upon the best practi-
cal  treatment and best available treatment criteria against legal
challenge, U.S. EPA will  have to have information on the benefits to
                            II-7

-------
be expected from the standards they are setting.   There are two
things to note from this sampling of future U.S.  EPA and Congress-
ional decision problems.  First, while decision makers may have
other objectives besides economic efficiency, it is clear that eco-
nomic considerations, broadly defined, will play a significant role
in the decision making process.   And second, each of these decision
problems is national in scope and requires national estimates of
benefits and costs.

     This discussion has established the potential value of national
estimates of benefits.  But it must be recognized that, under some
circumstances, benefit estimates can be damaging  rather than useful.
If estimates succumb to the fault of misplaced concreteness, if they
contain conceptual  or analytical errors, if they  do not make expli-
cit the key assumptions and value judgments involved, and of they do
not express their inherent lack of accuracy through some device such
as confidence limits, the estimates may do more harm than good.  They
may mislead policy makers in key decisions.  And  as their faults and
weaknesses become known, they may discredit the whole process of bene-
fit estimation and policy analysis.

     Finally, even if benefit information does not become an input
into a decision process, the exercise in quantification and measure-
ment that benefit estimates require may be itself of educational
value to researchers and policy makers.  The exercise requires that
investigators gain a better understanding of the  nature of different
pollutants, the paths that pollutants follow in reaching people, and
the variety of ways in which pollutants affect the uses that people
make of their air and water environments.  Even if the exercise does
not bear fruit in the form of monetary estimates  of benefits, the in-
sights gained and the pieces of information developed may be of value
themselves.

3.   Information Content

     A major factor influencing the usefulness of estimates of na-
tional benefits is  the nature and quantity of specific information

                             II-8

-------
contained in the estimates.  A statement that "air pollution costs
$20 billion per year" contains almost no useful information.  To be
useful for policy purposes, any statement about national benefits
must abide by the following minimum provisions:

     •    Consistent terminology
     •    Well-defined pollutant levels
     •    Identity of pollutants
     «    Sources of pollutants.
                                                              ,'
     The statement must be consistent in its use of the terms "bene-
fit," "cost," and "damage".  The benefits of pollution control  are
measured by comparing the present situation characterized by a  known
degree of pollution with some specified hypothetical  alternative for
which pollution has been reduced or eliminated.  Benefits are the
gain associated with reduced pollution.  The statement of benefits
should make clear whether the measure refers to total  benefits  for
some non-marginal change in pollution levels or marginal benefits
for some small change in pollutant levels.   The statement should
also indicate whether benefits are defined per capita or in the  ag-
gregate.

     Damages represent the mirror image of benefits measuring what
is lost in moving from some hypothetical clean state to the existing
level of pollution.  Pollution control benefits are the same as  re-
duced damages.  The term "costs" should be used only to refer to re-
sources absorbed in the process of controlling or reducing pollution.
Its use to denote damages should be avoided.

     The statement concerning benefits must clearly specify the  al-
ternative pollution levels being compared,  both the present dirty
level and the hypothetical cleaner alternative.  Is the polluted
state defined as conditions in 1975, or for example, 1973 (when
pollutant levels and adverse effects may have been either higher
or lower)?  Specifying the reference year is also important for
                            II-9

-------
determining the price level  for expressing dollar measures  of bene-
fits (e.g., in 1973 dollars),  and for specifying values  for other
socioeconomic variables  which  might influence the analysis  of bene-
fits.

     Four choices for the hypothetical  alternative seem  to  present
themselves:

     •    Zero ambient concentrations of pollutants (this may be
          unrealistic where  there are natural sources of the pol-
          lutant in question)
     t    Zero manmade emissions -- that is,  ambient levels equal
          to background  levels from natural  sources
     t    Ambient levels above background levels but below  all
          known thresholds (this alternative  would be difficult
          to implement,  because of the considerable controversy
          over threshold levels)
     0    Ambient levels at  promulgated air or water quality
          standards (this is the most useful  alternative for
          evaluating present pollution control  policies).

     The estimates should make clear which pollutant or  group of
pollutants is being referred to.  Where the benefit estimates are
provided for a group of  pollutants (e.g., all air pollutants),  the
statement should include a disaggregation or breakdown by individual
pollutants, unless the pollutants within the group act synergisti-
cally, so that such a separation of effects is not analytically pos-
sible.  Benefit estimates for a group of pollutants may  also be use-
ful where the group is controlled jointly.

     For each benefit estimate,the statement should indicate whether
all sources are included, or,  for example, only mobile sources.
Where the purpose of the benefit estimate is  to evaluate a  pollution
control policy, benefit  estimates should exclude potential  benefits
associated with non-controlled sources.  For example, pollution con-
trol benefits associated with the control of non-point water pollu-
tion sources should not  be included in an estimate of benefits  asso-
ciated with municipal and industrial point-source control program.
                            11-10

-------
     The kind of information which should be contained in a state-
ment of benefits also depends upon the nature of the policy ques-
tion for which the estimate was made.  For example, in the early
stages of the development of a pollution control policy, the most
important question might be one of priorities,  i.e., which classes
of pollutants should be controlled most quickly.  For this purpose,
very rough order-of-magnitude estimates of total benefits by pollu-
tant would be very helpful.  Later, as control  plans are developed,
marginal benefits, and benefits by source would be required.

     The main thrust of Federal policy since 1970 has been away from
regionally differentiated air and water quality standards and toward
uniform national ambient standards and national standards for emis-
sion levels and control technologies.  This evolution of a nationally
standardized set of policies has increased the  importance of national
estimates of benefits.  The process of setting  national  primary air
quality standards would be aided by national estimates of marginal
benefits by pollutant.  And the development of  pollution control
strategies requires national estimates of benefits by source.

     In conclusion, the type of policy question being considered
governs the nature and detail of the benefit information required.
Planning on a regional basis requires estimates of regional  benefits
and costs.  National policy choices require national estimates.  And
since the building blocks of valid national estimates of benefits are
regional studies of specific pollutants, once_these studies  are done,
their aggregation to the national level is relatively simple.  And
the effort to get better national estimates will stimulate research
on obtaining better building blocks.
                            11-11

-------
C.   THE THEORY OF BENEFITS

     This section reviews the conceptual  b'asis of benefits and some em-
pirical  techniques for estimating benefits.   These topics have been trea-
ted extensively in other studies  for the  U.S.  EPA (Haveman and Weisbrod,
1975; Freeman,  1975).

     1.    Efficiency and Equity

          By definition, benefits are desirable consequences.   But we
     require some criterion for defining  and  measuring  desirability.
     Welfare economics has  conventionally distinguished between effi-
     ciency and equity as criteria for judging alternative economic
     states.  Efficiency refers to the total  availability of those
     goods and  services valued by individuals  without reference to whom
     they accrue.   Equity refers  to the pattern  of the  distribution of
     available  goods and services among individuals.  What constitutes
     equity or  fairness in  the distribution of goods and  services  can-
     not be defined objectively.   Equity  involves  value judgments  about
     the relative "deservingness" of individuals.   For  this  reason, eco-
     nomic analysis focuses on the efficiency  criterion on the  argument
     that it is objective or value-free.

          The efficiency criterion requires a  rule  for  assigning values
     or  prices  to  goods  and services  so that they  can be  added  up  to  de-
     termine a  total  value.   The  price  system'of a  market economy  pro-
     vides the  necessary set of relative  values, provided markets  are
     competitive,  there  are not externalities, etc.  These  prices  would
     appear to  constitute the  set of  values necessary for the implemen-
     tation of  an  objective efficiency  criterion,  and to  validate  the
     dichotomy  between  efficiency  and equity.  But  this is  not  the case.
     And  this is one of  the insoluble problems in  the analysis  of  benefits.
     The  price  set  is  not independent of  the initial distribution  of  wealth
     among  individuals  in the  economy.  Thus,  if the price  set  is  taken to
     be valid as a  measure  of  values, this implies  that the  underlying
     distribution of wealth which  produced those values is acceptable in
     equity  terms.  A redistribution of wealth will lead  to  a different

                                 11-12

-------
set of relative prices.  And an allocation of resources judged effi-
cient under the initial distribution would likely be inefficient un-
der the new distribution.  Which measure of efficiency is to be pre-
ferred depends upon one's value judgment about the equity of the two
wealth distributions.  There is no way around this problem, so it is
typically ignored in the practical business of applied welfare analy-
sis.  In other words, the existing distribution of wealth and its
resulting set of relative prices are assumed to be acceptable in
equity terms.

2.   Measurement of Benefits

     Benefits are defined in terms of the increase in welfare or
utility of consumers stemming from some action to control pollution.
Benefits can accrue to consumers either directly in the form of in-
creases in the availability of utility conveying goods and services
(e.g., improved health, better visibility, improved recreation oppor-
tunities), or indirectly through increases in production efficiency
(for example, due to reduced defensive expenditures, reduced mater-
ials damages, etc.).  Pollution control involves the use of limited
resources which have opportunity costs measured in dollars.  This
means that the benefits must also be defined and measured in com-
mensurate dollar terms.  Furthermore these dollar measures must be
firmly rooted in and based upon individual preferences and values.

     Economic theory shows that there are two ways in which mone-
tary measures of welfare changes can be derived from individuals'
preferences.  The two approaches differ only in their definition of
the status quo ante^ from which the welfare change is measured.  One
approach, termed the willingness-to-pay approach, asks how much an
individual would be willing to pay to receive an extra quantity of
the utility-conveying good or service, rather than do without.  It
assumes that the individual does not have a legal property right in
additional units of the good, and therefore must give up control  over
other goods and services (pay) in order to receive more of this good.
The other approach, termed the compensation approach, asks how much
the individual  would have to be compensated in money terms in order
                            11-13

-------
 to induce  him  to  give  up or  forego  some  quantity of the good.  This
 approach assumes  that  the  individual  has a  legal property  right  in
 the good,  and  could  only be  induced to give up  the good if the
 amount of  the  compensation conveyed an equivalent amount of utility.
 (National  Academy of Sciences,  1974,  pp. 400-404).

      The two approaches  lead to quantitatively  different answers
 only if the  marginal utility of income to the individual changes as
 the individual moves from  one position to another.   If the marginal
 utility of income is diminishing, the compensation approach will
 lead to a  higher  measure of  benefits  than the willingness-to-pay
 approach.   Where  the marginal  utility of income is constant, or
 can be assumed to be approximately  constant (for example,  where
 the changes  are ve>y small relative to total income),  the  two ap-
 proaches can be taken  to be  equivalent.

      The benefit  associated  with a  particular pollution control
 action is  defined as the sum of the willingness-to-pay of  all in-
 dividuals  affected directly  or  indirectly by that action.   Analy-
 tically, willingness-to-pay  implies the  existence of a demand curve
 for the consequences of that action.  Benefits  are equal to the  area
 under that demand curve, properly defined.   Benefit estimation in-
 volves an  attempt, either  indirectly  or  directly, to determine the
 shape of that  demand curve.   This definition of benefits meets two
1 important  criteria for an  adequate  framework for benefit estimation:
'the definition is firmly rooted in  the economic theory of  individual
 preferences  and values and it  leads to objectively determined mone-
 tary measures  of  welfare or  benefit.

 3.   The  Estimation  Process

      Although  the definition of benefits focuses on  the existence
 of a demand curve, its application  in the realm of pollution control
 must also  deal with  two  other problems associated with the "produc-
 tion" of  benefits.  The  process of  producing pollution control  bene-
 fits has  three distinct  stages:
                             11-14

-------
     t    Improvement in environmental quality through re-
          duction of pollutant discharges
     •    Increase in uses of environmental amenities due
          to their improved quality
     §    Increase in willingness to pay due to changes in
          use of environmental amenities.

     A reduction in the quantities of polluting substances being
discharged into the air or water leads to an improvement in various
measures of air or water quality.  Modeling this transformation pro-
cess between changes in residual flows and changes in ambient pol-
lutant levels is outside of the realm of economics.  Yet it is a
task which must be done before the benefits of pollution control
projects can be estimated.
     Changes in ambient pollutant levels lead to changes in the
ways in which individuals make use of the air or water, that is,
changes in the level and composition of the stream of environmental
services yielded by the air and water bodies.  For example, changes
in ambient air pollutant levels may lead to changes in morbidity and
mortality rates.  Understanding these relationships is an essential
part of the estimation process.  This might be termed the measurement
process to distinguish it from the process of valuation, which consti-
tutes the next stage.

     Changes in uses or service flows have their counterpart in
changes in aggregate willingness to pay for uses of the environment.
Determining the relationship between changes in quality and changes
in use is only a partly economic problem.  Determining the relation-
ship between use and value is strictly the economist's domain, since
here the economic concepts of demand and value are central to the
analysis.

     The benefit associated with a change in air or water quality
has been defined as equal to the area under the demand curve for
the environmental service over the relevant range.  But, since en-
vironmental services are generally not bought and sold in organized
                            11-15

-------
markets, there may not be any direct way of estimating the shape of
this demand curve by applying normal econometric techniques to ob-
served market data.  The basic methodology used for estimating bene-
fits involves techniques for inferring values of environmental ser-
vices where market processes have failed to reveal these values di-
rectly.  Thus, benefit estimation often involves a kind of detective
work for piecing together the clues about the values individuals place
on these goods as they respond to other economic signals.

     There are several different situations where the way in which
environmental services enter economic processes permits estimation of
willingness to pay for improvements in environmental quality by indi-
rect means.  In an earlier study for the U.S. EPA (Freeman, 1975), I
analyzed the economic theory underlying several types of cases, where
environmental services were inputs in production, where environmental
services were complementary to other goods and consumption, where en-
vironmental services were perfect substitutes for other goods in con-
sumption, and where environmental quality levels were characteristics
of fixed assets such as land.  In that study, I also reviewed a number
of techniques, e.g., market demand analysis, net productivity, net fac-
tor income, Clawson-Knetsch travel costs studies, land value studies,
and interview techniques, in light of the earlier discussion of eco-
nomic theory.  Each of these techniques (except the interview techni-
que) relies on some model of individual behavior and some set of as-
sumptions about the nature of the benefits being analyzed to deduce
a relationship between the unobserved values individuals assign to
environmental benefits and related observable market s.ignals.
                            11-16

-------
D.   CONCEPTUAL PROBLEMS IN BENEFIT ESTIMATION

     There are a number of conceptual issues that need to be addressed
in the process of benefit estimation.  Among the most pressing of these
are valuation of human life, handling of overlaps and gaps, aggregation
of the stream of benefits over time, and expressing uncertainty of the
results.

     1.    Valuation of Life

          A major category of potential air pollution control  benefits
     is improved health and reduced mortality.  Assuming that these
     benefits can be measured or quantified, how can monetary values
     be attached to them?  Some might say that putting a price on hu-
     man life is insensitive, crass, and even inhuman.  But this point
     of view must be rejected on practical grounds because both indi-
     viduals in their day to day actions and governments in their deci-
     sions about social policy do in fact make tradeoffs between changes
     in probability of death and other goods with money values; and these
     tradeoffs  imply money price tags being attached to life.

          Individuals in a variety of actions act as if their preference
     functions  included probability of death or life expectancy.  They
     make decisions which involve reductions in life expectancy in re-
     turn for increases in income or other goods and services, reveal-
     ing, thereby, that they perceive themselves to be better off having
     made these choices.  Individuals who continue to smoke despite the
     Surgeon General's warnings could be viewed as trading off the con-
     sumer surplus attached to smoking against the now widely publicized
     reduction  in life expectancy.   Individuals also make implicit trade-
     offs between life expectancy and reduced travel time when they chose
     a mode of  travel, for example private autos vs. bus.  The individual
     willingness to pay framework has been developed by Schelling (1965),
     Mishan (1971), Zeckhauser (1974), and Thaler and Rosen (1975).  Thaler
     and Rosen  in particular have developed a framework for estimating the
     individual tradeoff between probability of death and higher wages in
                                  11-17

-------
more risky occupations; and they have tentatively estimated the
implied value of human life to be between $176,000 and $260,000
per life.   Although this estimate cannot be taken as definitive,
it does provide a point of reference for further work in the area
and for assumptions and value judgments as described below.  (Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, 1975, Chapter 6).

     What should be the basis for determining  these values?  The
conceptually correct basis for valuation is individual willingness
to pay.  But this willingness to pay must be defined and evaluated
in the correct context.  The question is not how much would one be
willing to pay to avoid certain death tomorrow.   Rather, for the
relevant policy questions, e.g., health effects  of pollution con-
trol, safety and accident prevention, the precise identity of the
people affected is not known.  Safety regulations reduce the prob-
ability that any one individual in a population  at risk will be
killed during a given period of time.  It is this kind of question
that Thaler and Rosen investigated.  Reductions  in air pollution,
for example, are likely to affect the whole probability distribu-
tion of the date of death for affected individuals.  One measure
of this change in the probability distribution would be to define
the change in life expectancy.  The changes in higher moments of
the probability distribution might also be important, especially
for things such as accident prevention.  (Freeman, 1975).

     The other major approach to valuation in  the literature is
the so-called productivity or human capital approach.  It values
each life lost at the present value of the expected stream of fu-
ture earnings for that individual had that individual's death been
avoided.  There are several serious weaknesses and limitations to
this approach.  First, it assumes that it is possible to identify
ex ante those whose lives will be saved.  Second, it does not take
into account the probabilistic nature of death and death avoidance
in the health and safety problems.  Third, there is no logical con-
nection between earnings and willingness to pay, especially in the
                            11-18

-------
probabilistic framework.  And finally, this measure places no value
on the lives of those who are not working for reasons of age, sex,
or other factors.

     While lost earnings can be readily calculated, that approach
is conceptually unsatisfactory.  In contrast, the conceptually va-
lid willingness to pay for changes in life expectancy approach is
appealing,, but it is only now being elaborated and subjected to
empirical testing.  In the absence of generally accepted empirical
estimates of individual willingness to pay, it is still useful for
the researcher to proceed beyond the measurement stage in benefit
estimation by applying assumed unit values to predicted changes in
mortality and morbidity.  In this way, the analyst can examine the
implications of alternative unit values for aggregate benefit esti-
mates, and for benefit cost comparisons.  (National Academy of Sci-
ences, 1974).

     However, if such assumptions are made, several points must be
kept in mind.  First, the assumptions should be made openly and
explicitly.  This is not the case with estimates of air pollution
health benefits provided by Lave and Seskin (1970) who fail to ex-
plain the implications of their assumptions about health values.
They used earlier data from Dorothy Rice on direct and indirect
costs of mortality and morbidity.  The indirect cost of mortality
was defined as forgone earnings due to early death.

     Second, researchers should provide an examination of the sen-
sitivity of final benefit estimates to changes in assumed unit
values.  For example, final  figures could be presented in the for-
mat of high and low range and "best estimate".  A third consider-
ation is that, whatever assumptions are made about unit values, it
would be helpful for readers of these studies to have the assump-
tions related to other work.  For example, if a researcher chose to
use a value substantially below that used in other work which might
be familiar to the reader, the researcher should offer some reason
for making that assumption.   Finally, where assumed values are used
                            11-19

-------
in making resource allocation decisions,  such as  allocating medi-
cal services, or setting standards for air pollution or toxic
chemicals, there is much to be said for using a consistent set of
values across the whole range of public decisions.

     While this discussion has been carried out in  the context of
valuing human life, most of the same points can be  made concerning
assumed unit values for other difficult to price  environmental ser-
vices, for example recreation user days.   The Water Resources Coun-
cil guidelines call for agencies to apply unit values to predicted
recreation days in calculating benefits of water  resource develop-
ment.  While there are problems in the application  of particular
unit values (Freeman,  1975), there can be no objection to the prac-
tice in principle, provided that the considerations outlined above
are recognized.  Assumed unit values can  be utilized provided they
are based upon a review of other analytical and empirical studies
designed to measure unit values of recreation under similar circum-
stances.

2.   Overlaps and Gaps

     One major problem area in estimating benefits  is the possi-
bility of either overlap among or gaps between categories of bene-
fits as estimated by presently used techniques.  This kind of prob-
lem can arise where two kinds of effects  associated with the same
pollutant are estimated separately.  For  example, do estimates of
health effects and property value changes associated with particu-
lates involve some double counting of particulate damages, or are
there additional effects not captured by  either measure?  Although
definitive answers to  this question cannot be given here, the dis-
cussion will show that it should be possible to determine when such
gaps and overlaps exist.  It should also  be possible to make some
judgment as to the significance and likely direction of any biases
in the estimated total benefit figures.  And this should be useful
in deriving confidence limits or high and low bounds surrounding
best estimates of total benefits.
                            11-20

-------
     Consider the case of air pollution where health benefits are
measured by mortality rate studies and aesthetic benefits are mea-
sured through property value differentials.  The justification for
measuring two classes of benefits separately and adding them to ob-
tain aggregate national benefits is that only those effects of air
pollution which are perceived by individuals can influence property
values, and that people have for the most part been ignorant of the
effects of air pollution on their health and life expectancy.

     But one can feel somewhat uneasy about this simple resolution
of the problem.  Some kinds of short term health problems (eye ir-
ritation, shortness of breath) may be directly perceived as being
caused by air pollution.  And there has been a substantial increase
in the information (and misinformation) available to the general
public about long term health effects and relative air pollution
levels around urban areas.  Thus, perceptions of health effects
may be influencing property value differentials and leading to the
possibility of double counting.  To gain a better understanding of
the problem, it is necessary to consider in more detail exactly
what is captured by each of the two approaches to measurement.

     It will be helpful to develop a system of classification for
different types of effects.  Aesthetic effects are defined to in-
clude odor and taste, reduced visibility, soiling, damage to exter-
nal paints, etc.  By definition, aesthetic effects are perceived
by individuals.  Impacts on health constitute the other broad class
of effects.  For purposes of this discussion, we need not distin-
guish between morbidity and mortality effects.  But we can, at the
conceptual level, distinguish between those health effects which
are perceived by individuals and those of which they are ignorant.
The former are likely to be primarily clinical manifestations of
short term exposures at relatively high levels.  Finally, it is
necessary to distinguish between those effects which are caused by
pollution exposure at home and those which are caused by the per-
son'^ exposure as he travels around the urban air shed, to work,
for shopping, for recreation, etc.   These "away from home" effects
are independent of the individual's place of residence.
                            11-21

-------
     This classification scheme is  displayed schematically in
Figure II-l.  There are six subsets of effects classified by
aesthetics, health—perceived,  health-^unperceived, and in all
cases further divided between home  and away.  Property value
studies can only capture those  effects associated with the
home which are perceived.   Health benefits  derived from mor-
tality and morbidity studies  capture both  home and away effects
and both perceived and unperceived  health  effects.
                             \
    Aesthetics
Vs
sN    --  Home
S
                            \S
     Health
           Perceived
           Home
                                 Aesthetics
                                    --  Away
                                    --   Perceived
                                    --   Away
                                                          ,
                                                         yy
                                                         y
 y
 /  Health
           Unperceived
           Home
                                 Health
                                   --  Unperceived
                                   --  Away

Vvvv
               captured  by  property  value  differential
               captured  by  morbidity and mortality  studies
               not  captured  by either measure
  Figure  II-l.    Classification Scheme for Capture of Effects
                            11-22

-------
     The figure illustrates both an overlap and a gap.   Perceived
health effects at home are captured by both the property value and
health effects approaches.  But aesthetics associated with away
from home exposures are not captured by either measure.  Whether
the addition of property value and health effect benefits results
in an overestimate or an underestimate depends upoh the relative
size of the doublecounted and omitted categories.  Nothing can be
said about this question on a priori grounds.

     There is a similar kind of problem in the case of water pol-
lution where recreation benefits and property  value benefits are
both being estimated.  Property value measures capture both the
value of easy access to the improved water based recreation oppor-
tunities and other non-recreation aesthetic benefits (e.g., wild-
life appreciation, elimination of odor and unsightly flotsam).  In
estimating recreation benefits the double counting problem can be
avoided by identifying recreation participants as either from abut-
ting property or from away, and counting for benefit purposes only
anticipation.by those from away.  This can easily be accomplished
if benefits are being estimated for a particular site, for example
by the Clawson-Knetsch method.  However, if benefits are being es-
timated at the national level from a national  recreation partici-
pation survey, it may not be possible to identify that part of par-
ticipation attributable to property owners using abutting water
bodies.  Thus, adding property value benefits  to those estimated
from a national participation model will involve some degree of
double counting.

3.   Temporal Aggregation

     For many pollution control programs, benefits accrue over
many years.  We have discussed benefits under  the assumption
that an estimate is for a given year.  But for some circumstances,
we may wish to examine the whole time stream of benefits.  This
would be the case, for example, if the pollution control program
involved capital costs now to produce a stream of benefits over
                            11-23

-------
the future.  Each year's benefit is temporally distinct and not
comparable or additive to benefits  accruing in other years, or
with costs without some system of weights.   The appropriate
weighting system is derived from the discount rate.

     There are two issues:   the choice of a discount rate and
the time horizon.  I see no reason  to depart from the accepted
practices of project analysis on either of these issues, at least
for benefits and costs accruing over the next, say,  fifty years.
(Kneese and Herfindahl, 1974).

     The issues are more complex when we consider effects ex-
tending over very long periods of time., for example  between gen-
erations.  Discounting with the normal discount rate can reduce
even catastrophic distant future effects to nominal  present values.
For example, with a relatively low  discount rate of  5%, the benefit
of avoiding some number of deaths 200 years in the future is re-
duced by a factor of 0.0006.   On the basis  of conventional discount-
ing, the benefits of preventing some future catastrophe, for example
the effects of possible destruction of the  ozone layer, may seem
less than the present costs of preventing the effect.  It appears
that in cases of this sort, the major consideration  is not inter-
temporal efficiency in resource allocation, but rather intergenera-
tional  equity in the distribution of welfare.  Hence, it should not
be surprising that decision rules based on  the efficiency criterion
should appear to give unreasonable  results.  This is a problem which
is beginning to receive attention in the literature.  But as yet,
there are no generally accepted answers.

4.   Uncertainty of Results

     A major problem area is  the development of a framework and a
language for conveying the uncertainty about the accuracy of bene-
fit estimates.  Even the most careful estimate of benefits contains
inaccuracies because of errors in the measurement of variables and
errors in the statistical estimation of relationships.  In addition,
it may be necessary for the analyst to make assumptions regarding

                            11-24

-------
unknown parameters, relationships, and values.  The uncertainty
inherent in these errors must be expressed somehow in the final
benefit figure.  The most appealing way of dealing with these
problems is through the use of probabilities to quantify uncer-
tainties.  This is straightforward in theory because probability
is a natural language for describing uncertain situations.   (Na-
tional Academy of Sciences, 1974, Appendix 8).

     Most people are accustomed to using probability informally
as a language for describing uncertainty.  Weather forecasts are
stated in terms of probability of rain.  And expectations concern-
ing elections and sporting events are often expressed in terms of
odds or probabilities.  The same concepts may be used to describe
uncertainties related to benefit estimates.  Probability theory
provides an unambiguous and logically consistent language to rea-
son about uncertainty.  In fact, a forceful argument can be made
that any logical'process for reasoning about uncertainty is equiva-
lent to probability theory.

