{"query_echo":{"q":"","filters":{"analysis_type":["valuation study"]},"warnings":[{"code":"facet_value_not_in_vocabulary","message":"Value 'valuation study' for facet 'analysis_type' is not in the controlled vocabulary."}]},"total":{"value":2,"relation":"eq"},"page":1,"page_size":20,"self":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/api/v1/search?analysis_type=valuation+study","stability":"beta","ai_marking":{"digital_source_type":{"uri":"http://cv.iptc.org/newscodes/digitalsourcetype/trainedAlgorithmicMedia","name":"Created using Generative AI"},"notice":"Summary and key insights are generated using artificial intelligence."},"results":[{"id":"sei-000295","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/sei-000295","title":"Economic value of hydropeaking externalities","publisher":{"name":"Stockholm Environment Institute","organization":"stockholm-environment-institute"},"document_type":"research paper","language":"en","date_published":"2024-01-05","source_url":"https://www.sei.org/publications/economic-value-of-hydropeaking-externalities/","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The research evaluates the trade-offs between reducing hydropeaking to improve river ecology and the potential increase in CO2 emissions. Findings indicate that individuals generally prefer stronger restrictions on short-term regulations to benefit fish stocks, recreational use, and the ecological state, with these benefits outweighing the disutility of increased CO2 emissions. The study emphasizes the need to account for unobserved preference heterogeneity in willingness-to-pay estimations.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-000295#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Most individuals prefer stricter restrictions on short-term regulations to reduce local environmental impacts, placing high value on the ecological state, fish stocks, and recreational use.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-000295#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"While potential increases in CO2 emissions create a clear disutility, the estimated benefits of improving the river environment through hydropeaking restrictions are greater than this disutility.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-000295#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimations should utilize a model specification with correlated utility coefficients to account for unobserved preference heterogeneity among individuals.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-000295#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["hydropower","carbon dioxide emissions"],"geography_discussed":[],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["discrete choice experiment","valuation study"]},{"id":"sei-001802","url":"https://climateinsightsdirectory.org/document/sei-001802","title":"Good environmental status in the Baltic Sea through regional coordination and capacity building via economic and social analysis","publisher":{"name":"Stockholm Environment Institute","organization":"stockholm-environment-institute"},"document_type":"policy brief","language":"en","date_published":"2014","source_url":"https://www.sei.org/mediamanager/documents/Publications/SEI-PolicyBrief-Tuhkanen-Baltic-GES.pdf","generator":"Climate Insights Directory","generated_fields":["summary","key_insights","climate_tags","analysis_type"],"summary":{"text":"The GES-REG project coordinated efforts between Estonia, Finland, Latvia, and Sweden to implement the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) and achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) by 2020. The project identified significant variations in how these countries conducted Economic and Social Analysis (ESA), with Latvia and Sweden using an ecosystem services approach while Estonia and Finland used a marine accounts approach. Valuation studies in Estonia and Latvia indicated a public willingness to pay for environmental improvements, with Estonians potentially willing to pay over EUR 11 million annually and Latvians up to EUR 3.8 million per year to reach GES targets. The brief emphasizes that due to data gaps, initial Programmes of Measures (PoMs) will likely rely on a combination of qualitative expert judgments and limited quantitative evidence. It recommends further cross-border coordination on baseline 'business-as-usual' (BAU) scenarios and the harmonization of ecosystem service classifications to better support ecosystem-based governance of the Baltic Sea.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001802#summary","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},"key_insights":[{"text":"Cooperation between Estonia, Finland, Latvia, and Sweden has established a foundation for harmonizing the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), specifically regarding the Economic and Social Analysis (ESA) required to reach Good Environmental Status (GES) by 2020.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001802#insight-1","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"There are distinct differences in the analytical approaches used for ESA among the project countries: Latvia and Sweden employed an ecosystem services approach, whereas Estonia and Finland utilized a marine accounts approach.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001802#insight-2","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Valuation studies indicate that citizens in Estonia and Latvia are willing to pay for improvements to reach GES compared to business-as-usual scenarios. The Estonian population may be willing to pay more than EUR 11 million annually for improvements in water quality, oil-spill risk, and non-indigenous species, while Latvians may pay up to EUR 3.8 million per year for water quality, marine biodiversity, and preventing invasive species.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001802#insight-3","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"Due to existing gaps in environmental and economic data, the first Programmes of Measures (PoMs) will likely be unable to rely solely on quantitative analysis and must instead combine quantitative evidence with qualitative assessments and expert judgments.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001802#insight-4","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"An evaluation of over 60 international policy frameworks revealed that while these frameworks are widely known, their actual implementation status varies across countries. Improving the implementation of these existing policies could reduce the need for additional new measures in the PoMs.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001802#insight-5","date_modified":"2026-10-23"},{"text":"The project identified a lack of specific data on water use and the value of ecosystem services across all participating countries, noting specifically that public data from Statistics Estonia is insufficient for an ecosystem services-based analysis.","ai_generated":true,"unit":"sei-001802#insight-6","date_modified":"2026-10-23"}],"climate_tags":["ecosystem service"],"geography_discussed":[],"frame_perspective":[],"analysis_type":["comparative analysis","valuation study","policy evaluation"]}]}