Abstract

Glasgow and Train propose a correction to the government’s estimate of recreation damages in the Deepwater Horizon oil spill assessment. Their correction depends on a description of behavior they assume to be true but did not test. We find that evidence on recreators’ response to the spill contradicts their assumption and that the standard welfare calculations applied in the case were appropriate.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call