     The same people who use probability naturally in informal
situations may be extremely reluctant to use the same ideas in im-
portant decision situations.  To some extent the problem is one of
measurement.  Many people are accustomed to viewing probabilities
as exact numbers based on objective evidence, for example,  as de-
duced from physical symmetry or observed frequencies from large
number experiments.  They are uncomfortable with the idea of using
subjective probabilities as a language for expressing their judg-
ment on a matter where the available information is limited.

     Consider the air pollution/human health relationship.   If we
had a large body of statistical  data on the incidence of mortality
over a range of known air pollution exposures, it would be  rela-
tively straightforward to assign a probability to a given indivi-
dual's dying as the result of exposure to that air pollutant.  But,
if estimates of benefits are desired before this type of data is
available,  or if those data are very difficult, to obtain because
                            11-25

-------
of cost, measurement problems,  etc., then the analyst must resort
to informed judgment and logical  reasoning.   Judgment must be ex-
trapolated from other information, for example,  animal  tests, or
a review of several  less than perfectly successful  attempts to
measure the desired  relationship.

     Once the basic  assumption  has been accepted that probability
assignments are not  "objective" but represent judgments, that they
can summarize information or a  state of mind, rather than being
physically measurable, then the probability  theory  for expressing
these judgments in a consistent manner is relatively straightfor-
ward.  For example,  what is frequently called the "best guess esti-
mate" can be interpreted as an  expected value or mean of the sub-
jective probability  distribution.   High and  low  values should be
expressed in terms of confidence limits.   Where  the final estimate
is derived from several  variables, each with their  own estimated
degrees of error or  uncertainty,  the uncertainty surrounding the
final estimate is a  compound of the component uncertainties.   And
probability theory provides a logical  framework  for determining
the overall degree of uncertainty.

     To those who might argue that the assignment of probability
should be rejected because it is subjective, the response is that
the present approach to determining best guesses and high and low
bounds is also subjective.  And often, the method of deriving best
guesses and high and low bounds from the underlying data are not
consistent from one  part of the study to the next.   Probability is
a language for dealing with subjective estimates In a consistent
and logical manner;  and, it is  one which can be  interpreted consis-
tently by others.
                            11-26

-------
E.   TECHNICAL PROBLEMS IN BENEFIT ESTIMATION

     In addition to the conceptual issues discussed in the preceding
section, there are a number of more technical problems that need to•
be resolved.  These include pollution measures, exposure measures,
and multicol linearity.

     1.   Measures of Pollution

          A major problem in estimating benefits due to air pollution
     arises because of systematic errors in the use of aggregate or
     average measures of the air pollution variable.  Consider, for
     example, the cross section mortality studies of Lave and Seskin
     which use SMSA's as the sample unit.  Assume that there is some
     single valued measure of the air pollution exposure of an indi-
     vidual.  Further, assume that the "true" relationship between
     this pollution measure and the mortality rate is known.  This is
     portrayed by the solid line in Figure II-2.

          Air pollution measures are typically taken at one centrally
     located monitoring station in the smaller SMSAs, whereas the
     larger SMSAs may have networks of monitoring stations.  In the
     latter case, pollution measures are some average of readings at
     the several stations.  Assume that for a "dirty" city the air
     pollution reading at the downtown station is 0-P^.  Because some
     portion of the population lives in suburban areas quite far from
     the downtown monitoring station, and some portion of the suburban
     population does not regularly travel to the downtown area, O-P^ is
     an overestimate of the true average pollution exposure of this ur-
     ban population.  Assume that the true measure is 0-P^.  Reference
     to the true pollution-mortality relationship shows that this dirty
     city would have mortality rate of 0-M.,.  The observed pollution-
     mortality data would be plotted as point A in Figure II-2.
                                 11-27

-------
Mortality
  Rate
                                                         True
           iiiiniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitii
                                    Observed
                                                       Pollution  Measure
                                                        for  Population
          Figure I1-2.
True, and Observed Relationships Between
Pollution Measure and Mortality Rate
          In a relatively "clean" city, there will  also  be  a  divergence
     between recorded and actual pollution exposures.  However,  the di-
     vergence will be much smaller, since the difference between the
     "clean" suburbs and "almost clean" downtown area will  be much  small-
     er.  If 0-P2 is the recorded pollution measure for  the clean city,
     the clean city observation would be point  B in Figure  II-2. It can
     be seen that a regression line fitted to the  recorded  data  would
     lead to an underestimate of the regression coefficient relating pol-
     lution to mortality.

          However, while the estimate of the regression  coefficient is
     biased by the error in the pollution measure,  if the regression equa-
     tion is used to predict changes in mortality  conditional upon  changes
     in pollution, the regression equation will give "true" predictions.
     Consider a pollution control program which is  expected to reduce re-
     corded pollution in the dirty cities from  0-P, to 0-P?.   The regres-
     sion equation predicts a reduction in mortality of  0-M3  to  0-M,.
                                  11-28

-------
The pollution control program will actually reduce true exposure
from 0-P- to 0-P,.  And the true reduction in mortality will be
just that predicted by the regression equation.

     Similar problems might arise for mortality or morbidity
studies based upon a sample of individuals, if the pollution
variable is measured by some proxy.  For example, suppose each
individual's exposure was taken to be a function of pollution le-
vels at his residence.  Then, the recorded pollution measure would
understate true exposure for those individuals living in the "clean"
part of the city and spending some part of the working day in the
"dirty" part of the city.  Similarly, for those living in the dirt-
iest part of the city, the recorded pollution measure is likely to
overstate'true exposure.  By a line of reasoning similar to that
developed through Figure II-2, it can be shown that this divergence
between recorded and true exposure measures will lead to an under-
estimate of the slope of the regression line relating exposure to
morbidity or mortality.  However, unlike the' preceding case, the
biased regression equation will not provide correct predictions.
Rather, the regression equation will underpredict reductions in
mortality or morbidity associated with reductions in pollution ex-
posure.

2.   Pattern of_Exposure

     One of the problems in doing research on dose-response rela-
tionships or epidemiological studies of the air pollution-mortality
relationship is a choice of a time dimension for the air pollution'
variable.  The air pollution level at any particular point in an
urban area is an instantaneous variable which fluctuates over time.
The true exposure of an individual located at that point is mea-
sured by a trace of the time path of that instantaneous variable
over the relevant time period.  The published data on air pollu-
tion levels which are used to generate exposure variables for em-
pirical research involve various approaches to summarizing this in-
stantaneous time path.  Inevitably these summaries, such as the
annual mean, lose information.

                            11-29

-------
     Also, at least in part because of measurement methods, aver-
ages are struck over shorter time periods,  for example the 24-hour
average for particulates, and 8-hour and 1-hour averages for other
pollutants.  These shorter averages can also provide a basis for
summary measures of exposure.  For example, Lave and Seskin used
the lowest 24-hour average recorded during  a year as one measure
of long term exposure.  No one or two of these measures completely
represent the true exposure of any individual.  Empirical  research
is hampered by this inability to accurately characterize exposure
over long periods of time.

     An alternative approach to summarizing recorded air pollution
data may lead to more accurate characterizations of exposure.  The
suggested approach is based upon the assumption that the instanta-
neous air pollution reading can be treated  as a stochastic variable.
For a city with given emissions patterns, meteorological conditions,
and location of monitoring stations, the instantaneous air pollution
reading can be viewed as being drawn from a probability distribution.
That probability distribution has a mean, variance, and other higher
order moments.  If the probability distribution is stable, its para-
meters can be estimated on the basis of readings taken over a long
period of time.  The air pollution of a city could be reported in
the published data in terms of these parameters.  These parameters
in turn could be used to characterize exposure in empirical research.

3.   Multicol linearity

     When two pollutants are both thought to be related to an "ef-
fect" variable such as mortality rate, and  when multiple regression
techniques are used to estimate the hypothesized relationship, the
process of estimation may be complicated by the problems of multi-
col linearity.  Thus, differences in mortality rates and property
value differentials have been associated with differences  in the
levels of both suspended particulates and sulfates.
                            11-30

-------
     For example, suppose the hypothesized relationship is as
follows:

               M = aQ + a.P + a2S + a3Z + e        (1)
         where M = mortality rate
               P = sulfate concentration
               Z = an index of other variables
               e = disturbance term

Suppose further that P and S are positively correlated, producing
multicol linearity.

     It is important to distinguish between problems in estimating
the coefficients for equation (1), and problems in using equation
(1) for prediction of mortality rates.  It can be shown that when
equation (1) is estimated with multicollinearity present,  the esti-
mates of a-, and a^ will be unbiased.  However, they are likely to
be imprecise in the sense that the estimates will have relatively
large standard errors.  In fact, it is possible that the equation
             2
may have an R  well over 0.95, with none of the regression coeffi-
cient estimates being significantly different from zero.  It is also
possible that estimates may have the wrong sign.  But it is impor-
tant to note that, while the individual coefficient estimates may
be imprecise, the equation as a whole may still provide good esti-
mates of mortality rates when the independent variables are known.

     Now suppose that equation (1) has been estimated and  that the
estimate of a? was insignificant by the ordinary statistical  criter-
ion.  One might be tempted to drop the sulfate variable and esti-
mate a new equation (2):

               M = aQ + a'.P + 837 + 6              (2)

However, this would be incorrect.  The estimate of a^ will  be bi-
ased.  Given a positive correlation between P and the omitted sul-
fate variable, it can be shown that a, > a-j  This is because the
                             11-31

-------
estimate reflects not only the partial  relationship between P and
M, but also part of the relationship between the omitted variable
and M.  Similarly, if P were dropped and the equation were estima-
ted with only the S, the estimated coefficient for the S variable
would be biased upward.

     In summary, when the regression equation is to be used to pre-
dict changes in the dependent variables, the correct procedure is
to use all  variables and all coefficients, including those which
are insignificant, to predict changes in the dependent variable.
In the case of air pollution health benefits, multicol linearity
does not pose insuperable barriers to benefit estimation.   How-
ever, in the case of the property value approach to air pollution
control benefits, the problems are more severe.

     This is because benefits are not measured by changes  in prop-
erty values stemming from changes in pollution levels (Freeman,
1974).  Rather, the partial  relationship between the pollution vari-
able and property values is  used to determine a  marginal willingness
to pay function.  Where there is multicollinearity between a pair
of independent variables (e.g., two pollution variables,  or pollu-
tion and distance from central business district), this partial re-
lationship can be estimated  only imperfectly or  imprecisely.  In
other words, the standard error of the pollution coefficient will
be high.  This uncertainty should be reflected in the final benefit
figure calculated from the regression equation.

     Most of the published property value and mortality studies use
only one or, at most, two air pollution variables, for example some
measure of particulates and  sulfates.  But if there are other air
pollutants  which also affect the property value  or mortality (for
example, oxidants or nitrogen oxides) and these  other pollutants
are correlated with the pollution variables included in the estima-
ting equation, then the estimates will  be biased upward,  as was
pointed out above.  I am not aware of any studies that have at-
tempted to  determine the significance of this problem.
                            II  32

-------
     Published studies of Lave and Seskin have focused primarily
on long-run or chronic effects of exposures to relative low levels
of pollutants.  They have found that long-term measures, such as
annual  average and minimum bi-weekly exposures work best- in their
regression equations.  This raises the question of whether benefit
estimates based on the Lave-Seskin equations might be missing the
contribution to mortality made by'health effects associated with
short-term exposure to high levels of pollutants.  A consideration
of the multicol linearity problem suggests that mortality equations
should be estimated with, say, two sulfate variables, one to reflect
the presence of short-term high level exposures and other to reflect
long-term chronic exposures.  These two variables are likely to be
correlated and when their coefficients are estimated in the same
equation, the standard errors may be high.  However, to omit one of
the variables on those grounds will lead to biased estimates of the
coefficient for the other variable.  Since the objective of obtain-
ing estimates of air pollution benefits is best served by obtaining
regressions with unbiased estimates and high predictive power, in-
significant variables should not be omitted where multicollinearity
is present.
                            11-33

-------
F.    PREPARING NATIONAL ESTIMATES

     The conceptually correct approach to aggregation  of benefits at
the national  level  is to examine each region separately, within that
region to analyze each pollutant and each effect separately,  then to
sum benefit measures across  all  effects,  all pollutants, and  all  re-
gions to get the national  figure.  This section reviews the criteria
for selection of regional  studies and the process of aggregation  from
these building blocks.

     1.    Criteria

          National  estimates of  benefits  can be judged in terms of
     two general considerations.   The first looks at the underlying
     benefit study used as a building block.  The second general  cri-
     terion is the logic underlying  the extension or aggregation  from
     the building block benefit  study to  the national  level.   The
     following criteria are  intended to provide a benchmark against
     which to evaluate specific  benefit studies which  are to  be used
     as  building blocks.

          Since the objective of the exercise is determination of
     values,  a technique should  lead to monetary measures of  values or
     benefits.  This means,  for  example,  that a measurement technique
     which predicts the increase in  recreation user-days associated
     with a given reduction  in pollution  does not meet this criterion.
     For, although the information is useful, it does  not fully meet
     the needs of water resource planners for benefit  measures which
     are commensurable with  their monetary estimates of pollution con-
     trol costs.  Similarly, while studies of the relationship between
     mortality and air pollution are essential building blocks in the
     estimation of benefits, they do not  determine value.  In some
     cases, the analyst may  not  have credible estimates of individual
     values.   In these circumstances, he  may be justified in  making
     some explicit assumption about  unit  values, e.g., value  per  death
     avoided, and determining the implications of alternative value
     judgments.

                                 11-34

-------
     The technique and estimating procedures should be based an-
alytically and empirically on individual  behavior and preference.
Some measures of the value of reduced mortality have been based
upon the earnings of affected individuals (Lave and Seskin, 1970).
Such measures do not meet this criterion, since there is no known
relationship between willingness to pay, on the one hand,and earn-
ings, on the other.  The most obvious limitation of the lost earn-
ings measure is that it places no value on the lives or health of
those who are not working for reasons of age, sex, or other factors.

     The measures of use and value should be related to changes
in pollution levels.  For example, the analysis of the demand for
water-based recreation is not adequate, unless the analysis shows
how that demand is affected by changes in pollution and the quality
of the water bodies being analyzed.  Particularly in the realm of
water quality, the difficulty of establishing the relationship be-
tween quality'and use is a major barrier to better estimates of
benefits.  We do not yet have a clear idea of what indexes of water
quality are relevant to recreational uses of the water, and how peo-
ple will respond to changes in quality parameters.  And furthermore,
the links between many of the more subtle water quality parameters
and discharge rates are not understood.

     Benefit estimates should be based upon a correctly specified
theoretical model of individual behavior and the relationships
among economic units.  The logic of the model must be internally
consistent and also be consistent with established theory.  When
observed relationships are measured empirically, without benefit
of an underlying theoretical model, researchers may be led to make
faulty or erroneous interpretations of the data.  An important ex-
ample is the discovery by early researchers that land value and air
pollution levels were inversely related in urban areas, ceteris
paribus.  They then assumed that changes in welfare associated with
reduced pollution would be adequately measured by the associated
increases in land values.  However, subsequent research based upon
                            11-35

-------
theoretical  models of urban land markets,  has shown that this as-
sumption is  not true in general.  (Freeman, 1974; Lind, 1973; Na-
tional  Academy of Sciences, 1974, Chapter  4).

     The actual measures used in the empirical  work should cor-
respond to the variables of the theoretical model.  For example,
i priori reasoning about the relationship  between air pollution
 ixposure and mortality suggests that the time profile of cumula-
 ive exposure of an individual  is the appropriate independent or
 ausal  variable.  But most empirical research on the air pollution-
 lortality relationship has been based upon air pollution measure-
 lents taken  at a point in time  or over a short period, and at a
 jpecific geographic location within an urban area.  Thus, the em-
jirical measure of air pollution is not perfectly correlated with
the measure  called for by the correctly specified theoretical
model.   The  correct theoretical measure may not be available, but
the analyst  must be sensitive to the problems that might be caused
by the  lack  of correspondence between the  theoretically correct
variable and the one actually used.

     Benefit studies should use the empirical techniques appro-
priate  to the theoretical  model and the data at hand.   Empirical
techniques should be able to cope with such problems as multicol-
linearity, simultaneity, and identification problems.   Empirical
techniques which do not adequately control  for other variables
should  be used with great caution.  Researchers should be sensi-
tive to the  problems caused by  misspecification of the variables
used and of  the functional  forms estimated.

     No benefit study yet done  is completely satisfactory in terms
of all  six of these criteria.  Yet,  the researcher and analyst
need to push on and do the best they can with available data and
analytical techniques using these criteria as benchmarks.  Part of
the art of benefit analysis involves a sensitivity to the gap be-
tween the ideal and the available and knowing how much confidence
                            11-36

-------
to place in the estimates being generated.  At some point, the
problems become so great and likely margins of error so large
that the effort is not producing usable numbers.

2.   Aggregation from Building Blocks

     A correct approach to estimating national benefits from
valid building blocks involves several distinct steps.   These
are now described in more detail.

     The first step is to specify the present levels of pollution
in each region or unit of analysis, and to postulate the change
in pollution or environmental quality which is to be the subject
of analysis.  The postulated changes in pollution will  be deter-
mined by the nature of the policy question to which the national
benefit estimate is to be addressed.  For example, in the case of
air pollution, it might be most useful to postulate the changes
in air pollution required to achieve national  primary standards
throughout the country.  In the case of water pollution, one could
postulate changes necessary to achieve the water quality standards
established under the 1965 law.  But an analysis which  postulates
a 50 percent across the board reduction in air pollution does not
shed much light on important policy issues.

     The next step is to determine the functional relationship be-
tween use of the environmental amenity and environmental quality
Use is likely to be a function not only of quality, but also of
socioeconomic and other variables which will  differ across regions
For example, differences among regions in industrial composition,
or importance of agriculture, may mean that the same changes in
environmental quality will  have different physical effects in dif-
ferent regions.

     The third step is to use the functional  relationships de-
scribed above to predict the changes in use for each region con-
ditional  upon its postulated change in environmental quality and
its other socioeconomic variables.

                             II 37

-------
     The next step is to estimate the functional  relationship be-
tween uses of the environment and marginal  value  or willingness to
pay.  This relationship will  also be a function of socioeconomic
variables and other factors (such as the availability of substi-
tutes as in the case of recreation).

     The fifth step is to calculate the value or monetary benefit
measure for each region on the basis of predicted change in use
and other factors influencing demand or marginal  willingness to
pay-

     The final step consists  of summing the predicted benefits
across all regions to obtain  the national  estimate.

     These six steps are offered as a benchmark against which to
evaluate the procedures used  to generate existing national  bene-
fit estimates.  I know of no  study which has followed faithfully
all six steps as outlined here.  Most of the studies take a short-
cut by generalizing from the  results of one or two specific studies
to the nation as a whole.  Sometimes this  is reasonable, where it
can be reasonably assumed that the variables involved are constant
across regions.  In other cases, the generalization may involve
significant distortions and inaccuracies.   Because of the great
variety of cases and types of benefits, it is not possible  to
state general rules as to when such assumptions are valid.

3.   Specific Examples

     I will now turn to some  specific suggestions for generating
national estimates for pollution control benefits in the three
quantitatively most significant areas:  health benefits from air
pollution control, aesthetic  benefits from air pollution control
(property values), and recreation benefits from water pollution
control.  I believe that it is possible to develop useful estimates
of pollution control benefits in these three areas on the basis of
present theory and analytical techniques.
                            11-38

-------
     In the areas of health and property value benefits from air
pollution control, data bases exist which would permit useful a!T
though not definitive benefit estimates.  Existing published esti-
mates in these two areas (Waddell, 1974) have used faulty pro-
cedures to move from the underlying functional relationships to
estimates of benefit and aggregation to the national level.  In
the case of water-based recreation, the necessary data base does
not presently exist.  However, work in progress by the National
Planning Association under contract to the National Commission on
Water Quality may help to close this gap.

     A major component of total air pollution control benefits is
accounted for by the property value approach to aesthetics.  Most
of the property value studies have used data from the decennial
              >
censuses.  The census collects data from each homeowner respondent.
on the owner's estimate of market value.  It would be highly desir-
able to improve the data base for property value studies by obtain-
ing value estimates more directly related to market transactions,
and by obtaining estimates more frequently than .during census years
Crocker (1970) has shown that this is possible and more investiga-
tors should follow his lead.

     Consider the benefits accruing to households due to improve-
ments in air quality at their residence site.  The first step is
to analyze the property value-air pollution relationship for a
given city using the appropriate regression techniques.  The first
derivative of the property value function with respect to air qua-
lity can be interpreted as a locus of household equilibrium margi-
nal willingnesses to pay.  It is necessary to make some assumption
about the shape of each household's marginal willingness to pay
function through that known equilibrium point.  Several alternative
assumptions were described by Freeman (1974).  Next, for each unit
of analysis (household, block, census tract), a change in air qua-
lity is postulated and, for each unit of analysis, the area under
the assumed marginal wil1ingness-to-pay curve between the original
air quality level and the postulated new clean air point is deter-
                            11-39

-------
mined by integration.   Finally,  these are summed across all  units
to determine the estimate of air pollution control  benefits  for
that city.   (Freeman,  1974; National  Academy of Sciences,  1974,
Chapter 4).

     To obtain conceptually correct national estimates, it is ne-
cessary to  repeat the  estimation of the property value-air pollu-
tion relationship for  each city, then repeat the calculations de-
scribed above.  This is because  different cities have different
levels of average air  pollution, different spatial  patterns  of
air pollution, and different vectors  of socioeconomic characteris-
tics.  (National Academy of Sciences, 1974, Tables  4-7 and 4-8).
I have also described  a technique based upon the estimation  of
hedonic price indices  for identifying the demand curve for clean
air directly.  It requires a pooling  of air pollution, property
value, and  socioeconomic data from several cities.   (Rosen,  1974;
Nelson, 1975).  If the demand curve has been properly drawn, it
is then possible to integrate areas under these demand curves for
all individuals in all urban areas to obtain a conceptually  valid
estimate of national benefits.

     A shortcut approach would  be to  review the existing air pol-
lution property value  relationships and to construct a synthetic
(average) relationship which is  assumed to apply to all  cities.
But this would have a  higher margin of error than the method de-
scribed above.  Alternatively,  one could carry out  this procedure
for subsets  of cities  grouped according to some set of characteris-
tics.  Then  the postulated changes in air quality could be combined
with the appropriate assumption  about functional  form to compute
benefits for each unit of analysis within each city.  Finally, these
could be summed within each city and  across all  cities to  obtain  the
national benefit figure.

     The present state of the art in  health effects research can
be characterized as follows.   Lave and Seskin have  produced  a sub-
stantial body of research showing an  association between mortality
and air pollution and  a number  of less comprehensive studies have

                            11-40

-------
corroborated this finding.  The Lave-Seskin research is based up-
on cross sectional studies using U.S. SMSA's as the sample unit.
At the other end of the spectrum, a substantial number of micro
dose-response relationships have been established for specific
clinical manifestations.  These are primarily related to high
acute dosages, at levels not often experienced in urban areas.

     The substantial gap between these two bodies of studies must
be closed.  At the clinical level, more work should be done to
establish the specific mechanisms and cause-effect relationships
involved with lower-level, longer-term exposures, such as those
found associated with mortality by Lave and Seskin.  On the other
hand,  epidemiological  work should begin to focus on more disag-
gregated research based upon smaller units of analysis.  But this
work must await the establishment of a better data base on both
mortality and morbidity associated with exposure to pollutants.

     I would recommend the following procedure for estimating
health benefits from air pollution control.  First, existing mor-
tality-air pollution studies are reviewed.  Either the single best
relationship is selected, or a synthetic relationship is construc-
ted which reflects the range of experience and confidence in dif-
ferent estimates revealed in existing studies.  For each unit of
analysis defined for the mortality relationships selected (e.g.,
SMSA, city), a change in air pollution levels is postulated.  Then
for each study the change in mortality based_upon the change in air
pollution and other socioeconomic variables is computed.  It should
be noted that, if the selected relationship is linear, the predicted
change in mortality is independent of other variables.  However,
if the function is semi-log or log, the vector of other variables
must be incorporated in the calculation.  Summing th£ predicting
changes in mortality over all  SMSA's will   give an aggregate measure
of deaths avoided for the nation as a whole due to the postulated
air pollution control program.  To obtain  a monetary measure of bene-
fit, it is presently necessary to make some explicit assumption about
the value of deaths avoided or postponed.   Morbidity effects can  be
measured and valued in the same manner.

                            11-41

-------
     Unfortunately, the most widely quoted estimate of national
health benefits associated with air pollution control  did not use
a correct method for predicting national  changes in mortality.
After choosing their "best" regression associating total  mortality
with measures of suspended particulates,  sulfate particles, and
several  socioeconomic variables,  Lave and Seskin (1970) calcula-
ted elasticity coefficients of the dependent variable  with respect
to each of the independent variables at the mean values for all
variables.  Strictly speaking, the elasticity enables  one to cal-
culate the percentage change in the dependent variable for a given
percentage change in any independent variable.

     If the elasticities are constant throughout (i.e., if a log-
log regression form had been estimated),  then the elasticity co-
efficients can be used for any magnitude  percentage change in an
independent variable for any sample point.   However, Lave and
Seskin estimated a linear form and it is  well  known that  linear
functions have different elasticities throughout the range of the
function.  Therefore, the calculated elasticity coefficient can
strictly speaking only be used to estimate changes in  mortality
for the "average" city for small  changes  in its population level.
A sample calculation suggests that with relatively low elastici-
ties, as in the case cited, the magnitude of the error in using
the same elasticity figure throughout for all  of the sample points
can be substantial.  Therefore, the estimated changes  in  mortality
consequent on a reduction in air  pollution must be called into ques
tion.

     Recreation appears to be the largest category of  benefits to
be realized from water pollution  control.   There are two  major
problem areas in the estimation of national  recreation benefits.
The first is our ignorance of the relationship  between water qua-
lity and recreation use or participation.   Second, it  is  very dif-
ficult to generalize to the nation as a whole from the small num-
ber of studies that have been done on the unit  value or shadow
price to be attached to a unit of recreation (e.g., a  recreation
day).  A priori reasoning suggests that the appropriate shadow

                             11-42

-------
price depends upon local socioeconomic characteristics, the avail-
ability of substitutes, and taste formation mechanisms, such as
the "learning by doing" phenomena.  Also, many of the recreation
sites which have been studied have unique attributes which make it
difficult to separate the value of the general recreation experi-
snce from the value attached to those site-specific characteristics

     In estimating the national recreation benefits from water pol-
lution control, there are several points to bear in mind.  First,
;he major barrier to developing adequate estimates of water pollu-
tion control benefits is our lack of understanding of the relation-
ship between various measures of water quality, on the one hand,
and various recreational uses of water bodies, on the other.  The
nost commonly measured water quality parameters are at best only
crude proxies for the more complex vectors of characteristics which
influence recreational uses.  Second, it is very dangerous to ex-
trapolate predictions of changes in recreation participation or re-
creation demand from narrowly focused studies of limited geographic
areas.

     Third, the analysis of recreation benefits must recognize the
variety of likely individual responses to changes in the availabi-
lity of recreation sites.  Existing recreationists will  increase
participation levels; non-participants will become participants;
and there will be shifts in the geographic pattern of recreation
activity, as recreationists shift from one site to another.  Fur-
thermore, there will be both changes in the level and pattern of
economic/market transactions associated with recreation, e.g.,
travel expenditures to recreation sites, and changes in utility
levels which have no counterpart in market transactions.

     It would be useful to outline briefly the theory of recrea-
tion benefits as developed for a single recreation site holding
all other relevant economic magnitudes constant.  There exists a
demand for this recreation site relating quantity demanded of re-
creation services (e.g., in recreation days) to price.  This can
                            11-43

-------
also be interpreted as a marginal  willingness to pay curve, rela-
ting marginal  value to quantity.   This demand curve is plotted
holding income, prices and availability of substitutes and alter-
natives, and the quality of this  recreation site constant.  When
price is known, as indicated by the line P in Figure II-3, actual
recreation use for quantity demanded can be predicted.  Of course,
price could be zero.  When the facility is polluted and the demand
curve with pollution is as shown,  the quantity of recreation days
would be 0-Q-,.
  A
                                        Recreation Days
 Figure II-3.    Recreational  Benefits  of Water  Pollution  Control

      The  net  value  or  rent attributable  to this recreation site
 is the area A-B-C.   This  is  a consumer  surplus measure of value.
 Now,  let  us assume  that a pollution control program  increases wa-
 ter quality at this site.  In economic  terms,  the effect is  to
 shift the demand  curve out and  to  the right -  the new  demand curve
 as shown  in the figure.   The net economic benefit of this cleanup
 is the increase in  consumer  surplus,  i.e., the area  between  the
 two demand curves,  B-C-E-D.
                             11-44

-------
     The net benefit can be divided into two categories.  The
first is the increase in utility or consumer surplus to those 0-
Q-l users who were using the facility even when polluted.  This is
the area B-C-F-D.  This area represents their increase in willing-
ness to pay to maintain present use rates at this recreation site
rather than do without.  In addition, the greater attractiveness
of this site relative to alternative recreation sites and alterna-
tive consumption activities, other than recreation, results in an
increase in recreation days at this site equal to Q-i-Q?-  There is
a benefit associated with this increase in use which is equal to
the area C-E-F.

     In utilizing such a measure of benefit, there is no need to
take into account changes in recreation use at other sites, sav-
ings in travel cost, or whatever.  These are all  reflected within
the B-C-E-D, benefit measure.  When there are simultaneous changes
in quality or availability at several recreation sites, the theore-
tical and empirical analysis becomes a bit more complicated.  (Burt
and Brewer, 1971).

     As the analysis of Figure II-3 shows, changes in water quality
will be associated with both changes in willingness to pay and
changes in quantity of participation.  This suggests that the simul-
taneous pursuit of two research paths might be most appropriate.
The two are a national recreation participation survey incorporating
socioeconomic variables as well as quality and quantity availability
variables, and micro efforts to measures shifts in the demand curve
for specific sites as water quality changes.
                            11-45

-------
G.   CONCLUSIONS

     Four questions were raised at the outset of this paper.  The first
was:  "Would national  benefit estimates be useful?"  In Section B, se-
veral important environmental policy issues were described which would
certainly be illuminated by better information on benefits.  Even when
environmental policy issues are not made in accordance with a strict
benefit cost rule, benefit and cost magnitudes are s'ill  important con-
siderations in environmental  decision making.

     The second question was:  "Will the state of the art permit the
development of national  estimates of benefits?"  In my judgment, the
economic theory and analytical techniques for valuing benefits for most
classes of benefits are  relatively well  developed.  There are still  ma-
jor unresolved theoretical  and analytical issues with respect to valu-
ing health and life benefits.  But in other areas, for example, land
value, travel cost approach to recreation, net factor income and pro-
ductivity approaches,  etc., the validity of the theoretical framework
is now well established.

     However, major problems  remain at the interface between the eco-
nomic dimensions of the  benefits problem and those dimensions dealt
with by the other sciences.  There are major gaps in our  ability to  re-
late changes in use of the environment to changes in the  environmental
quality parameters.  Examples include dose-response relationships for
air and water pollutants, and relationships-between water quality and
recreation and fishing benefits.

     It is fair to say that we know much more now about the nature and
magnitude of air and water pollution control  benefits than we did, say,
five years ago.  A review of  Ridker's (1967)  valiarvt effort is instruc-
tive in this regard, both in  terms of the very crude conceptual frame-
work and analytical technique and the almost non-existent data base  he
had to work with.

     Turning specifically to  air pollution, it is now possible to use
existing techniques  and data to obtain  tentative estimates of air pol-

                                 11-46

-------
lution health and property value benefits.  Obtaining these estimates
will involve the explicit use of value judgments and assumptions about
certain magnitudes; and there will be some degree of uncertainty in
the final figures.  But part of the present state of the art includes
a consistent framework and language for expressing this uncertainty in
probalistic terms.  Furthermore, these estimates will be reasonable in
the sense that we are more likely to hit the correct figure by using
these techniques than we are by drawing numbers out of a hat.

     In the case of water pollution, medical knowledge of potential
health benefits is simply inadequate.  And for the major class of water
pollution control benefits, recreation, the data base for relating water
quality changes to changes in recreation use is not adequate.  I would
conclude that the state of the art and data do not permit reasonable
water pollution control benefit estimates.

     Are there any "hopeless cases?"  For purposes of this discussion,
we can define "hopeless" as a situation where the marginal cost of ad-
ditional useful information is infinite.  By this definition, there are
no hopeless cases in the area of benefit measurement.  Consider the prob-
lem of valuing human life.  One might argue that although individuals
do make decisions which imply money values for changes in life expectancy,
these decisions reveal a multiplicity of values for different individuals
and different circumstances.  However, the search for a single unique
value of life applicable to all situations is unnecessary.  The absence
of a unique single price or marginal value is a characteristic of all  pub-
lic goods, such as the demand for clean air and the unit value of recrea-
tion experiences.  The point is that our understanding of the valuation
problem can be improved by further research.  It is in this sense that
the problem is not hopeless.

     There are, however, some insoluble problems in the area of benefit
estimation.  They are insoluble because they involve value judgments
and fundamental questions of equity, not primarily questions of economic
theory and measurement.  We have uncovered three manifestations of this
fundamental problem in the course of our discussion.  First, there is no
                                 11-47

-------
objective criterion for judging or evaluating different distributions
of benefits and costs.  Thus, although distributions of benefits and
costs can be described for decision makers, this information cannot
be incorporated into a comprehensive, objective decision 'rule with-
out the prior specification of some set of equity weights.   Second,
our estimates of benefits are derived from the price information re-
vealed by existing markets.  This price information derives its valid-
ity from the implicit acceptance of the existing distribution of wealth
which produced the existing set of prices.  If the present  distribution
of wealth is judged to be unacceptable on ethical  grounds,  no meaning-
ful welfare statements can be derived from the existing price informa-
tion.  And third is the evaluation of potentially massive or catastro-
phic environmental damages which may occur at some more distant time
in the future, i.e., so-called intergenerational  effects.

     The third question was:   "Do recently published estimates of na-
tional benefits adequately reflect the state  of the art?"  In other
words, do these estimates make the best use of presently available
analytical techniques and data?  Although a detailed answer is beyond
the scope of this  paper, in summary,  the answer is "no".  However,
the cost of generating estimates which do reflect  the state of the art
would be relatively small; and in my judgment, the benefits of doing
so justify incurring the cost.

     The final  question was:   "How can present national  benefit esti-
mates be improved?"  The recommendations for  gathering  additional
data and more effective utilization of existing data are  presented
in the next section.
                                 11-48

-------
H. ,  RECOMMENDATIONS

     Recommendations for improvements in benefit estimation here fall
into three categories:  those dealing with improvements in the basic
data and analytical techniques; those dealing with improved uses of
existing data; and one proposing the initiation of ex post measure-
ments of realized benefits.

     1.    Basic Data and Analytical Techniques

          Earlier we distinguished between measuring effects and as-
     signing of values, both necessary steps in the determination of
     benefit estimates.  But in the key areas of mortality and morbid-
     ity from air pollution, and in the lesser areas of vegetation and
     materials damages from air pollution, as well as sports and com-
     mercial fisheries and production benefits from water pollution
     control, the measurement of these effects lies largely outside
     the realm of economics.  And economists' efforts to assign values
     and estimate benefits in these areas must await better informa-
     tion on physical effects.

          The apparent importance of health effects of air pollutants
     suggests a high payoff for more information on dose-response re-
     lationships.  More effort should be devoted to large-sample care-
     fully controlled epidemiological studies to examine both long-
     term chronic and short-term acute effects of air pollutants.   An
     effort should be made to move beyond the inter-urban comparisons
     of the sort done by Lave and Seskin.  Perhaps the population at
     risk data base developed for EPA can be used to carry out epidemi-
     ological studies disaggregated within urban areas.   Also, some at-
     tention should be given to epidemiological studies of water pollu-
     tion health effects.   In particular, attention should be given to
     the problems of persistent organic chemicals, and viral pathogens
     in drinking water.

          Research efforts to determine health and other kinds of ef-
     fects should be designed so as to complement and support efforts

                                 11-49

-------
to determine values.  For example,  sample surveys to determine
morbidity effects due to air pollution should include questions
to obtain socioeconomic data.   This is important not only because
socioeconomic  variables are themselves associated with health sta-
tus and must be controlled for in estimating health effects, but
also because if these data are part of the effects study, they
may facilitate the later assignment of economic values.

     Research on the value of human life should be extended in
two directions.  First, the individual choice/willingness to pay
model where one element of choice is a small change in the prob-
ability of death should be further  developed.  (Bergstrom, 1975;
Zeckhauser, 1975; Thaler and Rosen, 1974).  One:important exten-
sion is to examine the implications of changes in the shape of
the probability distribution of expected life.  Second, govern-
ment decisions and other collective decisions involving safety.
health, medical research, etc., should be carefully analyzed to
determine the implied or explicit values placed on human life or
changes in probability of death.   This effort may give some in-
sight into collective attitudes toward life valuations, and it may
also stimulate efforts to achieve greater consistency among public
sector decision makers in this area.

     The U.S. EPA should commission a series of micro region-spe-
cific efforts to estimate the demand curves for specific recrea-
tion sites using the Clawson-Knetsch travel cost approach and to
relate shifts in the demand curve to changes in various water qua-
lity parameters.  This series of studies should be designed and
coordinated so as to control cross  studies for socioeconomic vari-
ables, the availability of substitutes and alternative sites, and
other regional differences in recreation behavior.  The objective
of these studies would be to identify the underlying functional
relationship between quality and willingness to pay for recrea-
tion experiences.  If this effort is successful, it should be pos-
sible to generalize the results to  additional sites and regions.
This series of studies would emphasize the determination of the
demand curve and evaluation.

                            11-50

-------
     Another study should address changes in the quantity of use
on the basis of a large, carefully constructed survey of recrea-
tion participation.   Earlier surveys have not adequately dealt
with the quantity and quality of the available water based recrea-
tion sites and the availability and quality of alternative forms
of recreation opportunity as determinants of water based recrea-
tion participation rates.  If such a data base were established,
and participation rates could be successfully related to the quan-
tity and quality of recreation opportunity, then the prediction of
changes in participation rates associated with specific water pol-
lution control programs would be relatively straightforward.   Of
course, this approach would not reveal  values or shadow prices; nor
would it capture the change in utility of existing recreationists.

     The model being developed by the National Planning Associa-
tion under contract to the National Commission on Water Quality
appears to be a very promising step in the right direction.   How-
ever, it does not appear that that model can be adequately devel-
oped given existing time and resource constraints.  That research
effort should be broadened and continued at a generous  level  of
support.  Independently, a series of travel cost and similar studies
should be initiated in an effort to determine unit values for recre-
ation days, and, more importantly, the way in which they vary with
changes in water quality and other attributes of particular recrea-
tion sites.

     There should be carefully constructed experiments  with  the in-
terview/questionnaire techniques for estimating willingness-to-pay
for reduction in pollution.  These experiments should be coordina-
ted with studies based on other analytical techniques in an  effort
to provide a cross check or validation of benefit estimates  obtained
by different approaches.

2.   Use of Existing Data

     The Lave and Seskin air pollution-mortality regression equa-
tions should be used to predict changes in mortality by SMSA for

                            11-51

-------
changes in air quality necessary to meet national primary air qua-
lity standards.  These estimates of changes in mortality should
be combined with alternative assumptions about the value of human
life to calculate a range of benefit estimates.

     The Freeman-Rosen technique should be used to compute correct
benefit estimates from existing property value studies for indi-
vidual cities.  Also, it may prove useful  to commission a series
of new property value studies using improved measures of property
value and a consistent theoretical model and empirical technique
for all cities.  These studies should be designed to identify the
demand curve or willingness-to-pay curve for clean air.

     A group of experts should be convened, perhaps under the au-
spices of the National Academy of Sciences, for the purpose of de-
veloping a comprehensive estimate of national  benefits of pollution
control.  The group should be comprised of professional researchers
with backgrounds in environmental economics, the economics of pro-
ject evaluation, econometrics, epidemiology, environmental  health,
limnology and marine  biology, agricultural  sciences, and engineer-
ing.  The group should be asked to review  all  of the available lit-
erature and on-going  research on the effects of all  classes of pol-
lutants, and to compile their best estimate of national benefits of
pollution control for each of the major polluting substances.

     The group should utilize a consistent framework for defining
and measuring benefits, and consistent techniques and methodologies
for moving from building block studies to  national  estimates.   It
should utilize all  available data, making  use  of their expert judg-
ments as to relative  quality and accuracy  of parameters and rela-
tionships from different studies.  The group should be asked to
make recommendations  to guide further research to close gaps in
information that are  identified by the group.   A new group should
be convened every three to four years in order to review new data
and to prepare new  national  benefit estimates.
                            11-52

-------
3.   Ex Post Evaluation

     A careful  and comprehensive program of ex^ post analysis of
pollution control benefits should be developed and implemented.
The period of the seventies will have been characterized by a
major commitment of resources to air and water pollution control
It would be penny-wise and pound-foolish not to plan now to al-
locate one or two percent of the total  funds to be spent on pol-
lution control  toward measuring and evaluating what we will have
bought with that massive expenditure.  In one sense, the nation
is embarking on a large-scale socioeconomic experiment in alter-
ing environmental conditions.  We should take advantage of this
experiment with a carefully thought out and comprehensive pro-
gram of data gathering and analysis.
                            11-53

-------
I.    REFERENCES
     Bergstrom,  Theodore,  "Preference and Choice  in Matters of Life and
         Death,"  in  press,  1975.

     Burt,  Oscar,  and  Durward  Brewer, "Estimation of Net Social  Benefits
         from  Outdoor  Recreation,"  Econometrica 39(5):813-827, September
         1971.

     Crocker,  Thomas,  Urban Air  Pollution Damage  Functions, University of
         California, Riverside,  PB  197-668,  1970.

     Freeman,  A.  Myrick,  III,  "A Survey of the Techniques for Measuring
         the Benefits  of  Water Quality  Improvement," in Henry Peskin and
         Eugene  Seskin, eds.,  Cost/Benefit Analysjs and Hater Pollution
         Policy,  The Urban  Institute, Washington, D.C., 1975.

     	__,  "On Estimating Air  Pollution Control Bene-
         fits  from Land Value  Studies," Journal of Environmental  Econono-
         mics  and Management 1:74-83, 1974.
     Haveman,  Robert  H.,  and  Burton Weisbrod,  "The Concept of Benefits  in
         Benefit/Cost Analysis with Emphasis on Water Pollution Control
         Activities," in  Henry Peskin and  Eugene Seskin, eds., Cost/Bene-
         fit Analysis and Water  Pollution  Policy, The Urban  Institute,
         Washington,  D.C.,  1975.

     Kneese, Allen, and Orris Herfindahl,  Economic Thoery of Natural Re-
         sources ,  Charles Merrill, Columbus, 1974.

     Lave,  Lester  and Eugene  Seskin, "Air  Pollution and Human Health,"
         Science  169:723-733, 21 August  1970.

     Lind,  Robert  C., "Spatial Equilibrium:  The Theory of Rent and the
         Measurement  of Benefits from Public Programs," Quarterly Journal
         of Economics 87(2):188-207, May 1973.

     Mishan, E. J., "Evaluation  of Life  and Limb:  A Theoretical Approach,"
         Journal  of Political Economy 79(4):687-705, July/August 1971.

     National  Academy of  Sciences, Air Quality and Automobile Emission  Con-
         trol ,  A  Report by the Coordinating Committee on Air Quality Stu-
         dies,  Vol. 4, The Costs and Benefits  of Automobile  Emissioii Con-
         trol ,  Washington,  D.C., 1974.

                            , Principles for Regulatory Decision Making
         About  Chemicals  in  the  Environment,  1975.

     Nelson,  Jon,  "Residential Choice,  Hedonic  Prices,  and  the  Demand  for
         Urban  Air Quality,"  Pennsylvania  State  University  (in  press),  1975

     Ridker,  Ronald G.,  Economic  Costs  of  Air Pollution,  Praegar,  New  York,
         1967.                           ~'
                                      11-54

-------
Rosen, Sherwin, "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets:   Product Differ-
    entiation in Pure Competition," Journal  of Political  Economy,  1974

Schelling, Thomas C., "The Life You Save May be Your Own,"  in Samuel
    Chase, ed., Problems in Public Expenditure Analysis,  Brookings In-
    stitution, Washington, 1968.

Thaler, Richard, and Sherwin Rosen, "The Value of Saving  a  Life:   Evi-
    dence from the Labor Market," University of Rochester Discussion
    Paper, 1974.

Waddel1, Thomas E., The Economic Damages of Air Pollution,  U.S.  Envi-
    ronmental Protection Agency, EPA-600/5-74-012, 1974.

Zeckhauser, Richard, Processes for Valuing Lives, Harvard Public  Poli-
    cy Program Discussion Paper #29D.,  19/5.
                                 11-55

-------
                  III.    BENEFITS OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
                              Thomas D. Crocker
                            University of Wyoming
A.   INTRODUCTION
     This section presents the purpose and scope of this paper, the
techniques for estimating air pollution control benefits, and finally,
the organization of this paper.

     1.    Purpose and Scope

          The purpose of this paper is to review and assess the methods
     available for modeling and measuring the economic benefits of air
     pollution control.   Models of the economic behavior of beneficiar-
     ies of air pollution control  could be increasingly used to untangle
     the various financial, economic,  and environmental  issues  relevant
     to proposed control efforts.   Nevertheless, in some instances, at-
     tempts to apply these models  may  already have gone beyond  the gen-
     eral understanding  of their analytical  foundations and their  appro-
     priate roles in decision making.   In order to evaluate the extent
     to which this might be true,  it is necessary  to have a clear  idea
     of the possible purposes of a model  of the behavior of beneficiar-
     ies of air pollution control.

          Fundamentally, a model  can have any one  or more of three ob-
     jectives:
          •    Enhanced understanding of the phenomena  being  inves-
               tigated
          0    Improved ability to predict the  future courses  of  im-
               portant variables at various levels  of disaggregation
          •    Improved basis  for analyzing the economic  consequences
               of specific  alternative control  policies.

     Generally speaking, all  three objectives are served  better by any
     model encompassing a greater range of phenomena or one characterized

                                    III-l

-------
by variables more closely corresponding to observable phenomena,
or one permitting the use of more powerful and readily applied es-
timation techniques.

     Among these three objectives, the first is most likely to be
of interest to the professional  researcher,, while the latter two
assume greatest relative importance for the decision maker.  More-
over, the first requires more emphasis upon fortnal  analytical com-
prehension, whereas the latter two emphasize empirical  implement-
ability.  In those parts of economics relevant to the assessment
of the benefits of air pollution control,  there has frequently been
inadequate attention by analytical investigators to possibilities
of improved empirical implementation.  On  the other hand,  decision
makers have overly encouraged the production of empirical  efforts
lacking proper analytical foundations.   Recognizing these  deficien-
cies, there now appears to be a  judgment that research  into the
economic benefits of air pollution control  can ultimately  have lit-
tle to contribute to the improvement of decisions about air pollu-
tion control.  This paper will  attempt to  temper this judgment.

     The framework of analysis adopted throughout this  paper is the
market, the interaction of buyers and sellers.   The particular inter-
est is those markets  in which air pollution is thought  to  have a sub-
stantive impact on buyer and seller valuations.   The manner in which
the valuations expressed in these markets  can be used to infer the
value of air pollution control  is discussed at some length.   Substan-
tial  attention is given to the modeling complications introduced by
special features of markets such as health and real  property in which
air pollution is thought to play a significant role.  Among these fea-
tures are multi-dimensional heterogeneity  (in which the combination of
characteristics embodied in each unit of a good is  more or less unique
to that unit), costly information, costs of market  participation, and
institutional and time constraints.

     The neglect of these factors results  in the omission  of entire
classes of air pollution control benefits  stemming  from the ameliora-
tion of intertemporal externalities and uncertainty about  future

                             III-2

-------
levels of air pollution and its effects.  This may mean that sub-
stantial biases are built into current estimates of air pollution
control benefits, even if these current estimates have been estab-
lished in an analytically and empirically sound fashion.

2.   Estimation of Benefits

     Estimating techniques employ one of three alternative mea-
sures of benefits:

     •    Alternative cost
     •    Opportunity cost
     •    Willingness-to-pay.

The first of these has been employed most frequently because of its
great simplicity.  However, its failure to consider adjustments
that the sufferer can make in response to the presence of air pollu-
tion means that it will nearly always yield estimates of  benefits
that are biased upward.  Moreover, because users generally do not
employ an explicit analytical model, the approach yields  little,  if
any, information about behavioral phenomena, the future course of
important variables, or the consequences of specific alternative
control policies.

     In contrast, opportunity cost and willingness-to-pay measures
require the construction of explicit analytical models of the pheno-
mena being studied.  Consequently, investigators with a background
in formal economic analysis who are not under severe time constraints
tend to employ these two measures.  The research problem  then becomes
primarily one of comprehending economic, rather than physical or  bio-
logical relations.  The investigator is able to describe  the behav-
ior of the price or value of air quality with respect to  various  phy-
sical, biological, and economic parameters.   Analytical models of
health markets, property markets, etc., employing opportunity cost
or willingness-to-pay measures are amenable to empirical  treatment
                              III-3

-------
with either available data or data that can plausibly be obtained.
One, must, however, be moderately less sanguine about the avail-
ability of data to implement models in which uncertainty or inter-
temporal externalities have a substantive role.

     Whatever the analytical and empirical  quality of the benefit
estimates thus far obtained, they rarely, if ever, make clear the
uncertainty of the estimates themselves.   All benefits assessment
efforts should generate probability distributions for whatever in-
put variables are relevant and then aggregate these distributions
to produce a probability distribution for the output measure, a'ir
pollution control benefits.  Doing so would reduce the amount of
useful information that is thrown away and  would reduce the suscep-
tibility of benefits estimates to criticism.

     In addition, a number of short-term analytical and empirical
approaches could yield rapid improvements in the state-of-knowledge.
These include:
          Development and empirical  implementation of general
          equilibrium models  of property values
          Adoption and empirical  implementation  of a household
          production function framework for health effects stud-
          ies
          Input productivity  studies with special  emphasis upon
          human factors of production
          Adoption of economic, rather than physical or biologi-
          cal, perspectives for the  construction of environmental
          quality indices
          Adoption of new techniques from mathematical  statistics
          to test the functional  forms of expressions employed to
          estimate benefits
          Testing of procedures intended to cause interviewees
          to reveal  their true preferences
          Increased use of algorithms intended to enhance the
          investigator's ability to  discriminate among variables
                              111-4

-------
          that might contribute to variations in the values
          assumed by another variable
     •    Use of sophisticated econometric models of agricul
          tural markets.
3.   Organization

     The next section presents the conceptual foundations of bene-
fits assessment for any air pollutant and discusses the issues that
must be resolved in applying these foundations to the analysis of in-
dividual air pollution control decisions.  The third section describes
each of the primary methods that might be used to estimate the bene-
fits of air pollution control.  An attempt is made throughout to re-
late these methods to a conceptual framework or a model and the prac-
tical questions, including data availability, associated with using
each method are raised.

     The fourth section compiles the most recent empirical efforts
and reviews the content of these efforts in terms of the earlier com-
mentary on conceptual foundations and empirical procedures.  The last
section reviews briefly the role and prospects of benefits assessment
in policy decisions and argues for an increased allocation of research
effort to the solution of specific analytical problems.

     In order to provide the reader with some appreciation of the mo-
tivations underlying the occasionally more abstract discussions in the
preceding sections, the attachment contains a discussion of the econom-
ic benefits for the participants in a single activity of controlling a
single class of pollutants in a particular locale.
                               III-5

-------
B.   CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS

     This section presents the conceptual  foundations for assessing
the benefits of controlling any air pollutant and takes up the issues
that must be resolved in applying these foundations  to the analysis
of specific control  decisions.   The presentation  covers the motiva-
tions for measuring  benefits,  measurement  techniques, and sources of
benefi ts.

     1.    Motivations for Measuring Benefits

          Air pollution  control  benefit assessments  are intended  to aid
     the public decision maker  in formulating  policy.   If neither more
     nor less meaning is to be  attached to these  assessments than their
     underlying analytical  foundations  justify, then  the  decision maker
     must  be sensitive to the  limitations as well as  the  strengths of
     these foundations.

          Cost-benefit analysis  is  an attempt  to  ascertain  the socially
     valuable resources  and services to  be gained and  lost  in the  attain-
     ment  of any  particular state of the world.   In each  state, market
     prices  alone are  presumed  to embody all relevant  information  about
     relative scarcities  and to  be  a sufficient means  of  allocating  re-
     sources  to their  socially most highly valued uses.   Price is  assumed
     to  be the  sole mode  of allocation used in voluntary  interactions of
     buyers  and sellers.  Markets are pervasive; that  is, all gains  from
     exchange are quickly exhausted.  Price Is thus a  sufficient measure
     of  social  as well as private value.  In effect,  the objective of
     cost-benefit analysis  is to ascertain what the price structure of
     any particular state would be when markets are pervasive.

          Sophisticated proofs are available in the economics literature
     showing  that states of tha world attained in a system in which mar-
     kets  are pervasive are Pareto-efficient:   the net social value of
     output  is maximized because no one individual's  welfare can be en-
     hanced without reducing the welfare of another individual  (Arrow
                                  III-6

-------
and Hahn, 1971).  The price structure to be ascertained via cost-
benefit analysis is therefore a Pareto-efficient price structure.
It follows then that, insofar as benefits assessments are used by
the decision maker as information inputs in policy decisions, he
is making the judgment that the benefit valuations established
through strictly voluntary exchange in a setting where markets
are pervasive are at least one useful means of weighting the alter-
natives he has before him.

     In the practical world outside economics textbooks, all gains
from exchange are not exhausted because markets are, in fact, not
pervasive.  Institutionally fostered monopolistic advantages, tech-
nological externalities, such as air pollution, and consumption and
production indivisibilities persevere  even though their very exis-
tence implies the presence of potential gains from exchange.  In a
general equilibrium setting in which the activities of all  pairs
of buyers and sellers are interconnected, the presence of an inef-
ficient price structure in one market implies a similar presence
in all  other markets.  If efficiency is defined only for circum-
stances in which markets are pervasive, and if the activities of
all pairs of buyers and sellers are interconnected, then all real
observable price structures must be inefficient.

     The activity of benefits assessment, when employed for pub-
lic policy purposes, is a direct recognition that markets for cer-
tain goods and services are either nonexistent or incomplete.
These goods and services are therefore valued inaccurately  in the
sense that their market prices diverge from efficient levels as
defined by a world of pervasive markets.  Benefits assessment em-
ploys various techniques to infer the equivalent prices of  these
non-marketed goods and services from information embodied in the
observed market prices of marketed goods and services that  are in
the same production or consumption process as the non-marketed en-
tity or which are substitutes or complements to it.
                             III-7

-------
     The extent of inefficiency reflected in these observed mar-
ket prices is typically unknown.   Unless an empirically implement-
able general  equilibrium model  of the economy is available, the
extent of inefficiency (remembering that efficiency is typically
defined only  for a world of pervasive markets)  is inherently un-
knowable.  However, one does not do serious violence to accurate
benefits assessment if one imposes separability conditions that
permit dimissal from consideration of all markets whose goods and
services are  plausibly only remotely connected  to the good or ser-
vice for which benefits assessments are being performed.

     Of course, a contribution  to the description of the  efficiency
benefits of air pollution control need not be the sole or even one
of the reasons why a decision maker wants benefits assessments per-
formed.  After all, any benefits  assessment is  simply a description
of the price  structure effects  of a particular  change in  the state
of the world.  It is therefore  readily used also to describe the
effects of a  change in air pollution control  upon the distribution
of income, government tax revenues, or any of a number of other pe-
cuniary and economic questions  of interest.  Nevertheless, since
all of these  effects are influenced by the price structure of the
market for the services of the  atmospheric resource, as well as
the price structures of closely related markets, analytically sound
descriptions  of these effects also require the  construction and
empirical implementation of a general  equilibrium model.

2.   Measures of Benefits

     Having recognized the type of world to which economic effi-
ciency is generally meant to refer and the implications of this
reference for the construction  and empirical  implementation of
models intended to measure air  pollution control benefits, it re-
mains to make explicit exactly  what is meant by the term  "bene-
fits".  First, it is necessary  to be absolutely clear that the
parties to whom the benefits of air pollution control are presumed
                             III-8

-------
to accrue are individual persons.  Social benefits are simply
some aggregate of individual benefits:   there does not exist in
cost-benefit analysis a concept of the society having an exis-
tence independent of the individuals who compose it.

     Second, there exists a consistent, discoverable relationship
between a change in ambient air pollution levels and the change
in the individual's utility or welfare.  The latter is interpreted
as the benefits accuring to the individual.   Central to the logic
of this relation is the idea of consumer's surplus.  This states
that the individual continues to purchase additional units of the
ith good until the marginal utility of the additional unit is just
equal to the marginal utility of the money he must pay to obtain
the additional unit.  That is, the individual will be indifferent
between keeping his money and consuming an additional unit of the
good when the marginal utility of the additional unit is equal  to
its market price.  The difference between what the individual is
willing to pay, as determined by the marginal utility he attaches
to the unit, and what he has to pay, as determined by market price,
is the consumer's surplus for the unit.  The sum of the surpluses
for all these units is total consumer's surplus.

     This concept is illustrated in Figure IV-1, where DD is
the demand function, the locus of points depicting the consumer's
              Price
                            Z°
Z1     Air Quality
            Figure IV-1.    Representation  of Consumer's  Surplus

                              III-9

-------
marginal  willingness  to pay.   The cross-hatched area,  ABC,  repre-
sents the consumer's  surplus  associated with an improvement in air
quality,  Z, from Z° to Z .

     In a very important paper,  Willig  (1974)  has shown recently that,
in most applications,  the difference between the observable consumer's
surplus area, ABC of  Figure IV-1, and the  theoretically correct con-
sumer's surplus of the income-compensated  demand function is accurate-
ly described as trivial.  Willig's (1974)  results vindicate analyti-
cally the conceptual  foundations and great practical  value  of the con-
sumer's surplus methodology so frequently  employed in  studies of the
benefits  of air pollution control.  It  should  nevertheless  be noted
that there exist several different measures of consumer's surplus,
most of which are distinguished  by the  path the consumer is presumed
to follow from one equilibrium position to another.   For presentation
of a set  of criteria  with which  to evaluate these various measures,
see Mohring (1971).

     The  empirical establishment of the observable surplus  becomes
considerably more complicated if alternative formulations of the con-
sumer's problem are employed.   For example, rather than directly en-
tering the utility function,  air pollution might reasonably be viewed
as influencing the cost to the consumer of using goods capable of pro-
viding utility.  Thus, if the absence of respiratory  problems is a
good from which a consumer derives utility, he will have to expend a
greater quantity of valuable  resources  attaining this  absnece in New
York City than in Laramie, Wyoming.

     An alternative formulation  would have the consumer obtain uti-
lity directly from the absence of air pollution while  also  permit-
ting air  pollution to affect  the costs  of  other activities  or goods
from which he obtains  utility.  Estimation of  consumer's surplus
using this formulation is more complex  than using the  traditional
formulation, because  the goods or activities the use  of which air
pollution is presumed to affect  (e.g.,  medical services) are treat-
ed as inputs into commodities (e.g., the absence of respiratory
                               111-10

-------
problems) that are the ultimate objects of the consumer's pre-
ferences.  In general, even though these formulations will usually
increase estimation problems, failure to adopt them in circum-
stances where reality warrants their adoption would introduce spe-
cification errors and thus possibly result in serious errors in
the benefit estimates obtained.

     As these progressively more complex formulations of the con-
sumer's surplus problem make intuitively clear the greater the
generality and realism of the formulation, the greater the diffi-
culty likely to be involved in empirically implementing the pro-
positions falling from the formulation.  Nevertheless, because
both informational and modeling constraints prohibit the consid-
eration of the full range of commodities, activities, and condi-
tions influencing consumer behavior, some subset of these things
must be taken as given.  An explicit statement of the formulation
on which the empirical effort is based is thus highly desirable.
Only then is the reader able to ascertain whether the estimation
techniques and the data base employed fit the problem.  Equally
important, the reader is unable to assign a unique meaning to the
empirical results, unless he is made fully aware of the conceptual
framework from which these results come.

3.   Sources of Pollution Control Benefits

     Most discussions of air pollution control benefits explain
the existence of economically excessiye ambient pollution concen-
trations in terms of static nonpecuniary externalities.  That is,
one economic agent's production or utility relations are said to
include levels of air pollution chosen by other economic agents,
without regard to the effects on the first agent's welfare.  The
damaged agent in these discussions is implicitly presumed to know
with certainty either the magnitude of the effects caused by the
air pollution and/or the level of air pollution.  Moreover, the
reader is customarily permitted to assume that the activities of
                             III-ll

-------
the pollution perpetrator and the responses of the sufferer to this
pollution are contemporaneous.

     The restriction of the discussion of the analytical reasons
for the existence of air pollution control  benefits to static non-
pecuniary externalities might explain why two plausibly important
causes of air pollution control  benefits* intertemporal externali-
ties and uncertainty, have been  rarely considered.   Their neglect
may mean that substantial myopic biases are built into current esti-
mates of benefits.

     There appear to be a number of air pollution effects charac-
terized by either or both of the above causes.   For example, rain
containing acid sulfates may ultimately alter the forest ecosystems
of entire regions.   Certain long-lived synthetic chemicals, once
widely dispersed throughout the  economy,  and thereby the natural
environment, may pose carcinogenic and mutagenic hazards for fu-
ture generations.  An economic agent's activities at one point in
time impose constraints upon other economic agents  in the future.
Insofar as there exists imperfect knowledge of  future events,  these
externalities are a problem worthy of empirical  attention.

     The air pollution effects associated with  intertemporal exter-
nalities and uncertainty are characterized  by some  or all  of the
following attributes:

     •    Information asymmetry
     •    Effects uncertainty
     •    Public-good type risks
     •    Low-probability catastrophic losses
     •    Irreversible effects.

     Substantial discrepancies exist in available information
about the benefits  of increasing an activity, as opposed to the
benefits of reducing it.   The benefits of automotive travel are
                             III 12

-------
 relatively  easy  to  calculate;  the  benefits of  reducing  auto-
 mobile  travel  and its  associated air  pollution, noise,  and aes-
 thetically  loathsome  landscapes are generally  more difficult
 and  expensive  to ascertain.   For many air pollution  phenomena,
 there is a  nearly complete absence of  knowledge about the response
 of physical and  biological systems.   For example, the overall ef-
 fect on the earth's climate of increased particulate loadings of
 the troposphere  is  highly uncertain.   Similarly, the influence
 on human health  of  increasing ambient  loadings of acid sulfates
 has not been adequately defined.

     The actual  or  potential  risks caused by certain activi-
 ties are indivisible  as between and among economic agents.
 Moreover,  they are  frequently borne by very large groups of
 these agents,  including future generations.  These groups are
 unable to reject the risks because they are bound up in a common
 property resource,  e.g., the atmosphere.  As used here, risk may
 refer not only to a lack of complete certainty about one's  future
 wealth, but  also  to  not knowing if one will  be alive to enjoy this
 wealth.

     With current information, there exists a probabilistically
 small possibility of catastrophic or  large-scale losses.  For ex-
 ample, one  potential result of burning  large quantities of  high
 sulfur fuels in  England is the possibility  of greatly and detrimen-
 tally altering the  forest ecosystems of the Scandinavian countries
 through formation of acid rain.  There  is also  a  possibility that
 the effects of a particular activity are physically impossible to
 reverse or cannot be reversed at reasonable cost.   Mutagenic  changes
 probably have this  characteristic.

     The importance of issues embodying substantial  uncertainty
or ignorance, and therefore the extent to which they are worthy
of substantial  research effort to assess their benefits and  costs,
depends  in  large part upon the decision strategy adopted.   If a
once-and-for-all  commitment is to be made to undertake or fail  to
                            111-13

-------
undertake an activity,  then  the  likely  effects  deserve to be spe-
cified and measured rather closely.   But if a sequential  decision
procedure is to be followed,  the accumulation of knowledge can be
delayed.   One can then  live  with a fairly high  degree of  uncertainty
in the present.  The cost of an  error in choice is not likely to
be as great, because it will  be  relatively less costly to reverse
course.

     Setting intertemporal externalities and lack of basic knowl-
edge about air pollution effects aside, there is an additional way
in which  uncertainty might plausibly  enter calculations of air pol-
lution control  benefits.   In the more mundane localized materials
damage, property value, interview, and  health effects studies of
common urban air pollutants  that form the bulk  of air pollution
control benefits studies, the uncertainty of potentially  affected
individuals about future air pollution  levels and the possible in-
fluence of this uncertainty  upon air  pollution  control  benefits is
usually not even mentioned (Crocker,  1971; National  Academy of
Sciences, 1974).

     The  disutility the affected individual  attaches to future air
pollution dosages has been treated as identical  in situations where
perfect  foresight  is lacking and  in  situations where it is present.
An affected agent's behavior at  a point in time has therefore been
viewed as invariant with respect to the probability of error in his
forecast  of expected air pollution dosages and/or effects.   Yet an
extremely voluminous analytical  and empirical literature  is avail
able in economics indicating that in  most everyday circumstances,
individuals are risk-averse,  i.e., uncertainty  is costly.

     When one admits that one component of air  pollution  damages
may be due to uncertainty of the affected individual about current
and future air pollution levels  and effects, it is apparent that
individual damages from air  pollution dosages are by no means in-
dependent of the process by  which expectations  about future dosages
and effects are formed.  That is, realized damages are but present
                             111-14

-------
representations of positions  taken in the  past  in  response  to
expected air pollution dosages and effects.   Most  empirical  air
pollution control  benefit studies have assumed  that sufferer ad-
justments to changes in air pollution dosages and  effects are  in-
stantaneous.  A more appealing hypothesis  is  that  expectations
about future air pollution dosages and effects  adapt to  changes
in present dosages and effects only after  some  lag in time.  Thus,
if a change has any permanent effect at all,  the effect  is  not
registered all at once but is instead distributed  over several
time periods.
                             111-15

-------
C.   EMPIRICAL PROCEDURES

     This section reviews some  general  formulation  employed in estima-
ting the benefits of air  pollution  control.   The  topics  include methods
of estimating  benefits, availability  of data,  expression of uncertainty
in results,  and aggregation  procedures.

     1.    Methods of Estimating  Benefits

          The  general  formulations  customarily  employed  in  the esti-
     mation  of air pollution control  benefits are:

          •     Alternative cost
          9     Opportunity cost
          «     Willingness to pay.

          The  alternative cost formulation is employed most frequently
     because of  its  simplicity and avoidance of complex economic analy-
     sis.  The  procedure  begins with determination of the physical ef-
     fects of  an  activity.  For example, an agronomist might construct a
     dose-response  function relating ambient concentrations of acid sul-
     fates to  the yield of a particular agricultural crop.  These effects
     are  then valued in monetary terms.   The assigned money value is that
     minimum cost which would have to  be borne in  order to return the  af-
     fected entity to its  original state.   This implies that all substi-
     tution possibilities  and other adjustment processes  available to  the
     owner of the affected entity are  dismissed from consideration.  Losses
     therefore tend to be  biased upward  in  the case  of reductions in air
     quality, and benefits tend  to be  biased downward in  the case of im-
     provements in air quality.   If, and only if,  no ready adjustments
    are possible for the  owner  of the affected entity is the alternative
    cost formulation a reasonable approximation of  the actual  losses  or
    benefits.

         Wherever these substitution  possibilities  and adjustment
    processes  are accounted  for,  the  researcher has adopted an

                                III 16

-------
"opportunity cost" formulation.  In the case of a decline in air
quality, a net loss measure is thus obtained.  For example, the
researcher studying the influence of smog on the behavior of out-
door recreationists would explicitly take into account the stock
and the unit price of substitute recreational opportunities.  -By
taking these opportunities into account, the researcher is, in
effect, deriving the minimum amount the recreationists would ac-
cept to be willing to be subjected to a change in air quality.
The presumption is that title to the air resource is held by the
parties who would be affected by the change rather than by the
potential perpetrator of the change.

     Finally, the "willingness-to-pay" formulation underlies the
discussion of the entire previous subsection.  As noted earlier,
this formulation involves the determination of what individuals
would be willing to pay in order not to be subjected to a change
in air quality.  Therefore, the researcher is assuming that title
is held by the perpetrators, rather than by those who will  be af-
fected.

     The ordering of the magnitudes of these formulations can dif-
fer from one set of circumstances to another.  Frequently,  estimates
of losses associated with reductions in air quality using the op-
portunity cost formulation exceed the estimates resulting from the
willingness-to-pay formulation.  This is due to the difference in
fundamental entitlements and therefore the wealth positions of the
parties.  Estimates obtained using the alternative cost formulation
as opposed to the opportunity cost formulation follow no consistent
pattern with respect to relative magnitudes.  For example,  one could
reasonably argue that the money necessary to compensate outdoor re-
creationists for increases in the amount of smog-damaged forest might
be relatively small when compared with the alternative of returning
the forest to its original state.

     The alternative cost method is nearly always used in the "tech-
nical  coefficients" approach (Anderson and Crocker, 1971).   Also,
                            111-17

-------
the widely quoted Lave and Seskin  (1971)  study on the economic as-
pects of the health effects of air pollution is best described as
an alternative cost study.  Examples  of studies that do not involve
air pollution, but show the empirical  practicality of willingness-
to-pay studies applied to health effects  are provided by Acton (1975),
Davis and Russell  (1972), Feldstein (1971),  Grossman (1972), Phelps
and Newhouse (1974),  and Rossett and  Huang  (1973).

2.   Availability of  Data

     The extent to which each of the  three  alternative measures have
been employed in investigations of air pollution control benefits
has been determined by three factors:   the  availability of data,  the
availability of time, and the background  of the investigator in for-
mal economic analysis.   Use of the alternative cost measure typically
requires little background in economic analysis, while allowing the
use of accumulated skills in the natural  sciences.  The necessary eco-
nomic "analysis" involves little more  than  the weighting of physical
and biological relationships by readily observed market prices.

     The investigator has the opportunity to draw upon the more so-
phisticated developments in economic  analysis when he chooses to  em-
ploy the opportunity  cost or the willingness-to-pay measures.   Ra-
ther than simply using observed market prices as determined by un-
known and presumed irrelevant forces,  the opportunity cost and the
willingness-to-pay measures compel  the construction of models of
the implicit market for air quality,  thus permitting the investiga-
tor to describe the behavior of the price or value of air quality
with respect to various physical,  biological, and economic para-
meters .

     The extent to which observations  must  be available on the
actual values assumed by the elements  of  each of these three sets
of parameters will, of course, vary according to the problem being
                              111-18

-------
investigated.  It is true, nonetheless, that the available secon-
dary data-and readily acquired primary data for the economic para-
meters of a great many problems have by no means been fully ex-
ploited.  For example, great masses of data are available in pub-
lications of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and other sources
allowing the empirical implementation of opportunity cost models
of air pollution damage in agricultural markets.  Similarly, large
secondary data collections from Federal, state and local sources
make possible the estimation of hypotheses derived from willingness
to-pay models of property markets.

     Even opportunity cost and willingness-to-pay models of the
effect of a/ir pollution upon health are amenable to empirical
treatment with either available data or data that can be readily
obtained.  The widely known CHESS studies of U.S. EPA would have
provided enormously more valuable information on the health im-
pacts of air pollution if they had initially been designed by
economists as well as by biomedical people.

     In summary, analytically sophisticated and empirically im-
plementable models for which data are available or can be readily
generated do exist.  This is not to say that all the economic  bene-
fits of air pollution control are readily susceptible to empirical
estimation.  The point is that a great deal more can be done.   The
decision maker must judge whether the results are likely to be
more useful than estimates obtained via the simplistic alternative
cost formulation, or even the intuitive or experiential approaches
that are used frequently in political decisions.

     The above comments about the availability of data allowing the
empirical implementation of opportunity cost and willingness-to-
pay measures apply mainly to static externalities.  One must be
less sanguine with respect to data availability for empirical  im-
plementation of economic analysis of intertemporal externalities
and risk aversion.  The latter is that facet of human preferences
                             111-19

-------
responsible for the existence of benefits  from the reduction of un-
certainty about air pollution effects  and  levels.

     Two approaches have dominated economists'  and psychologists'
attempts to measure risk aversion.   In the first,  lotteries are
established in a controlled laboratory setting and the investiga-
tor, usually a psychologist,  attempts  to extrapolate the results
to real-world situations.   Certainly,  one  can generate a great
deal of data in this manner.   However, the degree  of correspon-
dence between the controlled  laboratory and real-world situations
is not always apparent.   (Lichtenstein, 1965; Pruitt,  1962).

     The second approach has  been fairly widely used by econo-
mists.  Here, the observed behavior of individuals in  their every-
day pursuits is used to  infer the value they attach to the  reduc-
tion of risk to fortune, health, and life.   (Fama  and  MacBeth, 1973;
Oi, 1975; Brown and Enke,  1972).  The  approach  is  appealing to the
professional economist,  because  it permits the  construction of mo-
dels of the behavior of  economic agents, the formal  derivation of
testable propositions, and the application of opportunity cost or
willingness-to-pay measures of benefits.   However, its usefulness
is limited by data availability, at least  with  respect to health
and life.

     A number of difficulties may be attributed to the public  good
type risks that characterize  air pollution.   These are borne by
large groups of economic agents, including future  generations.
That is, the population  exposed  to deleterious  ambient levels  of
air pollution typically  involves a wide cross-section  of ages, in-
comes, medical histories,  employments, and other factors.

     The most available  data, permitting ready  inferences about
economic agents' voluntary willingnesses-to-pay to avoid risk  to
health and life are found  in  the area  of industrial  safety.  How-
ever, since netiher the  medical  backgrounds nor other  personal
                            111-20

-------
attributes of industrial workers are representative of the popula-
tion of a typical urban area, the extrapolation of these workers'
health and life risk valuations to entire human populations can be
done only with some trepidation.  On the one hand, industrial work-
ers may, as a group, simply have less or more innate aversion to
risk than do other identifiable groups within the entire population.
In addition, some groups, such as university professors and govern-
ment or private bureaucrats, may have less accumulated experience
with situations posing risks to health and life.   Given more ex-
perience, their attitudes may be altered.

     There exists at least one source of readily available data
on the risk aversion of representative individual economic agents
that has not been fully exploited.  This involves the voluntary
consumption or use of goods which carries obvious and generally
acknowledged risk to health and/or life.  For example, certain
automobiles are widely known to be safer than other automobiles.
In effect, the safety features of the automobile are weighed by
the purchaser against its other features and its price relative to
other automobiles and perhaps other modes of transportation.   The
question, nevertheless, remains as to how one extrapolates the
agent's valuation of risk to health and life in the context of an
automobile to his valuation of risk to health and life in the con-
text of air pollution.

     Intertemporal externalities are, of course,  intimately tied
to the presence of uncertainty and risk^aversion.  These externa-
lities are complicated, however, by the integral  part played in
their determination by irreversible effects and the passage of
time.  Analytical efforts in this area have thus  far concentra-
ted upon the nature of the adjustments that must be made in tra-
ditional benefit-cost evaluations of alterations  of natural en-
vironments in order to account for irreversibilities, uncertain
future effects, etc.  However, these efforts typically fail to
supply exact quantitative adjustments for these evaluations,  nor
do they provide computational algorithms indicating the form,
                            111-21

-------
type, and quantity of data required for empirical implementation.
Without such knowledge, one cannot state whether the requisite
data is, in fact, already available or easily obtainable.

     Nevertheless, it should be noted that, in particular cases
not involving air pollution, some investigators have managed to
implement empirically at least a part of the relevant analysis.
(Krutilla and Fisher, 1975).  These partially successful  empiri-
cal efforts have occurred in geographical  areas where detailed
data have been available on likely future technological  develop-
ments, environmental  carrying capacities,  and demand patterns for
uses based on the existence of a natural  environment, as  well as
for uses involving the transformation of a natural  environment.

3.   Expression of Uncertainty in Results

     Even if the world is a purely deterministic place,  it is
indeed unlikely that  it would ever be worthwhile to accumulate
enough data about air pollution problems  to eliminate all  possi-
ble sources of error  in benefit estimates.   Errors  in measure-
ment and simple absences of observations  on key variables  would
persist.  In spite of this rather obvious  point, estimates of air
pollution control benefits are, for the most part,  compiled and
reported in terms of  a single outcome that fails to take  account
of valuable information about the extent  of uncertainty  in the
reported estimates.  The commonly accepted procedure in  benefits
assessment calls for  the calculation of the benefits from each al-
ternative action and  for the use of political  and economic criteria
to choose among these on the basis of expected returns.   But ex-
cept by chance, single-valued benefit estimates must always be
in error.

     The uncertainty  problem discussed in  this subsection  occurs
because many of the variables affecting an air pollution  control
plan are neither subject to the control  of the decision maker
nor fully captured in the empirical  implementation  of any  model

                             III-22

-------
constructed by the benefit assessor.  These variables include prop-
erty rights structures, technological change, prices, micro-climates,
etc.  Hence, in contrast to commonly accepted procedures, benefits
assessment that takes full account of uncertainty requires:   judg-
ments about the likely pattern of behavior of these nohcontrollable
variables; calculation of an entire set of outcomes or returns for
each ambient air concentration; and criteria for choosing among con-
centrations on the basis of sets of possible benefits for each level
of control.

     On those occasions when uncertainty has been explicitly taken
into account, range sensitivity tests have typically been used to
account for lack of knowledge about the behavior of different rela-
tionships or the values assumed by particular parameters.  Waddell
(1974), for example, includes upper and lower bounds and "best
guesses" for various air pollution damage categories.  An alterna-
tive procedure is to generate probability distributions for  what-
ever input variables are relevant and then aggregate these distri-
butions to produce a probability distribution for the output mea-
sure, i.e., air pollution control benefits.  In an interesting ap-
plication of this latter approach, Mercer and Morgan (1975)  have
successfully applied the Weibull (1939) family of distributions,
showing that the amount of valuable information made available to
the decision maker is enhanced significantly   (see also Pouliquen,
1970).

     The probabilistic approach to presentation of benefit esti-
mates has many advantages, not the least of which is that it per-
mits the investigator to incorporate accumulated wisdom and  intui-
tion into the analysis in an explicit and communicable fashion.
If research resources are scarce, individuals who have had long
experience in working in an area frequently have a "feel" for the
structure of the problem, which permits them to assign subjective
probabilities to various outcomes.  Some people argue that such
evidence should be dismissed on the grounds that it is not "objec-
tive", but this argument is badly mistaken.  It is difficult to
                              111-23

-------
understand why the objective specification  of  uncertainty should
be so important,  when the criteria  used for choosing among alter-
native models and oftentimes the model  choices themselves are sub-
jective.

     Another major advantage of the suggested  probability approach
is that it does not throw away useful  information.   For example,
in attempting to  assess  air pollution  damages  to commercial  crops,
the biochemist might specify the "best" of  several  dose-response
functions relating crop  yield to ambient concentrations of a par-
ticular pollutant.  In the absence  of  a thoroughly  coordinated
research  effort in which the economist  specifies the variables,
units of  measure, and sampling procedures,  it  is possible that
the biochemist's  conception of best does not accord with that of
the economist.  It is then up to the economist,  who usually is ut-
terly illiterate  in biochemistry, to translate the  biochemist's
results into something useful for purposes  of  economic  analysis.
By requiring that a probability be  assigned to the  various plausi-
ble outcomes, the impact of this decision problem can be greatly
improved.  (Crocker, 1975).

4.   Aggregation  Procedures

     Any  estimate of national air pollution control  benefits is
an index  number.   That is, a variety of relationships of multiple
dimensionality are collapsed into a unique  sealer measure.  The
process of the collapse  or aggregation  involves  an  exchange of
detailed  information about the form and structure of a  set of
problems  in return for tractability and ease of comprehension.
The best  single source of information  on the aggregation problem
in economics continues to be Green  (1964).   The  portion of Marschak
and Radner (1972) dealing with the  one-person  team  is highly in-
structive from a  decision theory perspective.   Fisher and Shell
(1972) provide an excellent treatment  of the place  in index num-
ber problems of taste and quality changes,  both  of  which are
highly relevant to environmental quality problems.
                            111-24

-------
     For a limited number of purposes, it may be of interest to
obtain estimates of the total nationwide benefits accruing from
air pollution control.  An aggregate benefit estimate may provide
policy makers with an easily grasped idea of the magnitude of
the problem and may therefore give some indication that additional
or reduced research resources should be devoted to ascertaining
the economic effects across space and time of alternative control
strategies.  As a possible component of the national accounts,
these estimates may also be useful for macroeconomic decision mak-
ing purposes since they provide some evidence on how the presence
of air pollution and attempts to control it alter the nation's ag-
gregate net productivity.  An effort, currently underway at the
National Bureau of Economic Research to find ways to include en-
vironmental quality costs and benefits in the national  accounts,
is partially described by Peskin (1974).

     However, attempts to apply aggregated economic response func-
tions or aggregated magnitudes to local or regional air pollution
decision problems introduce sources of error that can lead to sub-
stantial discrepancies between expected and realized economic re-
sults.  These sources of error may remain even if the aggregated
functions or magnitudes are used as no more than the points from
which disaggregation to the local  level is initiated.  The initial
process of aggregation over locales, and subsequent disaggregation
back to locales, may destroy knowledge of the various transforma-
tion and substitution possibilities and relative consumer valua-
tions of alternatives in each locale.  That is, the weights used
to determine the contribution of each type of sufferer and each
locale to the aggregate measure may not correspond to the relative
weights sufferers in each locale attach.  The application of the
same set of weights across different sufferers and locales assumes
that all sufferers and locales are identical  and that existing
differences among sufferers and locales will  remain unchanged as
air pollution levels change.  These are indeed strong assumptions.

     Existing estimates of the national benefits of air pollution
control  combine a large number of heterogeneous disaggregated

                             111-25

-------
studies dealing with vegetation and materials damages, property
values, health effects,  and opinion surveys.   A majority of
these studies employ alternative cost measures, although will Ing-
ness-to-pay measures have been widely used in the property value
studies.   The process of aggregation typically employed to obtain
these estimates is exemplified by the procedures Waddell  (1974)
employed to obtain an estimate of aggregate national  (residential)
property value damages.

     Waddell first reviewed a  collection  of studies that had es-
timated marginal  purchase price functions with respect to sulfur
oxides and/or suspended  particulates for  eight different cities.
Interpreting the values  of the air quality parameters in these
several studies as measures for the average household in each
study of equilibrium marginal  willingness-to-pay at given air qua-
lity states and with given demand functions for air quality, he
selected a value within  the range of these estimated  values.  By
selecting this value within the range of  values, he assumed that
what was interpreted as  the equilibrium marginal willingness-to-
pay was the same for all households in all  cities.   Then, using
the further assumption that this assumed  equilibrium  marginal
willingness-to-pay was in fact the actual marginal  willingness-
to-pay for all air quality states, he multiplied the  constant
marginal willingness to  pay by the number of  households and the
number of air quality states to obtain an estimate  of aggregate
national air pollution damages.

     In effect, Waddell  assumed that the  decision problem
of each and every household in each urban area of the country
could be represented by  Figure IV-2, where b  is the marginal will-
ingness-to-pay, Q is an  air quality level,  D  is the aggregate na-
tional air pollution damage,  <9P/
-------
that willingness to pay involves only the multiplication of b by
whatever change in air quality is postulated.  Thus the value to
the depicted household of an improvement in air quality (Q** - Q*)
is simply b(Q** - Q*), and the sole distinction one needs to make
among households in order to calculate aggregate national damages
is to account for the location of each household on the Q axis.
Figure IV-2.    Willingness to Pay for Improvement  in  Air Quality

     The above discussion has been devoted to a single aggregation
over individual households.  Typically, however, estimates of na-
tional air pollution control benefits involve aggregation over mul-
tiple classes of pollutants, over time, as well as over households.
sealer estimates of the national benefits of air pollution control
may thus involve two or three distinct types of aggregation,  each
of which embodies unique assumptions about the similarities among
the units undergoing aggregation.  Thus,one must choose which type
of aggregation is to be performed first in arriving at a sealer
representing air pollution control benefits for households, for
pollutants, and for time intervals.  Moreover, in  deciding how to
perform the first aggregation, one must take into  account how the
aggregation for the second and third steps will be carried out.
                            111-27

-------
     Finally, it should be noted in passing that the entire dis-
cussion in this subsection has presumed that estimates of the ag-
gregate benefits of air pollution control  must be constructed from
disaggregated, microeconomic studies.   The presumption is that em-
pirically measurable microeconomic variables and relations have
been derived from microeconomic theory.  Given these derivations,
aggregated or macro-variables representing national  benefits of
air pollution control  and national  ambient air pollution levels
have then been defined,   Thus far,  there has been no intensive
analytical effort devoted to constructing  an aggregate or macro-
theory that will serve to make the  macro-variables  consistent with
the micro-theory and micro-variables.   At  least in  principle, the
development of such a  theory is by  no  means a hopeless task.   The
development of macro-economic theory and national  income account-
ing is evidence of this.
                            111-28

-------
D.   SHORT-TERM IMPROVEMENTS IN BENEFITS ASSESSMENT

     Most of the discussion to this point has been directed at im-
provements in the long-term strategy of benefits assessment research.
This section seeks to make the reader aware of some theoretical  con-
structs and empirical procedures holding tangible near-term promise.
The topics are arranged in order, from the more analytical  to the more
empirical.

     1.   General Equilibrium Models of Property Values

          Rosen (1974) and Freeman (1974) have recently developed a con-
     ceptually improved method of obtaining aggregate national damage
     estimates that neither assume that the same set of weights  applies
     to each locale and each individual, nor disregards the manner in
     which burdens are distributed across space, time and individuals.
     This method employs property value and attributes data for  indi-
     vidual urban areas to ascertain a distinct marginal  purchase price
     function for each urban area, using similar data and statistical
     techniques for each area.  Having estimated the marginal purchase
     price function for each urban area, the data from each area are
     merged into a single data set.  From this data set the relation-
     ship of air quality to marginal purchase prices and various house-
     hold attributes such as income and age is estimated.  The value
     of the parameter attached to the marginal purchase price variable
     can then be interpreted as the marginal willingness-to-pay  for an
     improvement in air quality.

          If the expression relating air quality to marginal purchase
     prices and various household attributes is nonlinear in the origi-
     nal variables, one can readily obtain scalar measures  of marginal
     willingness-to-pay that can differ from one urban area to another.
     If this expression is linear in the original variables, one obtains
     a scalar measure of marginal willingness-to-pay that is constant
     from one area to another.  Nevertheless, this two-stage procedure
                                  111-29

-------
does permit the distinctive attributes of different urban areas
and different households to enter into the determination of aver-
age marginal  willingness-to-pay.

     Summation over the marginal  willingness-to-pay estimates for
each city in  the sample and extrapolation to the nation of the
average sample marginal willingness-to-pay, if the sample is thought
to be representative of all the urban property markets in the coun-
try, provides an estimate of aggregate national  air pollution con-
trol benefits.  This estimation procedure has been recently applied
to a single urban area in an extremely interesting and innovative
paper by Nelson (1975).

     The procedure is soundly grounded in economic theory and is
capable of capturing many elusive features of the market, such as
multi-dimensional  heterogeneity and assorted institutional  con-
straints.  In contrast to many other approaches  that could be em-
ployed, this  one can be implemented by widely and thoroughly un-
derstood statistical techniques.   Finally, a multitude of data,
most of which is isomorphic with the theoretical  parameters, is
readily available.

     The Rosen-Freeman estimation procedure forgoes far less in-
formation than studies in the other benefit categories when ag-
gregated to the national level.   It thus  becomes worthwhile to
invest substantial analytical and empirical research effort in
establishing  the extent to which health effects, materials da-
mages, etc.,  are registered in property values.   Insight can
then be gained into the decision value of the estimates likely
to be obtained by investing further research resources in the
development of the other benefit categories.  A  serious effort
should be made to implement empirically the Rosen (1974) and
Freeman  (1974) estimation procedure in a  single coordinated
research project, in order to obtain national estimates of
the benefits  of air pollution control.
                            111-30

-------
2.   Household Production Function

     There is a common perception that the reduction of health
effects constitutes, both absolutely and at the margin, the great-
est benefit of air pollution control.  Substantive opportunity to
test this perception is now available in the form of an analytical
framework commonly known as the household production function.

     Fundamentally, this approach views the consumer as combin-
ing market-purchased goods and his own resources to produce a
state of health; that is, medical services and other remedial and
precautionary measures are not desired for their own sake but are
instead used because they reduce the probability that certain states
of the world will occur or because they reduce the loss to the con-
sumer, given the occurrence of certain states of the world.  The
properties of these household production functions for states of
health can readily be perceived as being determined by the state
of the household's consumption technology in precisely the same
manner that the properties of conventional production functions of
firms are determined by the state of standard production technology.
Conceptually, air pollution is thus considered as an exogenous fac-
tor that detrimentally influences the state of health likely to be
attained with a given mix and magnitude of household inputs.

     The household production function approach to the theory of
the consumer is consistent with alternative cost, opportunity cost,
or willingness-to-pay measures of benefits of air pollution con-
trol.  The alternative cost measure, for example, requires investi-
gation of the ways in which the consumer can, under given ambient
air pollution conditions, combine market-purchased goods and ser-
vices as well as his own resources to produce a particular state of
health.  Development of opportunity cost or wi Hifigness-to-pay mea-
sures would, of course, require that the consumer's choice process
among alternative states of health be accounted for.  The theore-
tical development of these latter two measures within the household
                            111-31

-------
production function framework is set forth in Rosen (1974).   Evi-
dence is abundant that empirically sound opportunity cost and will-
ingness- to-pay measures can be obtained via the approach for such
nonmarket activities as church attendance, human fertility,  educa-
tion, outdoor recreation,  medical  services, and a variety of other
topics.

     Previous studies of the economic benefits of reducing the
health effects of air pollution neglect,  among other things,  the
value of the leisure time  the individual  loses while he is ill, and
fail  to account for individuals who are nonparticipants in the work
force or who refuse medical services.   Moreover, these studies do
not recognize that the consumer may be uncertain about the covaria-
tion of air pollution and  health effects  and about the "producti-
vity" of particular precautionary  or remedial  activities.   Finally,
previous studies have abstracted from the possibility of the  indi-
vidual learning about effects and  about the productivity of  various
activities as well  as the  possibility that he  eventually becomes
acclimatized to air pollution and  thus attaches less relative im-
portance to its presence.

     The major advantage of the household production approach is
that it provides an analytical  framework  for the resolution  of the
issues cited above.   U.S.  EPA should encourage research efforts
that attempt to establish  in detail  the empirical  observations re-
quired to gain the necessary insights  from the analytical  perspec-
tive of household production functions.

3.    Input Productivity Studies

     Past studies of the economic  effects of air pollution on pro-
duction inputs have focused entirely on specific inputs without
giving attention to the manner in  which these  inputs are involved
in  a  production process.   This  is  due  to  the universal  absence in
these studies of an explicit model  of producer behavior.  Moreover,
these studies have  dealt with non-human inputs (e.g.,  materials
                            111-32

-------
damages).  The economics of the effects of air pollution upon
the supply of worker effort and participation has apparently not
been studied at all.

     The analytical perspective that studies of this sort might
adopt is exemplified at least in part by the perspective this au-
thor is employing in a U.S. EPA-funded study of the impact of air
pollution upon the work performance of citrus pickers in southern
California.  In this study, the individual citrus picker is viewed
as a contractor who sells his labor services in response to various
combinations of piece-work wage rate offers and expected picking
and environmental conditions.  The product the picker is selling
is the number of boxes of fruit he picks within a given time in-
terval.  His returns are determined by his wage per box of fruit
picked and the relative ease of picking the fruit.   It is thus pre-
sumed that the worker attaches utility to his working conditions
as well as his additional income and is willing to substitute one
for the other.  The grove owner is aware of this.  He thus pro-
duces a primary output (fruit) that he sells in the market and a
set of working conditions that he offers his pickers.   The grower's
problem is then to choose a combination of working  conditions and
fruit output, while the picker's problem is to choose a combina-
tion of working conditions and piece-work wage rates.

     This analytical perspective coincides with the fundamental
view of voluntary coordinated production presented  in Thompson
(1968), Alchian and Demsetz (1972), and Crocker (1973).  It can
be empirically implemented by means of procedures similar to those
set forth in Rosen (1974).  It seems desirable to invest some re-
search effort in additional attempts to assess these effects, be-
cause there is no existing information dealing with the impact of
air pollution upon labor supply and productivity, because an analy-
tical framework and empirical observations are readily available,
and because it is not implausible that the effects  in question
may be substantial.  It is likely that the analytical  framework
and perhaps some of the empirical results will be transferable to

                             111-33

-------
labor productivity situations involving other environmental  pol-
lutants in the work place.

4.   Environmental Quality Indices

     In the early 1970's, there was some hope that useful  indi-
ces could be constructed capable of conveying in capsule form
some information about changes in benefits of improvements in
environmental quality.  Enthusiasm for the possibilities of con-
structing these indices was evident in the 1972 Annual  Report of
the Council on Environmental  Quality,  though subsequent reports
have been noticeably less sanguine about these prospects.

     Attempts to construct such indices have viewed changes  in
ambient pollutant concentrations as being nearly synonymous  with
changes in air pollution control benefits.  Factors indicative of
social  valuations have entered only as more-or-less arbitrarily
chosen  weights to be attached to the changes in ambient concen-
trations of each pollutant of concern.  These weights  were typi-
cally based upon the Federal  primary or secondary air  quality
standards, and a great many facets of the economic benefits  of
air pollution control  were neglected.

     To improve upon earlier attempts  to construct useful  indices
of changes in the benefits  of air pollution control, one needs
to initiate the exercise from within an analytical economic  frame-
work rather than a physical taxonomy.   In particular,  the  quality
of the  atmosphere must be viewed as a  factor of production that,
in combination with other factors, influences objects  such as
states  of health that  individuals value.  Thus, for example, one
aspect  of the "quality" index of an urban atmosphere might be the
difference in some morbidity  characteristic in the present rela-
tive to some predetermined  standard atmosphere.

     Even if dollar values  cannot always be attached to the  parti-
cular object of preference, a great deal more information  about

                             111-34

-------
benefits would be conveyed in this manner than with a simplistic
recitation of ambient pollutant concentrations.  Moreover, in
order to construct a useful index, one need not have near-complete
information on the relation connecting air pollution to the object
of preference.  In many cases, the accumulated wisdom and knowl-
edge of researchers will permit the assignment of probabilities
to various possible forms of the relation.  These probabilities
can then be aggregated to form the desired index, in accordance
with well-known principles of the mathematical theory of prob-
ability.

5.   Form of Benefit Functions

     Economic theory provides few clues to the functional forms
appropriate to the specification of economic relationships.  Bene-
fit functions have been estimated using a variety of specifications
without noticeable concern as to the appropriateness of the func-
tional form chosen.  However, the choice of specifications affects
one's estimates of the characteristics of the benefits function and
therefore the calculated benefits from a change in ambient air pol-
lutant levels.  This has been recognized by Nelson (1975) in his
employment of the household production function approach.  Recent
references on the problem of choosing functional  forms include
Dhrymes et al. (1972), Pesaren (1974), Ramsey (1974), and Schmidt
(1974).

6.   Interview Studies

     The major reason for distrust of interview studies in which
the interviewee is asked his willingness to pay for alternative
ambient air quality states is that he has an incentive to bias
his responses depending on how he anticipates the information
will be used.  Although statements of total willingness to pay
for given levels of air pollution control may be biased, the dif-
ferences in total willingnesses to pay for various levels may be
reasonably accurate representations of marginal willingnesses to


                              111-35

-------
pay.   It is,  of course,  the  latter  that  is  of  primary  importance  for
decision making purposes.

     It is difficult  to  conceive  of any  way other  than interview
studies of valuing  such  amorphous facets of air  pollution  problems
as visibility and other  aesthetic effects (Randall  et  al., 1974;
Krutilla and  Fisher,  1974).   Moreover, certain techniques  for elic-
iting truthful  responses about  preference orderings  have recently
been  developed by economists studying  the demand for public goods
(Clarke, 1971; Bohm,  1972).   Although  most  of  these  techniques have
not been empirically  implemented, it seems  worthwhile  to study their
possible empirical  biases  in some detail, if only  to ascertain whe-
ther  the present state-of-the-art really justifies  the continued
viewing with  great skepticism of  interview  studies.

7.   Studies  of Agricultural Damages

     Studies  of air pollution damages  to agricultural  crops have  fo-
cused upon the physical  response, i.e.,  the influence  of air pollu-
tion upon the physical magnitude  of output  and the mixes and magni-
tudes of physical inputs that are adopted.   The  calculated economic
damages reported in agricultural  damage  studies  typically  assume  that
changes in these outputs and inputs have no influence  whatsoever  up-
on the unit price of the output or  the unit costs  of the  inputs.   The
determination of these  price effects requires  the  construction of a
detailed econometric model  of the agricultural market  in question.
Models of agricultural markets  that are  capable  of capturing these
price effects are generally available, and should  be applied to air
pollution studies.

8.   Testing  for Exclusion of Variables

     Many of the investigators  of property value and health effects
studies have  had to rummage through large data files,involving num-
bers of structural, neighborhood, household, and personal  attributes
that, given the discriminatory  abilities of the  models employed,
                              111-36

-------
could plausibly be determinants of property values or health ef-
fects.   Generally, no prestated strategy performed in a reproduci-
ble way has been used to choose the set of explanatory variables
for which estimated parameters are finally reported.   This is true
in spite of the widely known fact that the exclusion  of a relevant
variable from an expression to be estimated will  usually bias the
estimated parameters of the included variables.

    In order to ameliorate this problem, some writers have employed
factor analysis.  However, the economic meaning  of the grouped vari-
able then obtained is typically unknown.  A program called AID (Au-
tomatic Interaction Detector) by Sonquist et al.  (1973) simulates
the prestated, if complex, strategy followed by  a good researcher
in searching for the explanatory variables that  increase his power
to account for the variance of a dependent variable.   Using this
program, it should be possible to substantially  reduce the likeli-
hood that a relevant explanatory variable is inadvertently excluded
while simultaneously avoiding the construction of economically mean-
ingless grouped variables.
                              111-37

-------
E.   STATUS AND PROSPECTS OF BENEFITS  ASSESSMENT

     This closing section reviews  the  current  state  of the  art in  assess-
ment of air pollution control  benefits and  weighs  its  role  and prospects in
policy decisions.  An increased  allocation  of  resources is  advocated for
implementation of a directed and meaningful  research program.

     1.   Status and Role of Benefits  Assessment

          In my opinion,  the current state-of-the-art  in assessment of the
     benefits of air pollution control  is rather feeble.  Entire classes
     of benefits possibilities stemming  from amelioration of uncertainty
     and inter-temporal externalities  are nearly completely neglected on
     both analytical  and  empirical  terms.   Static, nonpecuniary externali-
     ties have monopolized empirical attention.  However, the  results from
     studies devoted to this class  of  benefits  have  rarely  been stated in
     a form most useful to the decision  maker.   That is, no probabilities
     have been attached to the alternative  results.  Because of the fre-
     quent absence of an  explicit analytical framework grounded in econom-
     ic theory, the economic meaning of  many of these  results  is a matter
     of guesswork in any  case.   Given  these  problems,  attempts to  establish
     aggregate national estimates of the benefits  of air pollution control
     are subject to enormous error.

          The prospects for attaining  national  damage  estimates are by no
     means entirely bleak,  however.  New analytical  approaches and empiri-
     cal techniques have  become  available that  are soundly  based in econom-
     ic theory, are susceptible  to  empirical treatment,  and for which data
     are already available or at least are  readily collected.   The applica-
     tion of these approaches and the  empirical  techniques  necessary for
     their implementation for estimation of  the benefits of air pollution
     control is feasible.   Moreover, from the  perspective of decision mak-
     ers, the encouragement of these approaches and  techniques should be
     worthwhile and is likely to become  increasingly so.

          It is axiomatic that the  set of obligations  faced by a public de-
     cision maker will  usually differ  greatly  from the obligations faced

                                   111-38

-------
by the sufferers from and perpetrators of air pollution, if only be-
cause the public decision maker is unable to appropriate directly any
pecuniary benefits his decisions may cause.  Thus the benefits of one
activity relative to another will differ between the public decision
maker and the air pollution sufferers and perpetrators.  Therefore,
if the public decision maker is to act as the embodiment of the suf-
ferers and perpetrators by choosing the set of activities maximizing
the combined value of the air resource to sufferers and perpetrators,
it must itself face a price structure, given its own obligations, that
will cause it to choose this set of activities.   Use without comple-
mentary information of benefits assessments and associated cost assess-
ments (that is, the price structure relevant to sufferers and perpetra-
tors) may cause the public decision maker to choose an inefficient set
of activities.  Nevertheless, benefits assessment can be of great as-
sistance in choosing the set of activities that, given the decision
maker's obligations, constitute the economically efficient set of ac-
tivities.  The reasons are several.

     First, the availability of sound benefits assessment can help set
the decision maker's thinking straight.  It makes it more costly for
him to set a policy course that entirely neglects the pervasiveness
of economic scarcity.  Second, it enhances the development of a frame-
work in which, as additional information is accumulated, more sophis-
ticated and knowledgeable analysts can insert their own results and
probability estimates to make more informed judgments.  Third, it al-
so permits the decision maker to insert his own results and probability
estimates about air pollution control benefits.   Fourth, it helps the
decision maker see which questions for possible further investigation
are of greatest impact in terms of changing policy choices.  Fifth, if
put together in a coherent analysis, it may at least point toward a
class of desirable policy decisions and, on occasion, even a unique de-
cision.   Finally, the chances of the decision maker erring are likely
to increase progressively through time if he disregards benefits assess-
ments in his policy choices.

     The last of the above arguments for public decision making giving
more attention to benefits assessments rests on two considerations that

                              111-39

-------
have received a good deal  of attention in the recent economics lit-
erature which has been synthesized by Krutilla and Fisher, 1975.
The first of these considerations is that for a great number of peo-
ple man-made environments  do not substitute for natural  environments
over a quite wide range of availability of the latter.   This range
of nonsubstitutability or  very low substitutability appears to in-
i. rease with respect to realistic increases in per capita incomes.
Furthermore, there are strong theoretical grounds for arguing that
improvements in man's production technologies tend to enhance the
supply of man-made goods and services while leaving the  supply of
goods and services produced by natural  environments either unaf-
fected or causing this supply to decline.  The implication is again
Jhat the value of natural  environments  relative to man-made environ-
ments will tend to increase over time.   A casual approach by public
decision makers to benefits assessment can therefore become increas-
ingly costly to the citizenry whose welfare the decision maker is
supposed to be enhancing.

2.    The U.S.  EPA Program

     In view of its potentially important role in establishment of
environmental  policy, one  is moved to ask why benefits assessment
research has not progressed farther in  the recent past and why, if
appearances are real, it has now been accorded a rather  low research
priority by U.S.  EPA.  Several  plausible reasons exist for this state
of affairs.

     It's possible that skepticism by natural  scientists about the
discipline of economics has been a factor in  U.S. EPA's  reluctance
to use economic models for benefits assessment while amicably greet-
ing models from biomedicine, meteorology, and other areas that pro-
vide estimates with larger errors and greater sensitivity to extreme
events than do economic models.   Such a situation is unlikely to be
ameliorated unless someone who  understands economic analysis is pro-
vided equal opportunity with natural  scientists to formulate U.S.
EPA's research programs.
                              111-40

-------
     An additional factor that may have contributed to the relative
lack of U.S. EPA concern about benefits assessment is the Clean Air
Act itself.  Of the many objects of preference individuals have, this
Act can readily be read as elevating health to a place where little
else can be considered in research activities or control  policies un-
til the public health is fully protected [see Sections 103(a) and 109
(a)].  Consideration of economic considerations is relegated to vague
statements about the public welfare while explicit reference to epi-
demiology, toxicology, etc. is made.  The desirability of the vague
statements and the explicit references is not at issue.   The point
is that the Act is probably interpreted as saying that economic con-
siderations are, at best, of secondary importance in air pollution
problems.

     This, of course, is not true, for the Act nowhere inhibits eco-
nomic considerations with respect to whether to set, for example, an
ambient standard or a source performance standard, or whether or not
to set any standard whatsoever.  It is here that benefits assessment
can be of greatest value to decision makers.  Nevertheless,  research
on the economics of air pollution control benefits has not yet pro-
duced a set of results regarded to be sufficiently compelling to war-
rant their serious use in air pollution control planning.

     U.S. EPA appears to have lacked a successful research strategy
in the economics of air pollution control benefits.   The  two main fea-
tures of any existing strategy seem to have had speed of-acquisition
of results and accumulation of piecemeal, uncoordinated,  isolated
studies by individual researchers.  The first of these features im-
plies a failure to recognize that any serious analytical  effort takes
a fair amount of time and that crash programs are not likely to be
successful.  As someone has pointed out, a crash research program
bears at least a family resemblance to an effort to have  a baby born
in one month by getting nine women pregnant.  U.S. EPA's  efforts in
biomedical and technological research have perhaps followed  more nor-
mal and acceptable fertilization procedures.
                              Ill-'

-------
     The result of the piecemeal  feature has meant that a random col
lection of studies, highly variable in quality and significance, has
been produced.   These isolated efforts do not serve effectively as
building blocks to be put together in a cumulative fashion for sub-
sequent studies, nor are they particularly useful  for decision mak-
ing purposes.

     In fact, such an effort can  fruitfully be viewed as an invest-
ment-production process characterized by considerable uncertainty
and stochastic  elements (i.e., surprises, disappointments, and er-
rors).   Naturally, in this investment-production process, as  high
a return as possible is desired.   However, that which constitutes
a payoff and the means by which this  payoff is to  be maximized,
cannot  be adequately characterized, without knowing the objectives
of those who will  use any information that is generated.   Other-
wise,  one can't know whether the  research emphasis given various
regions, pollutants, sufferer classes, and analytical  and empiri-
cal refinements correspond to those most useful  to decision makers.

     In the absence of knowledge  of explicit objectives, my major
research recommendation is that the U.S.  EPA concern with aggregate
national control benefits should, for the moment,  be limited  to
development of  a plan for microeconomic benefits research that is
explicitly tied to economic theory and which will  permit consis-
tent aggregation within a framework accounting for the intrinsic
uncertainty of  all benefits estimates.  My views as to what consti-
tutes  the possibly effective long- and short-term  components  of
this strategy have been set forth earlier in this  paper.
                              111-42

-------
F.    REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
     Acton, J.  P., "Nonmonetary Factors in the Demand for Medical  Ser-
         vices:   Some Empirical Evidence," Journal  of Political  Economy
         83:595-614, June 1975.

     Alchian, A.  A., and H.  Demsetz,  "Production,  Information  Costs,  and
         Economic Organization," The  American Economic Review  62:777-795,
         December 1972.

     Anderson,  R. J., Jr., and T.  D.  Crocker, "The  Economics of  Air  Pol-
         lution:   A Literature Assessment," in P.  B.  Downing,  ed., Air
         Pollution and the Social  Sciences, Praeger Publishers,  New  York,
         133-166, 1971.

     Arrow, K.  J., and F. Hahn, General Competitive Analysis,  Holden-
         Day, Inc., San Francisco, 1971.

     Bohm, P-,  "Estimating Demand for Public Goods:  An Experiment,"
         European Economic Review 3,  June 1972.

     Brown, R.  S., and S. Enke, "Economic Worth  of  Preventing  Death  at
         Different Ages in Developing Countries,"  Journal  of Biosocial
         Science 4:299-313.  July 1972.

     Clarke, E.  H., "An Approach to the Demand for  Public Goods,"  Pub-
         lic Choice 9:84-93, 1971.

     Cobb, F. W., et al., "Photochemical  Oxidant Injury and Bark Beetle
         Infestation of Ponderosa Pine, II, Effect  of Injury upon  Phy-
         sical  Properties of Oleoresin, Moisture Content,  and  Phloem
         Thickness," Hilgardia 39:147-149, 1968.

     Council on Environmental Quality,  Third Annual Report, Washington,
         D.C.,  August 1972.

     Crocker, T.  D., Urban Air Pollution Damage  Functions:  Theory
         and Measurement, U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency,  Office
         of Air Programs, June 1971.

     Crocker, T.  D., "Climate and Household Expenditures,"  in  T. A.
         Ferrar,  ed., Climate and the Urban Economy,  Wiley  Intersci-
         ence,  New York (forthcoming).~~

     Crocker, T.  D., "Contractual  Choice," Natural  Resources Journal
         13:561-577, October 1973.

     Crocker, T.  D., "Benefit-Cost Analyses of Benefit-Cost Analysis,"
         in H.  M. Peskin and E. P. Seskin, eds., Cost-Benefit  Analy-
         sis and Water Pollution Policy, The UrbarPInstitute,  Washing-
         ton, D.C., 341-360, 1975.
                                   111-43

-------
Davis, K., and L. Russell,  "The Substitution of Hospital  Care for
    Inpatient Care," Review of Economics and Statistics  54:109-120,
    May 1976.

Dhrymes, P. J.,^et al.,  "Criteria for Evaluation of Econometric
    Models," Annals of Economic and Social  Measurement 1/3:291-324,
    1972.

Fama, E. F., and J. D.  MacBeth, "Risk, Return,  and Equilibrium:
    Empirical Tests,"  Journal of Political  Economy 81:607-636, 1973.

Feldstein, M. S., "An  Economic Model  of the Medicare System," Quar-
    terly Journal of Economics 85:1-20, February 1976.

Fisher, F. M., and K.  Shell, The Economic Theory of Price Indices.
    Academic Press, New York, 1972.

Freeman, A. M. Ill, "On  Estimating Air Pollution Control  Benefits
    from Land Value Studies," Journal  of Environmental Economics
    and Management 1:74-83, May 1974.

Green, H. A. J., Aggregation in Economic Analysis:   An Introductory
    Survey. Princeton  Univ. Press, 1964.

Grossman, G., The Demand for Health:   A Theoretical  and  Empirical
    Investigation, Columbia University Press,  1972.

Grossman, M., "On the  Concept of Health Capital and the  Demand for
    Health," Journal of Political Economy 80,  March/April  1972.

Jaksch, J. A., Outpatient Medical Costs Related to Air Pollution  in
    the Portland-Vancouver  Area, Department of  Agricultural  Econo-
    mics, Oregon State University, Corvallis,  Unpublished Ph.D.
    Dissertation, 1973.

Krutilla, J. V., and A.  C.  Fisher, The Economics of Natural  Envi-
    ronments, The Johns  Hopkins Press, Baltimore,  1975.

Lave, L., and E. Seskin, "Air Pollution and Human  Health," Science
    j69_:723-733, 21 August  1970.

Lichtenstein, S., "Bases for Preferences Among  Three Outcome Bets,"
    Journal of Experimental Psychology 69:162-169,  1965.

Lind, R. C., "Spatial  Equilibrium, Rents, and  Public Program Bene-
    fits," Quarterly Journal of Economics 87:188-207, May 1973.

Marschak, J., and R. Radner, Economic Theory of Teams, Yale Uni-
    versity Press, 1972.

Marshall, A., Principles of Economics, 8th  edition, McMillan and
    Co. , London, 1961.
                             111-44

-------
Mercer, L. J., and W.  D. Morgan, Reassessment of the Cross-Florida
    Barge Canal:  A Probability Approach,, Department of Economics,
    University of California, Santa Barbara, June 1975.

Miller, P. R., et al., "Photochemical Oxidant Injury and Bark Beetle
    (Coleoptera scolytidae) Infestation of Ponderosa Pine III, Ef-
    fect of Injury upon Oleoresin Composition, Phloem, Carbohydrates,
    and Phloem pH," Hilgardia 39:135-140, 1968.

Mohring, H., "Alternative Welfare Gain and Loss  Measures," Western
    Economic Journal 9:349-368, December 1971.

National Academy of Sciences, Coordinating Committee on Air Quality
    Studies, "The Effect of Uncertainty on Project Evaluation and
    Design," Air Quality and Automobile Emission Control, Vol. 4,
    The Costs and Benefits of Automobile Emission Control, prepared
    for Committee on Public Works, U.S. Senate,  Washington, D.C.,
    427-470, September 1974.

Nelson, J., Residential Choice, Hedonic Prices,  and the Demand for
    Urban Air Quality, a paper presented at the  Third World of Con-
    gress of the Econometric Society, Toronto, Canada, 16-20 August
    1975.

Niskanen, W. A., and S. H. Hanke, On the Use of  Land Values in Bene-
    fit-Cost Analysis, Department of Economics,  University of Cali-
    fornia, Berkeley (undated).

Oi,  W., "An Essay on Workman's Compensation and  Industrial Safety,"
    Supplemental Studies for the National Commission on State Work-
    man's Compensation Laws, Washington, D.C., 41-106, 1975.

Pesaran, M. H., "On the General Problem of Model Selection,"  The
    Review of Economic Studies 41, April 1974.

Peskin, H. M., Accounting for the Environment:  A Progress Report,
    paper prepared for the Second National Symposium on Corporate
    Social Policy, Chicago, Illinois, 3-5 October, 1974.

Phelps, C. E., and J.  Newhouse, "Coinsurance, the Price of Time,
    and the Demand for Medical Services," Review of Economics and
    Statistics 56:334-342, August 1974.

Pollak, R. A., and M.  L. Wachter, "The Relevance of the Household
    Production Function and Its Implications for the Allocation of
    Time," Journal of Political Economy 83:255-278, April 1975.

Pouliquen, L.  Y., Risk Analysis in Project Appraisal, The Johns Hop-
    kins Press, Baltimore, 1970.

Pruitt, D. C., "Pattern and Level of Risk Taking in Gambling Deci-
    sions," Psychological Review 69:187-201, 1962.
                              111-45

-------
Ramsey, J. B., "Classical  Model  Selection Through Specification
    Error Tests," in P.  Zarembka, ed., Frontiers of Econometrics,
    New York:  Academic  Press, New York, 1974.

Randall, A., et al., "Benefits of Abating Aesthetic Environmental
    Damage," Agric.  Exp.  Sta.  Bull.  618. New Mexico State Univer-
    sity, Las Cruces, New Mexico, 1974.

Rosen, S., "Hedonic  Prices and Implicit  Markets:  Product Differ-
    entiation in Pure Competition,"  Journal  of  Political  Economy
    132:34-56, January/February 1974.

Rosett,.R. N., and L. Huang, "The Effects of Health Insurance on
    the Demand for Medical Care," Journal of Political  Economy 81:
    281-305, March/April  1973.

Schmidt, P., "Choosing Among Alternative Linear Regression Models,"
    Atlantic Economic Journal  1,  July 1974.

Sonquist, J. A., et  al.,  Searching for Structure, Institute for
    Social Research, University  of Michigan, 1973.

Stark, R. W., et al., "Photochemical  Oxidant Injury and Bark Beetle
    Infestation of Ponderosa Pine, I, Incidence of  Bark Beetle In-
    festation of Injured  Trees,"  Hilgardia 39:121-126,  1968.

Thompson, E. A., "The Perfectly  Competitive  Production  of Collective
    Goods,"  Review of Economics  and  Statistics  5JD:1-12, February 1968

U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency, The Clean Air Act,  As Amended
    June 1974, Washington, D.C.,  1974.
                             111-46

-------
ATTACHMENT.   AN ILLUSTRATION OF SOME ISSUES IN BENEFITS ASSESSMENT

     This attachment seeks to illustrate the application of the fore-
going discussion to a real world problem by analyzing the benefits ac-
cruing from controlling a single class of pollutants in a specific
locality.

     1.    Introduction

          Conventional microeconomic theory constructs  an extremely
     general conceptualization of the consumer or producer decision mak-
     ing process.   For example, in the case of the consumer,  households
     are assumed to allocate their budgets so as to maximize  the utility
     they derive from the purchase and consumption of goods and services
     subject to the constraints imposed by the resources to which they
     have access as well  as the prices of the commodities available to
     them.   Since  the conceptualization is extremely general  and,there-
     fore,abstract, many  issues that are of importance  to particular ap-
     plications are assumed to be irrelevant in order to focus  attention
     on  the key principles governing consumer choice.

          However,  once the framework is applied to a specific  set of
     decisions, such as those involving the behavior of sufferers from
     air pollution, then  an array of details must be reviewed.   These
     details are indeed relevant to the usefulness of the models on
     which  the decisions  are to be based and to the behavioral  outcomes
     that these models would predict.  Inclusion of these details con-
     siderably complicates the analytic, and even more  the econometric
     treatment of  the benefits of air pollution control; but  outright
     omission in the interests of tractability may grossly misrepresent
     the phenomena  involved.  By focusing upon a particular type of mar-
     ket in an identifiable locale, the reader should become  more sensi-
     tive to the most important of the aforementioned details and the
     difficulties  one faces in trying to account for them.
                                  111-47

-------
     The natural  framework of analysis for the economist is the
market, the interaction of buyers and sellers.  Air pollution af-
fects behavior in a wide variety of markets,  each of which has its
own unique structure.   As used here, the term "markets" is meant
to apply to all air pollution control benefits studies employing
market-established prices or some surrogate as a means of estab-
lishing benefit assessments.   The term is thus meant to encompass
each of the methods of assessment (technical  coefficients, market,
opinion surveys,  litegation,  political  expressions, and Delphi)
that Waddell  (1974) distinguished.   The presumption is that a
model, whether implicit or explicit, of a market is present when
any one of these  methods is  employed in a given situation.  That
is, at its roots, any  use of one of these methods involves some
perspective of the structure of buyer and seller interaction.

     The benefits of air pollution  control  in the particular mar-
ket to be discussed are probably trivial  relative to the benefits
in markets such as human health and life, materials, housing, and
assorted other buyer and seller interactions  in which  air pollu-
tion is thought to have a significant role.   Nevertheless, this
case is very illustrative for each  of its peculiarities are pre-
sent in one or more of the markets  that are typically  studied for
purposes of estimating the benefits of  air  pollution control.  In
addition, this case illustrates the difficulties encountered in
analyzing the recreation benefits of water  pollution control  which
have been mentioned in the other papers of  the report.   Recreation
benefits are, it  is frequently asserted,  a  major portion of the to-
tal benefits  of water  pollution control.

2.   Presentation of the_P_rob1em

     The San  Bernardino Mountains of Southern California serve as
one of the primary outdoor recreational  resources available to the
approximately 11  million people of  the  Los  Angeles  Basin.   On the
                               11-48

-------
slopes of these frequently extremely steep mountains grows a
highly varied set of plant communities ranging from hot desert
to sub-artic.  The lower portions are dominated by a fairly dense
coniferous forest consisting primarily of ponderosa pine and white
fir.  Here are found the most heavily used outdoor recreational
facilities, including hiking trails, campgrounds, lakes, small
mostly intermittent streams, and arrays of publicly and privately
provided outdoor recreational amenities, such as cabins and res-
taurants.

     Most users of these facilities would probably agree that the
ponderosa pine, an esthetically pleasing tree that is large, tall,
shady, and straight-stemmed, contributes significantly to their
outdoor recreational experiences.  Recently, however, a relation
has been found between ozone, or ambient oxidants, and suscepti-
bility of this pine to attack by insects.  It is thought that
the combined action of insects and pollutants results in higher
rates of needle drop and death than the action of insects alone.
(Miller et al. , 1968; Stark et a!., 1968; Cobb and Stark, 1970).

     Let us presume that the biological relationship between photo-
chemical  oxidants and ponderosa pine morbidity and mortality has
been reasonably well established.  The problem facing the econo-
mist, then, is to tie to this biological relation a welfare mea-
sure that simultaneously registers the values of outdoor recrea-
tionists and is meaningful to air pollution control decision makers.
That is,  the economist's task is to assess the value outdoor recrea-
tionists place upon the presence of healthy ponderosa pine.

     This task is not easy, since neither air pollution control,
the services of ponderosa pine forests to outdoor recreation ex-
periences, nor recreation experiences themselves are, for the most
part, exchanged in organized, explicit markets permitting direct
observation of the relative values households attach to such goods
and services.  One must therefore infer the relative values house-
holds attach to ponderosa pine in various states of health from
                              111-49

-------
observations on the rates at which these households voluntarily
substitute one state for another and the market values of the
resources they expend in performing these substitutions.

     However, in order to make these inferences, all  other fac-
tors that influence the voluntary rate of substitution must be
accounted for.  This accounting requires the construction of a
model of the nature of buyer and seller interaction in outdoor
recreation.   Some of the structural features of the outdoor
recreational market that, ideally, should be integrated into
this model are described below.   With a bit of reflection, the
reader will  recognize that similar features (in kind, if not in
degree) are to be found in many of the actual  markets studied in
the past to ascertain the benefits of air pollution control.  For
example, whenever the term "outdoor recreation" appears, the term
"housing" or -"state of health" would generally serve  just as well.
(Vars and Sorenson,  1975).

3.   Multi-Dimensional Heterogeneity

     The sites a household considers in planning its  outdoor re-
creational activities are heterogeneous rather than homogeneous.
That is, they exhibit great differences in a number of different
dimensions to which the household typically attaches  value.   Dif-
ferences in the physical recreation sites themselves  are obvious
enough.  For example, these differences may be manifested in size,
number of campsites, topography, forest type and condition,  and
other attributes.

     But an outdoor recreational site embodies more than the phy-
sical site itself.   It is a composite consisting of the site and
its accessibility with respect to alternative recreational sites
and the household's residence.   Accessibility of sites differs
greatly in terms of the pecuniary and temporal outlays required
and in terms of the quality of transport mode and route.  More-
over, outdoor recreational sites, as well as the transport modes

                              111-50

-------
and  routes  that  provide access differ greatly in the cultural
backgrounds  of the people who frequent them, the assortment of
privately owned  goods available, the quality and quantity of
common  property  and publicly owned goods provided, and conges-
tion.

     The state of affairs described above is really not alto-
gether  unusual in applied economic analysis.  Just about any en-
tity a  household values can be viewed as a composite of several
attributes.   Frequently, these components will differ substan-
tially  among various sellers and among various buyers.   Econo-
mists nevertheless habitually aggregate these heterogeneous enti-
ties into units  of analysis they term goods, industries, etc.
The aggregate unit of analysis is usually probably a good approxi-
mation  of the most informative unit for the purpose at hand.   How-
ever, in the economic analysis of outdoor recreation markets,  the
question of the  most informative units of anlaysis must be ap-
proached with a  good deal more caution than is customary.   The
reasons are several.

     First,  at least to the casual  observer, households appear to
exhibit great differences in the utility they derive from outdoor
recreation.   They differ greatly in the value they attach to  any
form whatsoever  of outdoor recreation, as well as in the relative
importance they  associate with various forms of outdoor recrea-
tion.   In addition, for any particular form (e.g., viewing scenery),
they differ in their preferences for the various components of
the form.  All this implies that the differences observed among
outdoor recreational  sites influence the market.  To some extent,
particularly in  the case of accessibility,  the observed differences
might not be matters  of chance but are instead demand-induced.

     Second, the consumer and the producer  are able to  exercise
much less discretion  as to the components of the commodity in  the
case of outdoor recreation.   The household  that consumes  outdoor
recreation experiences has substantial  discretion with  respect to
                              111-51

-------
the set of alternative recreational  opportunities, but, once the
choice is made, many subsequent events are outside its control.
For example, when arriving in the mountains, the household is un-
able to control the congestion at a  site it does not own.   There-
fore, it is unable to control the extent of deterioration  in the
quality of services it had expected  to obtain at the site.  Since
this can greatly affect the utility  of recreation and typically
occurs without the direct intermediation of the market, there
exists a large potential  for substantial externalities in  out-
door recreational markets.

     Third, from the perspective of  the individual  household, the
great variety of outdoor  recreational  sites available in Southern
California  means that they are imperfect substitutes for one an-
other.   Any fairly large  collection  of sites is likely to  exhibit
a range of  substitutive relations extending from rather close to
nonexistent.  Is the beach a close substitute for the mountains?
In addition, given the near impossibility of untying the packages
into which  the components of most sites are bound and, given the
limited number of sites the household  is likely to consider, there
may exist a major difference in the  degree of substitutability that
pairs of households assign to the same pair of sites.  This  implies
that a single outdoor recreation market does not exist.  Instead,
there seems to be a set of markets that are more or less related to
one another.

     One serious consequence of this market segmentation is  that
the supply  and demand relations that constitute each market  seg-
ment can behave in different fashions  across segments.   Price
elasticity  of demand for  a particular  activity may be high in
one segment and low in another; one  segment may have excess  de-
mand for a  certain activity, while another may have excess sup-
ply.  All this implies that prices,  whether implicit or explicit,
may vary across the segments.  Moreover, an exogenous change that
impacts forecefully on one segment may have no impact whatsoever
in another  segment.

                              111-52

-------
     This segmentation of the outdoor recreation market is nour-
ished by the high cost for households of information about market
conditions.  Information is clearly an important factor in house-
hold decisions when one recognizes the great variety of outdoor
recreational opportunities and the differences in preferences
among households for these opportunities.  However, it seems un-
likely that households can afford to survey all  or even a major
part of their potential opportunities.  Instead, they limit their
search to some portion, a delineation probably based on various
rules of thumb reflecting prevailing knowledge about opportunities
that are good substitutes for one another.

4.   Costs_of Market Participation

     To a perhaps greater extent than for many other commodities,
the act of participation in the various segments of the outdoor
recreation market is costly.  For several reasons, the cost of
the act of participation tends to harden the discrepancies in
prices across market segments.  First, as previously noted, since
heterogeneity in available outdoor recreational  opportunities is
pervasive and considerable and tastes regarding  these differences
are quite important, substantial search by a household may be re-
quired to assure a satisfactory recreational experience.

     Second, the consumption of outdoor recreation generally re-
quires that the household remove itself from its permanent resi-
dence and selectively travel to one or more sites at which the
chosen combination of the components of the recreation package
afe thought to exist.  Outdoor recreation does not have the port-
ability of the typical  commodity.  Since the commodity cannot be
carried from one location to another, the household experiences
pecuniary and temporal  costs in overcoming  the distance necessary
to match household to site.   Third, even after the household's
search has been terminated and the distance to the site overcome,
actual participation usually requires the purchase of complemen-
tary inputs.

                              111-53

-------
     These costs imply that the prospective gains from becoming
an active participant in the market may have to be quite substan-
tial in order to warrant such participation.  The values of those
who do not participate are not registered in the market.  The
prospective gains the household perceives from participation can
arise from changes in the household's preferences with respect to
different combinations of outdoor recreation packages and with
respect to recreational versus non-recreational commodities.  They
can also arise from changes in the components and in the implicit
and explicit prices of the different packages available on the mar-
ket.

     Barring changes of these sorts, the high cost of market par-
ticipation suggests that participation is likely to be intermittent
rather than continuous for most households.   This, in turn, im-
plies that the set of households one observes participating, and
thus determining the outcome of market transactions in any fairly
short time period, might not be representative of the entire pop-
ulation of households.

5.   Institutional and Temporal Constraints

     Apart from the problems that multi-dimensional heterogeneity,
information, and the costs of market participation introduce, the
outdoor recreational market bears little semblance to a perfectly
free market.  Indeed, the outdoor recreational market in Southern
California has been subjected to a number of public institutional
controls, including assorted health and safety regulation, non-
price rationing., such as queuing, and zoning regulations intended
to inhibit congestion.  In effect, these controls reduce the do-
main over which the market is able to exercise discretion in ad-
justing to changing situations.

     Although the reductions in negative externalities which these
controls permit may well exceed any losses in efficiency which the
controls engender, such losses are nevertheless undoubtedly present

                              111-54

-------
They  involve the  losses present when every household is forced
to consume and/or produce in more or less the same manner and
the flexibility that is lost when the only parameter subject to
occasional adjustment is the value of the regulation.  Moreover,
to the extent they reduce substitutability among sites, the con-
trols intensify whatever tendency toward market segmentation al-
ready exists.

     The constraints the household faces while recreating are
not only budgetary and those publicly designed to shape its ac-
tivities.  Most households are unable to allocate their time in
any arbitrarily desired way.  Instead, the household's free time
for outdoor recreation is structured and limited by inalterable
work schedules.  In the case of family units, work and education
schedules may interact, so as to curtail family recreational time
futther.  Even individuals who are self-employed are constrained
to the extent they must interact with other individuals and busi-
nesses .

6.   Conclusion

     All of the issues discussed above are relevant to the assess-
ment of effects that changes in the health state of the ponderosa
pine forest have upon the choice behavior of outdoor recreation-
ists in Southern California.  The discussion is, in fact,  germane
to most, if not all, markets that are studied to assess the bene-
fits of air pollution control.   Nevertheless, a model  capable of
capturing the full impact of the multi-dimensional  heterogeneity,
cost of information and market participation, and institutional
and temporal  constraints of the outdoor recreation market  upon
the household's decision problem would indeed be unusual.   In
any model that is to have real  application, the treatment  of many
and sometimes most of the issues raised above must of necessity
be conjectural.  That is,  in his applications of a model  of bene-
ficiary behavior, the investigator must be willing to take a sub-
set of these issues as already settled for the application in

                              111-55

-------
question.  Both the limited availability of suitable data and
the limited abilities of investigators in model  construction dic-
tate the failure to comprehend in each instance  the range of these
issues.

     Most fundamentally, in any attempt at benefit assessment one
must examine the role the assessment is to have  in the decision
making process.  In effect, one must know with some precision the
criteria to be used to evaluate the  assessment as  well  as the ob-
jectives of the assessment effort.   Such knowledge permits the in-
vestigator to isolate those facets and issues  with significant
implications for decisions from the  less important ones.   (Crocker,
1975).
                             111-56

-------
                  IV.   BENEFITS OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
                               Joe B. Stevens
                           Oregon State University
A.   INTRODUCTION
     Despite the richness of the literature in applied welfare econo-
mics and benefit-cost analysis, there is currently very little concrete
knowledge of the extent of economic benefit which would result if water
quality were brought up to state and Federal standards.  The develop-
ment of what knowledge does exist has been very asymmetric.  Estimates
of production losses, including conventional waterborne disease, are
reasonably firm; unfortunately, only a small fraction of the potential
benefits appear to be in these areas.  The predominant share of the
potential benefits appear to be in the categories of recreation, aesthe-
tic uses, and option demands, where the methodologies for simulating
consumers' willingness to pay for quality improvements are much less
well developed.

     The lack of adequate, general izable behavioral  relationships be-
tween water quality and consumer behavior, and hence, willingness to
pay for quality improvements, is thus the predominant problem in as-
sessing pollution control benefits.  There is simply inadequate knowl-
edge concerning why people "consume" leisure-type environmental acti-
vities, and especially how changes  in water quality  (objective and/or
perceived) affect these consumption activities.  Some creditable work
has been done in estimating recreation benefits from pollution control
in small areas,  but extrapolation of these studies to national  aggre-
gates is not currently possible with any degree of precision.  The mon-
etization of aesthetic and option demand is, at present, even less well
developed than for active recreation uses.

     Increased precision in the measurement of consumption benefits
(recreation, aesthetics, option demand)  will come slowly and probably
fortuitously in the absence of an expanded U.S. EPA  role in benefit
estimation.   This is particularly true for the evaluation of efficiency
                                     IV-

-------
at an aggregate level.  Decentralized academic researchers do not have
an incentive system which encourages them to derive "premature" esti-
mates of national  benefits p_£ to structure their partial equilibria
analyses to facilitate this derivation by U.S. EPA or other institu-
tions.  Asking even the best consulting firm to extrapolate existing
partial analyses when these were not designed to be extrapolated is a
hopeless strategy.

     Thus, U.S. EPA should assume an expanded role in designing and
funding high-quality analyses of consumption benefits, where these
analyses have the  express objective of being extrapolated to national
levels.  As a complement to this activity, a basic commitment should
be made by EPA to  establish a long-term "behavioral monitoring system"
analogous to that  established by the U.S.  Geological  Survey for assess-
ing water quality.   Common socio-economic  and physical data sets need
to be maintained over time at sites where  water quality changes are, in
fact, occurring.  The rationale is  that a  much more adequate knowledge
of behavioral response with respect to water quality  changes must be
established before  the efficiency of water quality enhancement can be
assessed with any  substantial precision.
                                  IV-2

-------
B.   CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS

     This section is intended only as an overview of the welfare eco-
nomic foundations of benefit estimation in water pollution control,
since several other sources treat this essential topic in much more
detail.   It identifies and synthesizes the implications of general
and specific problems affecting current benefit estimates, by cate-
gory of damage (e.g., health, recreation), and offers a set of sug-
gestions for improving the quality of future estimates.

     1.    Role of Benefit-Cost Analysis

          Historically, benefit-cost analysis has been a valuable
     tool for analyzing the economic worthwhileness of alternative
     publjc policies.  Although its origin can be  traced to legisla-
     tive mandates (e.g., the Flood Control Act of 1936), rather than
     theoretical modeling, substantial theoretical and empirical  lit-
     erature on benefit-cost analysis now exists.  The relevance of
     this literature to the analysis of benefits and costs of water
     pollution policy has been documented in a 1973 EPA Symposium,
     the proceedings of which are now in print and available to admin-
     istrators and researchers (Peskin and Seskin, 1975).

          A particular policy can be supported by two antagonists,
     each of whom views the policy as contributing to a different ob-
     jective.  Also, it is uncommon in the political world that the
     real objectives of the policy's promoters will be explicitly sta-
     ted, if in fact, the promoters are actually capable of articula-
     ting these objectives.  Indeed, the "muddling through" or "dis-
     jointed incremental" approach to public policy (Lindblom, 1959)
     rests largely on the notion that agreement on "means" (i.e., poli-
     cies) is primary, and that agreement on "ends" (i.e., objectives)
     is  secondary and perhaps even unnecessary.

          Benefit-cost analysis, on the other hand, presupposes that
     objectives d_p_ matter in the public policy process.  Simply stated,
                                  IV-3

-------
the benefit-cost analyst says:   "If X (or Y or Z)  is  your objec-
tive, then that particular objective is  enhanced (or  impeded)
by the policy or program under  consideration."  The variety of
objectives to which benefit-cost analysis can be addressed is
limited, yet the tools are powerful  if economic efficiency is
a relevant objective.

     Three possible objectives  of water  pollution  control  poli-
cy are:
     •    To make efficient use of resources  associated with
          water use
     •    To distribute goods and services,  including those
          which are water-related, in an "equitable"  manner
     •    To avoid ecological irreversibilities.
     Benefit-cost analysis can make a potential  contribution to
each of these.   However, a "state of the art"  assessment of bene-
fits from water quality improvement can most productively be
focused on "national  efficiency"  benefits,  or  those which would
arise from the increased value of goods and services made possi-
ble by water pollution policies.   Economic  science is far more
advanced in contributing to this  objective  than  to the two other
objectives.

     Differential incidence of benefits and costs  among various
people or groups may  arise from different water  pollution poli-
cies, and decision makers may choose to look at  the problem par-
tially or solely in this  context.   The  state of economic  science
at present is inadequate to define distributional  benefits in
a normative sense, but instead is limited to a positive descrip-
tion of "who gains,"  "who loses," and "how  much."   Such descrip-
tions are inherently  useful, and  should be  included in any assess-
ment of pollution control benefits and/or costs.   Finally, benefit-
                              IV-4

-------
cost analysis may be used to identify the costs of maintaining a
designated water quality standard, even though the benefits from
maintaining this standard may not be fully quantifiable or even
perceived at this time  (Krutilla, 1967).

2.   Estimation of Benefits

     Efficiency benefits should be defined in terms of the total
value to users of increases in the national output of goods and
services, where total value is defined in terms of willingness of
users to pay for the additional output.  Because it is often not
feasible to measure individual demand functions, and hence, the
willingness to pay by users, four alternative techniques for as-
sessing these benefits  have been devised.

     If markets for the goods and services exist, and if the
additional output does  not have a significant effect on price,
then market prices can  be used to assess benefits.  This technique
will be of little value in assessing water pollution control  bene-
fits, since markets are seldom used directly to determine water
quantities or qualities.  Simulated markets, including demand func-
tions, supply functions, and/or simulated market outcomes, can be
used as a proxy for real markets.  While the methodology for this
technique is rudimentary in its development, it appears to be the
only relevant technique for evaluating water quality benefits
where outputs are "consumed" directly by final users.   In particu-
lar, benefits to recreation and aesthetics will need to be evalua-
ted by this method.

     If the output of investment is an intermediate good, rather
than one intended for final consumption, then changes  in the net
income of producers  (or consumers), with and without pollution,
may be used to reflect benefits.   This method will be useful  pri-
marily for determining benefits from controlling industrial
                             IV-5

-------
and agricultural pollution, and from reduced waterborne disease.
Finally, if computation of net income changes is not feasible,
the cost of the most likely alternative for attaining the same
objective can be used to measure benefits.  The rationale behind
this method is that benefits are obtained to the extent that re-
sources are thereby released for the creation of other goods and
services.

     A second category of benefits, often termed "secondary bene-
fits," are those which might result from the use of resources
which would otherwise be unemployed or underemployed (Haveman and
Krutilla, 1968).  In general, one would not expect to find sub-
stantially improved employment opportunities for otherwise under-
employed resources, if national water quality were restored to
meet Federal  and state standards.  The reason for this expectation
is that water pollution has probably occurred gradully enough that
the market has had time to re-allocate resources away from polluted
areas.

3.   Special  Considerations

     If market data could be relied on extensively for calculating
benefits, care would need to be exercised to see that the markets
were competitive and to account for project-induced changes in price
Under such circumstances, welfare economic theory provides a basis
for asserting that prices reflect social  values, provided that one
accepts the prevailing income distribution as "proper".  In the
case of water pollution, however, much reliance in benefit evalua-
tion must be  placed on simulation of markets for non-market goods
such as outdoor recreation, and calculation of net income changes.
Therefore, special attention would need to be given to several
criteria which relate to the internal consistency of the analysis.

     Thus, inferences as to technical relationships should be
at the highest "state of the art" possible within the relevant
                             IV-6

-------
discipline.  For example, the nature and extent of man-made pollu-
tion should be identified, along with marginal treatment costs for
these pollutants.  To the extent feasible, inferences of technical
relationships should be both complete (e.g., no major omissions
in types of waterborne diseases) and capable of replication.

     Although direct market prices for goods and services produced
by water pollution control will be of limited value in the direct
assessment of benefits, some reliance must of necessity be placed
on real or synthesized price data in the simulation of markets for
certain goods and services.  Examples include:

     •    Health
               cost of medical  treatment
               value of time lost to illness
               value of human life (present value
               of future earnings)
     •    Outdoor Recreation
               costs of vehicle operation and travel
               value of time spent in travel
     •    Production
               marginal costs of waste treatment for
               various types and levels of effluents.

     Use of price data where market prices are artifically set,
either by imperfect competition or through public policy, should
theoretically be discouraged.  This is easier said than done,  when
one considers this varied range of contrived market outcomes:

     t    Health
               restricted supply of medical personnel
     t    Recreation
               OPEC policy on U.S. oil imports
               auto prices administered by U.S.
               manufacturers
                             IV-7

-------
          Production
               degree of price competition among sup-
               pliers of pollution control equipment
               price support levels of farm crops lost
               to siltation and brackish water.
About the only reasonable expectation is  that the analyst be able
to identify major price imperfections where knowledge of such has
been documented (e.g., farm price supports).

     Where price data are relevant in the synthesis  of proxies for,
"willingness to pay," the expected level  of such prices over the
lifetime of the project needs to be identified.   Use of current
prices such as, for example, the current  cost of travel, may lead
to inflated or deflated estimates of benefits, depending on what
constitutes a "reasonable" long-term price expectation.

     To the extent possible, the analyst  should identify signifi-
cant technological externalities which would  be alleviated by ex-
panded policies of water pollution control.   In fact, this should
form the substance of benefit calculations for improvements in wa-
ter quality; these improvements  would reduce  the level of negative
externalities to users (e.g., disease, degraded recreation oppor-
tunities).  National efficiency  benefits, regardless of method of
calculation, should be net of pecuniary externalities (income trans-
fers).  Especially if the "net income" approach is used in benefit
calculations, care should be taken that offsetting income losses are
included in the analysis.  Also  to be questioned or  excluded are
windfall net rents which may accrue to fixed  assets  without corres-
ponding increases in outputs of  goods and services.

     Where the investment project for augmenting water quality lev-
els is expected to produce benefits extending over several years,
the annual increment (or decrement) to benefits should be identi-
fied, and the present value of current and future benefit streams
should be computed.   Goods and services provided directly to con-
                               IV-8

-------
sumers through water quality restoration are of particular concern
here, in that the income elasticity of demand for different services
may vary widely.

     With respect to human health, research indicates that the
value of the human agent has risen markedly over time (Schultz,
1968).  So, too, has the demand for services to maintain the hu-
man agent,  including health services.  One would suspect a high
and rising  income elasticity, then, for avoidance of waterborne
diseases.   Within the category of outdoor recreation, there is
reason to suspect that a substantial  range exists in the income
elasticities for different activities, including some "inferior"
goods (Stevens, 1966).  Conceptually this poses a weighting problem
for assessment of benefits at the national level, where  annual
changes in  benefits are a function of the composition of current-
year benefits (by recreation activity), the expected income growth
in the economy, and the income elasticities of the different acti-
vities.

     These  time-related changes should be identified in  computing
annual benefit streams.  Inclusion of such calculations  and break-
down of the requisite investment into installation cost  and operat-
ing cost components would improve both the benefit and cost esti-
mates, since investment projects for improving water quality would
be capital-intensive and long-lived in nature.
                             IV-9

-------
C.    GENERAL PROBLEMS

     This and the following section are meant to be synoptic statements
on  the state-of-the-art,  rather than a detailed review of empirical
studies on benefit estimation.

     1.   State of Damage Functions

          The most complete and useful  review of empirical  attempts  to
     estimate water pollution control  benefits  is Tihansky's chapter
     in Peskin and Seskin (1975).   To  quote  selectively from his  con-
     clusions:   "This paper reviews an  extensive compilation of major
     benefit studies.   From an  original  collection of  almost two  hund-
     red studies,  approximately sixty  are  selected as  contributing most
     to the conceptual  framework and empirical  insights  of  benefit eval-
     uation.   Of the selected studies,  less  than 30  percent  are theore-
     tically valid,  but even fewer  seem cognizant of the  applicability,
     let alone  the existence, of welfare economics ...  If only recrea-
     tional  studies  are considered,  fewer  than  10 percent follow  from
     theory ...  Although  there  is no theoretical  basis  for most benefit
     values,  equally discouraging is the paucity of  empirically derived
     damage functions.  Only 20  percent  of the  surveyed  literature de-
     rives  dose-response  relations  from  on-site  data.  With  recreation
     studies,  this  proportion decreases  to 10 percent."

          Despite  some allegations  to the contrary, water quality data
     are  relatively  abundant.  The  real  problem,  however, is the  lack  of
     conceptually  valid functional   relationships  between water quality
     parameters  and  associated human behavior.   We need to know:

         •    How economic activity affects the  nature and  con-
              centration of waterborne pollutants

         •    How the latter affects behavioral  perceptions of
              water quality
         •    How this perception is translated  into behavioral
              decisions.
                                  IV-10

-------
      Welfare  economics is a useful and integrative conceptual base
 for  benefit estimation, but existing facts often have multiple in-
 terpretations  since functional relationships well-founded in theory
 have  usually  not been established.  Generally speaking, welfare
 economics  is  a  "non-problem" in that the accumulation of theore-
 tical insights  has far outrun the empirical implementation of the
 theory.

     The current "state-of-the-art" in assessing water pollution
control benefits strongly reflects an asymmetric development in
terms of establishing such functional relationships.  The reasons
are partly economic and partly institutional.   At an earlier stage
of economic development in the U.S., the primary concern with water
quality was for human health and safety.   The whole historical  thrust
of the Public Health Service has to do with developing functional
relationships between pollutants and waterborne disease.   Especially
with the more virulent and contagious diseases, a fairly simple be-
haviral response was assumed, i.e., avoidance.

     As economic development progressed,  natural  resources  were
increasingly regarded as items for consumption, rather than produc-
tion.  At an institutional level, the Public Health Service con-
tinued to be concerned with the production of health.   Elsewhere  in
government, water-based leisure (and most other forms  of  recreation)
were evidently regarded as something to be done,  not studied.   In-
creased awareness of this knowledge gap led to  the  creation of  the
Outdoor Recreation Resources Review Commission  and  subsequent efforts
elsewhere in government.

     Within this set of poorly understood leisure-type phenomena
are those which relate changes in water quality to  changes  in con-
sumer behavior.  In particular,  damage  functions  which relate to
active recreational uses  of water or to more vaguely  defined  aesthe-
tic uses have not been established to any substantial  degree.   Thus,
there is inadequate knowledge of the whole set  of relationships
                             IV-11

-------
concerning why people "consume" leisure-type environmental  activi-
ties, and how real  and/or perceived water quality affects these con-
sumption activities.   Individual  researchers have done creditable
work in specifying  particular water quality parameters and  relating
these to particular recreational  activities, but there is nothing
resembling a comprehensive research effort in this area.

     The knowledge  which does exist about behavioral  responses with
respect to changes  in water quality is fragmentary.   More crucial
to the task at hand is that it deals with partial  equilibria,  i.e.,
variables which are crucial in the user's decision framework are
often assumed as constants in existing analyses.   In  particular,
most of the existing work on recreation benefits assumes  a  constant
level of water quality in bodies  of water other than  the  particular
one being researched.  In that this group of other sites  probably con-
tains some which are substitutes  for the one under study, the  analy-
tical models are incompletely specified and, hence,  less  useful  than
would be desired for purposes of  national  aggregation. The genera-
tion of national benefit estimates implies solutions  which  are more
general with respect to competing sites than is permitted by the
current literature.

     This is not surprising, in that the immediate objectives  of
research have usually been to measure costs and benefits  of control-
ling specific water pollutants in specific bodies  of  water.   Ten
years ago, when estimation of recreation benefits  was in  its first
primitive stages, it was a real challenge to perform  the  analysis,
let alone worry about extrapolation to higher levels  of aggregation.
It is still generally acknowledged that consumers  have a  broader
preference set than just the particular river or lake under study.
The state-of-the-art is to assume away the influence  of competing
streams and how recreationists might react to more general  water
quality changes.

     The needed knowledge of behavioral responses  to  changing
water quality levels has not progressed to the point  where
                              IV-12

-------
reasonable extrapolation can be made with any degree of precision.
Although estimates of national benefits have been derived in the
past (e.g., Unger  et a]_.. 1974), these estimates are based on ex-
trapolations which have neither a sound conceptual footing nor an
underlying accumulation of coherent empirical work.  Tihansky's
(1975) review of such studies reveals that the bulk of water qua-
lity benefits seem generally to be in those areas where the "state-
of-the-art" is least developed, particularly in the areas of recrea-
tion, aesthetics, and option demands.  The same conclusion is also
reached in this present paper.

2.   Classification and Aggregation of Benefits

     That proportion of specific pollutants which are man-made,
rather than naturally occurring, and the approximate control  costs
for both man-made and natural pollution are often known with  some
degree of precision.  The general tendency has been to impute aver-
age (proportional) costs to control of man-made pollutants.   How-
ever, marginal costs (over and above those required to treat  natural
pollutants) would be a more appropriate measure.   This can lead to
overstating the benefits of pollution control.

     There is only a weak consistency in the quality of estimates
among the various benefit categories.  Although health and produc-
tion benefits are relatively firm, or at least susceptible to re-
finement through further analysis, this is not the case with  consump-
tion benefits (recreation and aesthetics).  These estimates  must
currently rely on highly simplifying assumptions  in order to  utilize
existing research not intended for purposes of extrapolation.

     As the "state-of-the-art" develops in benefit estimation, knowl-
edge of the growth rates of benefit streams becomes increasingly im-
portant.  Technological change in the future is likely to be  greater
for production activities than for consumption activities.  Hence,
the costs of pollution to production activities (and hence,  potential
benefits) may be reduced over time as new technology is developed
                              IV-13

-------
and implemented to alleviate those problems.   Considering health
as a "production" activity in a manner consistent with human capi-
tal theory, the per unit benefit values may rise over time as the
value of human capital  rises relative to that of physical capital.
Some consumption benefit streams may grow and some may decline,
depending in part on the income elasticity of demand for water-
based services.

     The decision context implicit in an assessment of national
benefits and costs is one of aggregate efficiency in water resource
use.  The broad question is "Do the national  benefits of cleaning
up our water outweigh the costs?"  In reality, the issue of whether
or not this is the most productive question to be asked must be
faced.  Obviously, a good answer to the larger question would be
immensely valuable to policy makers.

     On the other hand, asking the broad question about an over-
all benefit-cost ratio  may conceal the fact that there are a host
of individual  benefit-cost ratios (some high, some low) for cleaning
up specific pollutants  and for cleaning up or protecting specific
areas.  If the latter is a more appropriate decision context, then
criticism of the state-of-the-art has to be mitigated to some degree.
Problems with  the totality of behavioral responses become less cru-
cial, and a re-focusing on the more pressing  responses is facili-
tated.

3.   Other Problems

     Even if the question of aggregate efficiency of water quality
enhancement could be answered definitively, this would be suffi-
cient information only  if policy makers were  interested solely in
economic efficiency.  This is obviously not realistic, as most
policy makers  are also  interested in distributional  issues.  Hhe-
ther access to goods and services would be redistributed in a pro-
gressive or regressive  manner among individuals is information
which is almost totally lacking in the benefits literature.
                             IV-14

-------
     Similarly, pollution control might be progressive, if
the costs of pollution, to producers now paid through higher
product prices and/or utility rates, were met largely through
Federal expenditures financed by a reasonably progressive
tax system.  On the other hand, pollution control could be
regressive if the dominant beneficiaries are white-collar,
urban recreationists.  In addition, information is also
needed on redistribution at a more aggregate level, e.g.,
urban versus rural states, metropolitan vs. rural areas.

     It is crucial that benefits and costs be estimated for a
variety of levels of water quality; this is not generally found
in the literature.  Such a procedure would permit marginal  analy-
sis by allowing water quality standards to be viewed as variables,
rather than basic parameters to be met at all  costs.   In light of
current concern about the high costs of meeting existing standards,
the estimation of benefits and costs for a range of water quality
standards  becomes very crucial information.
                             IV-15

-------
D.    SPECIFIC PROBLEMS

     This section discusses  problems  inherent  in  estimation  of speci-
fic benefit categories,  including  health,  production,  recreation,  aesthe-
tic,  and ecological  benefits,  and  property values.

     1.    Health  Benefits

          It would appear  that extensive pre-treatment of  drinking water,
     especially chlorination,  has  already  greatly reduced  the  incidence
     of  conventional  waterborne disease outbreaks, and that  further  defi-
     nition of benefits  depends on  how accurately the  following can  be
     quantified:
               Extent of  such diseases as hepatitis, gastroenteritis,
               salmonellosis, and typhoid
               Extent to  which these outbreaks can be identified as
               waterborne, at both current and standard levels of
               water quality
               Incidence  of the outbreaks by morbidity and mortality
               classifications
               Assignment of unit values, in monetary terms, to the
               above categories.
         Current estimates of benefits in the above categories include
     1 billion  (Unger, et al. , 1974), 373 million (Liu, 1970), 356 mil-
     lion (Lackner, 1973), and 120 million (Sokoloski, 1973).  While
     the variation in these estimates appears to be substantial, it is
     largely due to different working assumptions about facts and func-
     tional relationships.

         Determination of the real extent of damages from conventional
     diseases is tractable, requiring additional time and money.  Such
     an allocation is not of high priority, given the softness of the
     benefit estimates in other categories, particularly recreation and
                                 IV-16

-------
aesthetics.  If such an allocation should be deemed desirable,
more attention should be given to the following:
     •    Assignment of mortality values according to human
          capital theory, i.e., using expected present value
          of future earnings as the measure of benefit
     •    Recognition that both the incidence of mortality
          and expected lifetime earnings are age/sex/race-
          specific rather than constant over the population
     •    Recognition that health services are generally
          income-elastic in demand
     •    Recognition that costs of medical treatment have
          risen secularly, as compared to other commodities.
     The key problem in quantifying health benefits is how best
to deal with uncertain, long-term, and largely unknown water qua-
lity-health relationships, such as the presence of carcinogens
and certain inorganic compounds in water.  Although a consumer's
perception of the importance of these events is subject to con-
siderable emotion, misunderstanding, and lack of an informed base
from which to make judgments, option value constructs should be
explored within this category as well as in the categories of re-
creation and aesthetics.  The reasons for this view are that will-
ingness to pay can arise from  desires for future as well  as cur-
rent consumption, option demand can be viewed as willingness to
pay for future supplies of a specified good and non-carcinogenic
drinking water is surely one such good.

     Although it was suggested above that conversion to monetary
values be based on a productivity approach (present value of future
earnings), an alternative willingness-to-pay framework is now being
developed in the literature (Mishan, 1971).  An individual's willing'
ness to pay to avoid contracting cancer through drinking water, for
example, has an upper bound in terms of his own future productivity,
if one makes the value judgment that the individual should be re-
sponsible for his own actions and liabilities.  On the other hand,
society may be willing, explicitly or implicitly, to expand the
                              IV-17

-------
effective willingness to pay of an individual  beyond that which he,
himself, Would be able to pay (i.e.,  his future earnings).  The
possibility of such revealed preferences, i.e., private and public
trade-offs between the probability of death and other goods and
services, need to be better understood in the  context of evaluating
serious health hazards with low probabilities.

2.   Production Benefits

     The principal specific problem within this category is the
assumption that the marginal costs of water treatment due to man-
made pollutants, and hence the benefits from pollution control,
are equal to'the prorated portion of  the average cost of treatment
due to both man-made and natural  pollutants.  If a substantial
amount of natural pollution must be treated in  any event, then  the
marginal costs of treating man-made pollution  might be less (sub-
stantially or moderately) than average treatment costs.  If so,
using average cost data would overstate the benefits from pollu-
tion control.   An extreme case is that of boiler feed water, which
is usually demineralized and given tertiary treatment even in the
absence of man-made pollutants.   In this case,  the benefits to  re-
duction of man-made pollutants would  be zero,  since the marginal
treatment costs are zero.

     For municipal water supplies, Barker and  Kramer (1973) have
attributed about 39 percent of total  pollution  to man-made sources.
For damages to household items from water supplies, Tihansky (1973)
has estimated that about 17 percent of dissolved solids and hardness
are due to man's activities.  Also, it has been estimated (U.D. De-
partment of Interior, 1974) that about 40 percent of total salinity
in agriculture results from man-made  sources.

     For agricultural damages due to  siltation  and salinity, ob-
served prices  are often distorted by  price supports for farm pro-
ducts.  If price supports were to prevent price declines which
might result from expanded farm production (due to siltation and
                              IV-18

-------
salinity control), then use of the price support level to compute
benefits would result in overestimation of benefits.  This is of
particular concern for desert irrigated crops such as cotton grown
in the Southwest, where both salinity and siltation are production
problems, and where prices are highly influenced by public policy.

3.   Recreation Benefits

     The inescapable conclusion is that the state-of-the-art is
simply inadequate to allow generalizations of existing research
to arrive at national benefits.  To cite just one example, Unger
et al.  (1974) derived an estimate of 9.4 billion in recreation
benefits from water pollution control.  Their estimate involved
extrapolation of national values from two small-area studies.
One of these involved a high man/water ratio, the other involved
a low ratio.  Although this was an imaginative approachs  the pre-
cision with which it can define true national benefits is neces-
sarily undefined, and hence, suspect.  The model is inadequately
specified with respect to water quality dimensions of the two
sites, and the measure of value at either site is not clearly de-
fined.

     The above study is symptomatic of the site-situation-specifi-
city of past research on outdoor recreation benefits related to
changes in water quality.  Whether or not this is viewed  as  "good"
or "bad" depends on one's views of the appropriate decision  con-
text, that is, whether or not information on aggregate efficiency
of water pollution control is more valuable than information about
the relative efficiency of improving water quality in selected
bodies of water.

     If benefits are to be derived at the national  level , research
must be sponsored explicitly for that purpose,  or one must, wait for
the decentralized efforts of researchers to produce conceptual
frameworks and empirical  relationships which can be properly ag-
gregated to the national  level.   The latter alternative must be
                              IV-19

-------
viewed as a "long-shot", as the implicit decision context (national
efficiency gains and losses) is not one which attracts decentralized
research effort when the state-of-the-art is  not well  developed.
The incentive system of most researchers stimulates performance of
relatively "safe" projects, such as introducing methodological  in-
novations in analysis of situation-site-specific cases.

     Especially relevant for purposes of aggregation is  the need
for the analyst to consider the entire set of recreational  options
as perceived by the consumer, and then to analyze how  water pollu-
tion at one or more sites affects consumption behavior at all  sites.
Analysis at present (even for small studies)  is usually  quite  par-
tial; no attempt at "netting out" is made.   This approach,  inherent
in small-scale analysis, must be explicitly abandoned  in any re-
search attempts to move toward aggregate estimates.

     Whether viewed from a perspective of assessing national  or
local water quality benefits, the principal  limitation is the  in-
adequate documentation of a variety of damage functions  which  re-
late changes in water quality parameters to changes in consumer be-
havior.  Moreover, in  most of the damage functions which have  been
documented, a key water quality parameter is  assumed by  the analyst,
and its relationship to consumer behavior is  derived (e.g., Stevens,
1966).  Additional attention needs to be paid to perception of  water
quality by the recreationist, which may be considerably  at  odds with
the scientist's perception.

     Most studies consider only the recreational  value of a body
of water in its current state, where one or more water quality  para-
meters are not up to standard, and its recreational value if the
quality standards were to be met.  Such two-point analyses  must pre-
sume a linearity of value between points, which is probably not
valid.  For example, bringing the DO levels in a certain river  up
to 3 ppm might have positive net benefits,  whereas at  5  ppm,  the
incremental costs might far outweigh the benefits.  Unless  a  range
                             IV-20

-------
of water quality levels is considered, the existing standard is
assumed as a parameter, when in fact it might more usefully be
considered as a variable.

     One area of needed research is the estimation of the income
elasticities associated with various water-based activities.  Not
all leisure or water-based activities have positive income elasti-
cities.  One might hypothesize that the income elasticity for swim-
ming in rivers which run through major industrial  centers is quite
low, and perhaps even negative.  In fact, it might further be hypo-
thesized that what appears to be a substantial cost of pollution
(i.e., the abandonment of swimming in industrial rivers) is a phe-
nomenon which largely would have occurred in any event through in-
come growth and the substitution of other leisure  activities, parti
cularly those which involve travel to less congested and more at-
tractive sites.

     If this hypothesis is valid, and it appears tractable to test-
ing, then the implications are substantial.   Rather than reclaim-
ing these rivers on efficiency grounds, as assumed in national
benefit-cost computations, the reclamation could be justified on
distributional grounds (as compensation to those whose incomes do
not allow them to recreate elsewhere), and/or to preserve the op-
tion to go back to older forms of recreation at some time in the
future, is worth the cost, and/or on the basis of  "national  pride".

     The benefits of pollution control can be regarded as the
extra travel costs imposed on consumers by water quality con-
straints which are exogenous to their control.  To infer that
these benefits from pollution control are the same as what appear
to be the damages of pollution may seem valid intuitively, but
the symmetry between the two needs to be examined  closely.

     Unusual income elasticities may cause pollution control bene-
fits to be less or more than the apparent damages  of pollution.
Recreational preferences are not acquired instantly, and hence are
                              IV-21

-------
subject to private and public influences, some of which are both
strong and pervasive.   One such influence is the encouragement
of travel through production of both super-highways and super-
autos.  Hence, there may be substantial  lags in returning to ur-
ban water-based activities even if all  bodies of water were brought
back up to standard.  Higher energy prices do, of course, pose a
constraint to travel,  as dc the "psychic costs" of driving crowded
freeways to escape the crowded city.

     One can find micro cases in which  the reduction in travel
cost would lead to negative benefits.   For example, consider two
sites of unequal  quality, the one farther away being the more de-
sirable.  Then if pollution destroys the (more valuable) distant
site, the recreationist turns to the less desirable, closer site,
and saves travel  costs.  While this does in fact happen (e.g., in
over-use of some high  mountain lakes),  the model may be appropriate
in a macro sense.  That is, in terms of  absolute magnitudes, water
pollution* has generally been urban-oriented and people have been
forced to travel  more, rather than less, to find comparable sub-
stitutes.

     An ambivalence can be reached on  incorporation of the costs
of time in recreation  benefits in that  the opportunity cost of time
spent in travel is more likely to be other leisure activities for-
gone than income generation.   To value  time at zero, however, might
imply that alternative leisure activities are of zero utility; this
is not a reasonable argument.  It would  seem that from an ex ante
viewpoint, the expected gains from recreating would at least equal
the expected costs, including opportunity costs of forgoing other
recreational alternatives, some of which are substitutable with
money and, hence, have a positive monetary value.

     The net effect of all these considerations is not obvious, and
hence, is deserving of research.  The  conclusion at this point is
that the terms "pollution damages" and  "pollution control benefits"
should not be equated  lightly.
                              IV-22

-------
     A dynamic, simultaneous setting is the reality with which
analysts must deal.  In this setting, the economy and its system
of distribution provides a driving force in re-shaping consumer
preference, both through allowing greater discretionary income
and in motivating consumers on how and where to spend it.  More-
over, economic growth, in part through uncompensated negative ex-
ternalities, imposes constraints on the range of goods and ser-
vices which the recreationist can purchase (e.g., "no swimming"
signs).

     Two conceptual models, presented in Attachments A and B, may
be useful in making aggregated assessments of recreation benefits
from water pollution control.  Model 1 demonstrates the conceptual
links between quality, quantity, and price of the recreational  ex-
perience.  Model 2 demonstrates the usefulness of a "reduction in
travel cost" construct and specifies data requirements for its im-
plementation.

     The typical recreationist finds that water pollution reduces
the quality of his recreation experience, causes him to recreate
less often, and causes him to incur higher travel costs to enjoy
substitute sites.  The objective of Model 1  is to demonstrate
that these three components (quality, quantity, and price) are
conceptually linked, and that addition of the three as separate
components is not defensible.

     Model 2 (Attachment B) moves toward establishing theory
which may be useful in specifying data requirements for assess-
ing national benefits.  As a corollary, it may also be useful in
interpreting whether or not existing empirical studies and data
are of value in attempting to generate estimates of national bene-
fits.   The implications of Model 2 are that decreases in travel
costs due to pollution abatement represent potential benefits from
abatement, existing data on total costs of recreation should be
explored as a proxy for travel cost data, and the empirical  rela-
                               IV-23

-------
tionship between pollution levels and travel  costs must be estab-
lished before the model  can be implemented empirically.

4.   Aesthetic and Ecological  Benefits

     We have seen that the methodology for simulation of changes
in market values for active recreational  activities,  as a function
of changes in water quality,  is still being developed and as yet,
has not been adequately  generalized to a  national  aggregate.  The
methodology for monetizing the less active (e.g.,  viewing) or more
latent (e.g., future consumption) uses is even less developed.   At
present, there is little conceptual or empirical  support for any
available estimates of national aesthetic benefits from water pol-
lution control.

     A specific problem  which  links the categories of outdoor re-
creation and aesthetics  is whether to believe what people say,  or
to believe, instead, what they do.  Economists have long had a  pre-
ference for the latter,  fearing the lack  of appropriate decision
context in the former method.   In short,  people may overstate their
willingness to pay if they think it will  help secure  a good, or
they may understate their willingness to  pay  if they  fear that
their pocketbooks will somehow be affected.  Although economists
have long recognized these tendencies, there  is relatively little
in the literature in the way  of constructive  analysis on the avoid-
ance of under or overstatement.  The work by  Bohm  (1971) and Tide-
man (1972) are exceptions, but the reliance on assumption is still
substantial there.

     The constraint imposed by inadequate methodology is especially
apparent when one considers the dilemma that  exists where direct
questioning appears to be the  only available  methodology.  In the
case of option demands on the  part of the current  non-users, the
questioning must be with respect to desire for future consumption.
Hence, there is no way to check results of direct  questioning
                                IV-24

-------
against observed behavior.  In hypothetical cases of improved
water quality, the general question is "What would your recrea-
tion preference set be if certain water quality parameters were
varied?".  In addition to problems that the recreationist might
have in visualizing the improvement, there is again the absence
of empirical cross-checks.

     Despite this apparent dilemma, economists have had little
propensity to seek help from other disciplines.  Even in cases
where the wording and setting of particular questions are cru-
cial to the results, economists have usually preferred to "go
it alone" rather than seek inputs from psychologists, social
psychologists, or communication theorists.  On the other hand,
the non-economic literature on "environmental perception" is
flourishing, but usually with no handles by which to impute
monetary values.

     Analysis of cross-section and time-series data is much pre-
ferred to direct questioning, if the data are available.  Cross-
sectional and time-series analysis can be designed to reveal  con-
sumer behavior in terms of what people actually do in response to
changes in water quality.  The basic problem is the lack of data
with which meaningful analyses can be made.

     Although the theoretical literature is far ahead of the  em-
pirical work, the theory itself is plagued with ambiguities which
only time and intellectual effort can unravel.  Its evolution dates
back only a few years and the implication for pollution control
benefits is that something in excess of consumers' surplus of cur-
rent users is ususally appropriate and legitimate.  The extent of
this "something" is the crucial issue.

     In spite of this evolutionary condition, several vital dimen-
sions of the problem are now being addressed in the literature:
                              IV-25

-------
     »    The role of risk-preference versus risk-aversion
     •    Policy outcomes as public goods (and the concomir
          tant implications for direct questioning)
     •    Uncertainty as to future supply and/or demand
     «    Relevance of contingent claims markets as analogs
     •    Mixed-good (private and social) conception of en-
          vironmental goods.

     Current empirical  work is limited in its applicability for
generalization, in that it focuses on high quality, unique envi-
ronmental services, rather than medjurn or low quality services.
This is not to dispute the future methodological  value of such
work, only to point out that the ratio of option value to (cur-
rent) consumers' surplus may be quite different for Hells Canyon
than for more mundane activities on the Delaware River.

     One would hypothesize that the ratio of option value to con-
sumers' surplus would be higher for the more unique sites, and
that aggregation based on current empirical  work would overstate
total benefits.  The rationale behind this hypothesis lies in the
differential income elasticities for  high and low-quality environ-
ment services.  One would suspect the demand for high-quality ser-
vices is more income-elastic than that for services of lower quality.
Thus, the former will become relatively more valuable in  the future,
and consumers would be more likely to desire "insurance"  of future
supplies, should contingent claims markets exist.   Individual in-
vestigators appear most likely to analyze unique,  high-quality
sites.   In order to test the above hypothesis, one may need to pro-
mote similar research efforts for non-unique, lower-quality sites,
rather than wait for decentralized researchers to ask this question.

     Economists and administrators are in a  rather obvious dilemma
as to the extent to which option value estimates should be added to
current user values.   A market failure symptom is  evident in the
sense that contingent claims do not exist for environmental goods
                             IV-26

-------
in the sense that they exist for some other goods.   On the other
hand, the current ability to estimate option values is admittedly
weak, and may cast doubts on the validity of the more concrete
estimates in other categories.

5.   Property Values

     The academician's traditional wisdom in benefit-cost analysis
has been to exclude  from consideration as efficiency benefits
any increments in property values arising from public investment
for which there is no corresponding increase in the output of goods
or services.  In other words, pecuniary externalities or simple in-
come transfers have been netted out of the analysis.  On the other
hand, if there is in fact an increase in the output of goods or
services, a more direct measure than property value increments is
usually sought.  For example, if crop damages were  averted by flood
control, both higher farm incomes and higher land values, due to
higher farm incomes, would result.  In this case, one would prefer
to use the increase in net farm incomes as the measure of benefit.

     Nevertheless, increments to property values do arise as a re-
sult of water quality improvement.  This has been substantively
documented by Dornbusch and Barrager (1973) and David and Lord
(1969), although both the capability for generalization and the
adequacy of their model specification must be questioned.  David
and Lord's measurement of water quality was much less precise than
desired for purposes of extrapolation, and the Dornbusch and Barrager
effort failed to measure water quality explicitly.   These are in-
adequacies that can be rectified with further effort; the real ques-
tion is the meaning, in the context of national efficiency, of
even more adequately derived estimates.  That is, what do increments
in property values really reflect?  The recent conclusion by Lind
(1973) is that, in a general equilibrium model, most increments (or
decreases) in land values can be ignored for benefit computation.

     Property value increments may reflect an actualized option de-
mand which should be included as an efficiency benefit.  Pursuit of

                              IV-27

-------
the relationships between water quality and property values should
be viewed seriously from a strategic point of view, considering
that existing behavioral damage functions for recreation and aes-
thetics are currently not capable of generalization to national
levels.

     The methodologies for estimating both recreation demands and
option demands often rely on direct elicitation of responses,
whereas property markets tend to reflect what people do, rather
than what they say they will do.  Since public access to water is
increasingly difficult, property values may increasingly reflect
an actualized option demand wherein buyers seek to assure, for
private use, a continued supply of particular environmental ser-
vices.  To the extent that these option demands are satisfied, a
service is produced by pollution control.

     If sufficient relationships between water quality and property
values were to become available, these might be used to derive gen-
eralized benefit estimates in terms of increments  to property values
Caution would be needed to avoid "double-counting".  On the other
hand, those to whom property value increments would accrue are prob-
ably a small fraction of total  active users.

     More refined lines of questioning could be developed to explore
option demand, including the degree to which people seek to secure
greater certainty over resource services through property acquisi-
tion.  To the extent that property acquisition does act as a hedge
against uncertain future supplies, there is a "corresponding in-
crease in the output of goods or services," and the criteria for
benefit computation are not violated.
                             IV-28

-------
E.   CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

     This section lists the conclusions drawn from the foregone discus-
sion and recommendations for future work.

     The analytical base of welfare economics and U.S. EPA's data col-
lection capability both provide hope for better benefit estimates.  Al-
though numerous other problems exist, the analytical  foundations of wel-
fare economics and the data collection capability of U.S. EPA both pro-
vide a basis on which to expect that improved benefit estimates can be
obtained.  As Tihansky (1975) points out in his detailed literature re-
view, welfare economics provides a significant conceptual base which has
not been rigorously adhered to in much of the empirical work.  The theory
for estimation of benefits is far more advanced than  the empirical work;
hence, welfare economics, per se, is not a limiting factor.

     The estimates of national benefits, by category  of benefit, now have
vastly different precisions.  Until  these categories  are made more nearly
comparable, there is little capability for judging to what degree invest-
ment in water pollution control would be efficient.  Estimates of produc-
tion losses, including traditional waterborne disease, are reasonably
firm, although they could be improved at a cost.   However, estimates of
consumption losses, including recreation, aesthetics, and survival dimen-
sions of health, are much less firm.

     The general prospects for improving the precision of estimates also
differ greatly over the various categories.  Additional analytical effort
along conventional lines can resolve much of the  variation in the produc-
tion estimates.  Also, technological change (biased toward production ra-
ther than consumption activities) may retard the  rate at which these bene-
fit streams grow over time.   Increased precision  in estimates of recrea-
tion benefits and option values will come slowly  and  probably fortuitously
in the absence of a coordinated effort in benefit estimation.

     Highest priority shou_ld_be_ directed to generation of behaviora_l_
response functions which are more conipjete and useful  than those  few
                                   IV-29

-------
which now exist.   Principal  attention should be directed to generation
of meaningful  behavioral  response functions with respect to water qua-
lity changes,  which improves their capability for aggregation and pro-
vides a more general  framework.   It seems almost a hopeless strategy for
U.S. EPA to continue  retaining even the best consulting firms to period-
ically make efforts toward extrapolating existing studies, when the base
studies themselves are not designed to be extrapolated.

     Criteria need to be  established to identify and fund high priority
research on behavioral response functions.   The ambitous nature of the
current decision context, that of weighing  aggregate national benefits
against aggregate national costs, must be reconsidered; suboptimization
in research design should become a pragmatic reality.   Decision criteria
then need to be set to identify and fund high-priority research settings
in which to generate  behavioral  response functions to  changes in water
quality.  A matrix relating types of pollutants to geographic regions
should be identified, and priorities for future research established.
The criteria which would  be needed to set priorities,  among different
elements of the matrix, should include consideration of the current le-
vel of pollution control  benefits, considering both mean values and dif-
ferential precision of the estimates, the rate at which the benefit
streams appears to be growing or declining, the likely cost (in money
and time lag)  of establishing the behavioral relationships.

     The set of behavioral response functions should include services
for which "option demands" might be exercised.  Within the set of behav-
ioral relationships to be identified are those which relate to willing-
ness to pay to increase the certainty of future provision of selected
consumption goods and services.   The latter may include access to or
availability of recreation activities or aesthetic uses where water qua-
lity is a consideration and avoidance of waterborne health hazards (e.g.,
carcinogens and toxic chemicals).

     A "reduction in  travel  cost" model offers potential for assessing
recreation benefits at a  level of aggregation higher than that which
now exists.  Empirical implementation of such a model  will be more
                                  IV-30

-------
difficult than specification of theory.   Crucial  elements  include iden-
tification of the entire set of water-based recreation activities with-
in the preference set of the consumer and specification of subjective
substitutability or complementarity between sites.   Also,  measurement
of how water quality differences are related to these elements,  ability
to measure this relationship on a continuum, rather than for "clean"
water and "polluted" water, and ability  to test the equality of  degrada-
tion versus restoration of water quality.

     A basic commitment should be made by EPA to establish a long-term
"behavioral monitoring system" analogous to that established by  the
U.S. Geological Survey for assessing water quality.  The data sets for
a carefully selected variety of sites would include measurement  of ba-
sic economic and ecological data, objective and perceived  water  quality
parameters, recreation activity, by type, intensity, and other charac-
teristics, and property values; particularly for residential and recrea-
tional properties.  The monitoring system would be  longitudinal  in that
trends in both water quality and user behavior would be recorded, allow-
ing for time-series analysis.

     Selection of a variety of sites would also allow cross-sectional
analysis.  Periodic cross-sectional sampling could  be done among recrea-
tionists and potential users.  This sampling would  not need to be done
necessarily on a large-scale basis, but  it would need to be done well.
Samples of users could also be followed  longitudinally; a  substantial
literature now exists on this methodology.  Criteria would need  to be
established for selection of sites.  Consideration  should  be given to
selection of sites where significant changes (upward and downward) are
occurring or are likely to occur in the  water quality parameters and  to
selection of sites which differ significantly in socio-economic  variables
(so as to allow cross-sectional estimates of income elasticities).

     The rationale behind the proposal to establish a monitoring system
are:
     •    More adequate knowledge of behavioral responses with re-
          spect to price, income, and (perceived or objective) water
                                    IV-31

-------
quality changes need to be established before national
benefits can be estimated

Current inferential capacity of analyses based on di-
rect questioning is largely unknown

Changes in water quality are in fact occurring, and
researchers should be taking advantage of this

The conceptual and empirical dimensions of "option de-
mand" are still evolving; the theoretical models ten
years hence may well be more powerful than can be
tested against the data unless steps are taken to ac-
cumulate a large set of data

A monitoring system provides a continuing flow of in-
formation to decision makers and to their constituency;
over time, behavioral relationships can be determined
and made available, thus augmenting this flow of infor-
mation as well as facilitating much more precise esti-
mates 'of national benefits from pollution control.
                         IV-32

-------
F.    REFERENCES


     Barker, Bruce,  and Paul  Kramer,  "Water Quality  Conditions  in  Illinois,"
         in Statewide Water Resource  Development  Plan  1972,  Illinois  Depart-
         ment of Transportation,  Division of Water  Resource  Management,  1973.

     Bohm,  Peter, "An Approach to the Problem of  Estimating  Demand  for  Pub-
         lic Goods," Swedish  Journa1_of Economics  73(1):94-105,  March 1971.

     David, Elizabeth L.,  and William B.  Lord,  Determinants  of  Property
         Value on Artificial  Lakes,  University  of  Wisconsin,  Department  of
         Agricultural Economics,  May  1969.

     Dornbusch, David M.,  and Stephen M.  Barrager,  Benefit of Water Pollu-
         tion Control on Property Values, U.S.  Environmental  Protection
         Agency, EPA-600/5-73-005,  October 1973.

     Freeman, A. Myrick III,  "A Survey of the Techniques  for  Measuring  the
         Benefits of Water Quality  Improvement,"  in  Peskin,  Henry M., and
         Eugene P.  Seskin  (eds.), Cost Benefit  Analysis and  Water Pollution
         Policy, The Urban Institute, Washington,  D.C., 1975.

     Haveman, Robert H., and  John V.  Krutilla,  Unemployment,  Idle Capacity,
         and the Evaluation of Public Expenditures,  Johns Hopkins Press, Bal-
         timore, 1963.

     Haveman, Robert H., and  Burton A.  Weisbrod,  "The  Concept of Benefits
         in Cost-Benefit Analysis:  With  Emphasis  on Water Pollution  Control
         Activities," in Peskin,  Henry M.,  and  Eugene  P.  Seskin  (eds.),  Cost
         Benefit Analysis  and Water  Pollution Policy,  The Urban  Institute,
         Washington, D.C., 1975.

     Krutilla, John  V., "Conservation Reconsidered," American Economic  Review
         57_(4): 777-786, September 1967.

     Lackner, Jack,  Safe Drinking Water Act of  1973:   Estimated  Benefits and
         Costs, U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency,  1973.

     Lind,  Robert C., "Spatial  Equilibrium, The Theory of Rents, and  the
         Measurement of Benefits  from Public Programs," Quarterly Journal of
         Economics  37(2):188-207, May 1973.

     Lindblom, Charles E., "The Science of Muddling  Through," Public  Adminis-
         trative Review, pp.  79-83, Spring  1959.

     Liu, Oscar C.,  Illnesses Associated  With Human  Enteric  Viruses,  U.S.
         Environmental Protection Agency, Northeast  Water Supply Research Lab-
         oratory, 1970.

     Meyer, Philip A., Recreational and Preservation Values  Associated  With
         the Salmon  of the Fraser River,  Fisheries  and"Marine Service,  Van-
         couver, B.C., Canada,  Information  Report  Series, No. PAC/N-74-1 , 1974
                                   IV-33

-------
Peskin, Henry M.,  and Eugene P.  Seskin (eds.),  Cost Benefit  Analysis
    and Water Pollution Policy,  The Urban Institute,  Washington,  D.C.,
    1975.

Schultz, T.  W., "Institutions and the Rising Economic Value  of  Man,"
    American Journal  of Agricultural  Economics  50:1113-1122, December
    1968.

Sokoloski, A., Economic Benefits of an Adequate Supply of Safe  Hater,
    U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency, 1973.

Stevens, Joe B.,  "Recreation Benefits from Water Pollution Control,"
    Water Resources Research 2(2):167-182, 1966.

Tideman, T.  Nicolaus, "The Efficient Provision  of Public Goods,"  in
    Selman J. Mushkin (ed.)   Public Prices for  Public Products, The
    Urban Institute,  Washington, D.C, 1972.

Tihansky, Dennis  P.,  "An Economic Assessment of Marine Water Pollu-
    tion Damages," Proceedings of the Third International  Conference
    on Pollution  Control in  the  Marine Industries,  June 5-7, 1973.

Tihansky, Dennis  P.,  "A Survey of Empirical  Benefit Studies," in  Pes-
    kin, Henry M., and  Eugene P. Seskin (eds.), Cost  Benefit Analysis
    and Water Pollution Policy,  The Urban Institute,  Washington,  D.C.,
    1975.

Unger, Samuel G.,  et  al.,  National  Estimates of Water Quality Benefits,
    Development Planning & Research Associates, Inc., November  1974.

U.S. Department of the  Interior, Westwide Study Report on  the Critical
    Hater Problems Facing  the Eleven  Western States,  1974.
                              IV-34

-------
ATTACHMENT A.   MODEL 1

     Assume that a recreationist has separate demand functions (D-,  and 02)
for two non-priced sites which have, in his subjective judgment,  some de-
gree of substitutability.  Assume also that these two sites  constitute his
"demand for outdoor recreation" (D3).   The demand function  for each site
is a function of both price (travel  cost)  variables  and the  quality para-
meter  (Qu) of the  site  itself.  Hence:
                            Q   = f(Pr  Qur  P2)

                            Qd = f(P,  Qu,  P.)
Diagrammatical ly:
        Price
       C=k,
                                              ql+q2
                                            Quantity
Assume further that the relative price structures are such that the  price
of Site I  (P, ) is low relative to the price of Site 2 (Pp),  so  that  the
quantity,  q, ,  exceeds q^
implicit "before pollution" price is k]p^
weights determined by optimum quantities,
surplus which  he derives is equal to CAFG.
                                    IV-35
                          Viewing the aggregate demand function, D,, the
                                         + k2P2> where the k.'s are
                                         q^ and q2>  The total consumer's

-------
     Now assume that water quality at Site 1  deteriorates  to  the  point
that the recreationist no longer has  any effective  demand  for this  site.
Such an event obviously reduces the utility of the  consumer.   When  Site 1
disappears from the consumer's utility function,  his  equilibrium  position
changes from point A to point B.   There is a  reduction  in  his total  quan-
tity taken, an increase in the unit price paid (though  not in the total
bill), and a decrease in his utility.   His consumer's surplus is  now
PpBFG, and the double cross-hatched area (CAFBP^) is  his reduction  in
consumer's surplus due to pollution.

     If the loss of Site 1  to pollution causes his  demand  for Site  2 to
shift outward and become more inelastic (fewer substitutes),  as might be
expected, then the above decrease in  willingness  to pay has been  over-
stated.  Conversely, if the pollution of his  "favorite" stream causes
him to quit fishing, for example, altogether  (due to  inter-re!atedness
of sites and complementarity in terms  of fixed factors  such as tackle,
etc.), then the reduction in willingness to pay is  equal to CAFG,  less
the salvage value of his equipment.
                                    IV-36

-------
ATTACHMENT B.   MODEL 2

     Consider that in a "no-pollution" situation, a recreationists's
utility mapping for Site 1 or 2 contains indifference curve UQ which
passes through his current income position, Y .   His willingness to
substitute income to obtain additional units of recreation along U
is identical between Sites 1 and 2.  That is, the two sites are per-
fect substitutes for each other.

     The cost of travel to the two sites, however, differs; Site 1 can
be reached for a fixed outlay of (Y -k-j), which is essentially the cost
of travel, lodging, and/or food required to reach and return from the
           t
site.  Once the fixed costs of reaching the site are incurred, the vari
able costs (k-,X-,) per unit of time (e.g., on-site lodging and/or admis-
sion fees) become relevant in determining his optimum length of stay.
     Site 2 is located farther from his home, thus the fixed costs of
travel (Y -k?) exceed those for Site 1.  Assume, for simplicity, that
the variable or on-site costs of the two sites are equal, or that (k
is parallel to (k,X,).
    Income
      or
    Money
             m
             m
                                     IV-37
                                                 Quantity  of  Days

-------
     In that the two sites are defined (initially)  as perfect substitutes
and their relative prices are unequal, a corner solution is reached.   The
recreationist will reach a higher (than U )  indifference curve if he  sacri-
fices (Y -m,) income and consumes q,  days at Site 1  (i.e., point A on in-
difference curve IU).

     Assume now that water quality at Site 1  deteriorates to the point
where he is no longer willing to sacrifice income to enjoy Site 1.  Un-
der the assumption that the demand for each  site is  a function of both
site prices and its own quality dimension (i.e., IU  retains the same  cur-
vature as U  and U,, but is now relevant only for Site 2), the recrea-
tionist will now turn to Site 2, which can be reached only at higher  tra-
vel costs.   His optimum level of consumption is now  q? days (all taken
at Site 2)  with a money outlay of (Y0-mp)i i-e., point B on indifference
curve Up-

     Note at this point that the model is probably of general relevance
in that:

     •    Pollution leaves the consumer "worse-off"  than before
     •    Pollution causes the distance traveled to  increase
     t    Some recreation is still consumed,  even though a site is
          "lost" to pollution
     •    The total money outlay for  recreation increases as pollu-
          tion and per-unit prices increase  (i.e.,  the demand for
          outdoor recreation, in general, would seem to be inelas-
          tic, as with most broad categories  of commodities)
     •    Variable or on-site costs probably do not  differ greatly
          between non-polluted and previously non-polluted areas.

     The model is simplistic, however, in that the two sites are initially
defined as perfect substitutes, differ only  in distance, and constitute
his entire recreational demand.  (The limiting nature of his assumption has
important implications, to be discussed below.)

     The "costs" of pollution, to the recreationist, can be defined as
the reduction in willingness to pay which is incurred through pollution.
                                    IV-38

-------
Similarly, the benefits to restoration of clean  water (or prevention  of
damage) can be seen as the same quantity.   Each  is  a  mirror  image  of  the
other, ceteris paribus.   The Hicksian concept of  "compensating  varia-
tion" allows us to approximate the monetary value  of  this averted  utility
                                                                       2
loss or potential utility gain.  It asks:   "How  much  would the consumer
have to be compensated to leave him as well  off  as  before?"   In  this  model
utility level  U-j  could be regained by an outward shift  in the price line
from ^Xp) to (k,X,); i.e., an income transfer  of  the  magnitude  (k,^),
or the difference in  the fixed costs of travel,  could leave  the  recrea-
tionist as well off as he was prior to pollution,  given that on-site  costs
are the same in both  cases.
     This model illustrates two things.   First,  if  the  recreation  sites
are initially perfect substitutes,  the relevant  measurement of benefit is
isolated in terms of additional travel costs  alone.   Any measures  of bene-
fits from quantity and quality changes are clearly  duplicative, since they
are already incorporated in the reasoning and diagram above.  The  model
says this; if pollution causes a recreationist to  incur $10 in additional
travel cost to reach a more distant site, a $10  income  transfer to him
would theoretically leave him as well  off as  before,  and hence, is a mea-
surement of values foregone by pollution  -- or benefits created by restor-
ation.  Second, the model identifies crucial  needs  for  (a) extent  to which
pollution has caused substitutions  between sites, and (b) data on  additional
per unit travel costs due to pollution.   While these  may or may not be avail-
                                                                        2
able, the differences in total outlays (ru-ni) might  be a suitable proxy.
 The critical  limiting  nature  of  this  ceteris paribus assumption is examined
 on pages IV 21-22.
n
 The analysis  is  shown  for those  who participate  in at least some recreation
 both with and without  pollution.   Other  recreationists, however, would cease
 this type of consumption  altogether with the demise of Site 1 (i.e., move to
 Y0).  In any  empirical  treatment,  the willingness to pay of these (marginal)
 consumers would  need  to be added  to that of existing (intramarginal) consumers.
 I  would note,  however,  a  difference  in  the ratios /  'o'"'1 | , and/ 'o'.M \ .  If,
                                                               /Y°'kA
                                                               Iv^J
 for example, moving from B to A represents a 40 percent reduction in total  costs
/ Q'^1  = n A l > tnen this mi9nt involve (say) a 60 percent reduction in travel
        =  o
                                  IV-39

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
 i. REPORT NO.
     EPA-600/5-78-014
                                                           3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOf*NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
                                                           5. REPORT DATE
  CRITICAL REVIEW OF  ESTIMATING BENEFITS OF AIR
  AND WATER POLLUTION  CONTROL
             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
 7. AUTHOR(S)
 A.  Hershaft (ed.); A. M. Freeman  III;
 T.  D.  Crocker, J. B. Stevens
                                                          8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
  Environ  Control,  Inc.
  11300  Rockville Pike
  Rockville,  Maryland 20852
             10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
               1HA094
             11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
               Contract No.  68-01-2821
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
  Office  of Research and Development
  U.  S.  Environmental Protection Agency
  Washington,  D.  C.  20460
             13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                Final
             14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE

               EPA-ORD
 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
  Project Officer   Thomas  E.  Waddell
 16. ABSTRACT
  This  report provides a critical review  of  the  current state-of-the-art and future
  prospects  of estimating benefits of air and water  pollution control.  This
  report  represents three independent critiques  by three experts of benefit
  assessment methodologies.  Specific aspects discussed include the nature
  and role of benefits, damage functions, valuation  of effects, aggregation of
  results, and representation of uncertainties.   The conceptual foundations of
  estimating pollution control benefits were presented and compared with empirical
  studies.  It was concluded that while available estimates often do not adequately
  reflect the state-of-the-art, estimates of pollution control  benefits would
  potentially be very useful to decision  makers.   The conceptual basis provided by
  economic theory for benefit estimation  is  adequate in most respects and far ahead
  of the  corresponding empirical effort.  A  number of studies are guilty of failing
  to list explicitly critical assumptions or to  express adequately uncertainty in
  the results while other studies have employed  conceptual  models that are
  inappropriate to the problem at hand or the available data.  Damage functions
  underlying benefit estimates are frequently based  on insufficient data and/or
  inadequate characterization of exposure and effects.  National benefit estimates
  were  found to be based on regional studies which are frequently inadequate in
  number  and/or quality.
17.
                               KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C.  COSATI field/Group
       Economic  Analysis
       Economic  Surveys
       Air  Pollution
       Water  Pollution
  Environmental Economics
  Environmental Impacts
  Benefit/Cost Analysis
  Economic Efficiency
  Pollution Abatement
      Benefits
  Pollution Effects
5C
20A
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
  Distribution  Unlimited   Available through
  National  Technical  Information Service
  Springfield,  Va.  22151
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
  UNCLASSIFIED
                                                                        21. NO. OF PAGES
20 SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)

  UNCLASSIFIED
                           22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                        VUS GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1978 - ':•_-

-------