CEEP faculty and affiliates are involved in the full spectrum of program evaluation approaches. These include

(1) Project evaluations as short-term consultants (often case-study based). Example: An evaluation of investments by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility in Costa Rica’s national Payments for Environmental Services program (Sills et al. 2005).  A two-week long team mission aimed at using program theory and available data to provide insights into the performance of a 5-year old national environmental incentive program.  The program theory identified causal pathways through which the program may or may not achieve its objectives, and available data were used in a heuristic way to test the theory.  The results offered insights into ways in which the program could be altered to improve future effectiveness. For example, the data were consistent with a program suffering from poor targeting as a result of landowners volunteering unthreatened ecosystems into the program. Advice on contract design to resolve this problem were thus offered.

(2) Ex post observational studies using state-of-the-art statistical methodsExample: An evaluation of the way in which citizens move in and out of communities conditional on environmental (Banzhaf and Walsh, 2008).  Based on predictions from a theoretical model that allows citizens to sort across communities based on their preferences and constraints, a statistical analysis (difference-in-difference) was undertaken to test whether households “vote with their feet” in response to changes in environmental quality.  The analysis found that households do indeed vote with their feet, and this potential for “environmental gentrification” has important implications both for the analysis of environmental equity and for the design of environmental policies aimed at benefiting the less-advantaged elements of society.

(3) Ex ante experimental and quasi-experimental project designs (i.e., controlled policy experiments). Example: A collaboration between CEEP faculty and employees at the Cobb County Water System in metropolitan Atlanta during the 2007 drought to test the effectiveness of different approaches to reducing residential water consumption using an experimental design (Ferraro and Price, 2009).  CEEP faculty provided expertise in behavioral theory and in experimental design, and Cobb County practitioners provided knowledge of the policy context and their years of practical experience. The collaboration between faculty and practitioners ensured that the field experiment was designed to answer the most relevant policy questions. The study found that the approaches historically used by the Water System had little impact, but an approach based on theories from the behavioral science literature had a much more substantial impact.

Selected Recent Publications of CEEP faculty
Andam, KS, PJ Ferraro, A Pfaff, GA Sanchez-Azofeifa, and J Robalino. 2008. Measuring the Effectiveness of Protected Area Networks in Reducing Deforestation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105(42): 16089-16094.

Andam, K, PJ Ferraro, KE Sims, A Healy, and MB Holland. 2010. Protected Areas Reduced Poverty in Costa Rica and Thailand. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(22): 9996-10001.

Arriagada, PJ Ferraro, S Pattanayak, R, E Sills, S Cordero. Forthcoming. Do payments for environmental services reduce deforestation? A farm-level evaluation from Costa Rica. Land Economics.

Arriagada, R, EO Sills, SK Pattanayak, and PJ Ferraro. 2009. Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods to Evaluate Participation in Costa Rica's Program of Payments for Environmental Services. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 28(3): 343-367.

Banzhaf, H.S. The Political Economy of Environmental Justice, Stanford University Press, forthcoming.

Banzhaf, H.S. Forthcoming.  Regulatory Impact Analyses of Environmental Justice Effects,  Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law.

Banzhaf, H.S. 2010.  Economics at the Fringe: Non-Market Valuation Studies and their Role in Land Use Plans in the United States, Journal of Environmental Management 91(3):592-602.

Banzhaf, H.S. 2009.  Objective or Multi-objective? Two Historically Competing Visions for Benefit-Cost Analysis.  Land Economics 85(1): 1-23.

Banzhaf, H.S., and N. Lavery. 2010.  Can the Land Tax Help Curb Urban Sprawl? Evidence from Growth Patterns in Pennsylvania,  Journal of Urban Economics 67(2):169-79.

Banzhaf, HS and VK Smith. 2007. Meta Analysis in Model Implementation: Choice Sets and the Valuation of Air Quality Improvements. Journal of Applied Econometrics 22: 1013-31.

Banzhaf, HS and RP Walsh. 2008. Do People Vote with their Feet? An Empirical Test of Tiebout’s Mechanism. American Economic Review 98(3): 843-63.

Banzhaf, H.S., W.E. Oates, and J.N. Sanchirico. 2010.  Selection and Design of Local Referenda for Land Conservation,  Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 29(4):769-98.

Boyd J and H.S. Banzhaf. 2007.  What are Ecosystem Services? The Need for Standardized Environmental Accounting Units. Ecological Economics.

Ferraro, PJ, M Price. Forthcoming. Using non-pecuniary strategies to influence behavior: evidence from a large-scale field experiment. The Review of Economics and Statistics.

Ferraro, PJ. Forthcoming. Theory and evidence to design payments for environmental services in the 21st Century.  Invited article for the 25thAnniversary Issue of Conservation Biology.

Ferraro, PJ, K Lawlor, K Mullan, SK Pattanayak. Forthcoming. Forest figures: A review of ecosystem services valuation and policy evaluation in developing countries. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy.

Ferraro, PJ and M Hanauer. 2011. Protecting ecosystems and alleviating poverty with parks and reserves: ‘win-win’ or tradeoffs?Environmental and Resource Economics 48:269–28.

Ferraro, PJ, M Hanauer and KE Sims. 2011. Conditions Associated with Protected Area Success in Conservation and Poverty Reduction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108(34):

Ferraro, PJ, JJ Miranda Montero, M Price. 2011. Persistence of treatment effects with norm-based policy instruments: evidence from a randomized environmental policy experiment. American Economic Review: papers and proceedings.

Ferraro, PJ. 2009. Counterfactual thinking and impact evaluation in environmental policy. In Special Issue on Environmental program and policy evaluation, M. Birnbaum & P. Mickwitz (Eds.). New Directions for Evaluation 122: 75–84.

Ferraro, PJ, C McIntosh and M Ospina. 2007. The Effectiveness of Listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act: An econometric analysis using matching methods. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 54(3): 245-261.

Ferraro, PJ and T Uchida. 2007. Stock Market Reactions to Information Disclosure: new evidence from Japan’s Pollutant Release and Transfer Register. Environmental Economics and Policy Studies 8: 159-171.

Ferraro, PJ and SK Pattanayak. 2006. Money for Nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLoS Biology 4(4): 482-488.

Flores-Lagunes, A. and K. E. Schnier. Forthcoming.  Estimation of Sample Selection Models with Spatial Dependence,  Journal of Applied Econometrics.

Hanson, A., Schnier, K.E. and G. Turnbull. Forthcoming.  Drive ‘Til You Qualify: Residential Sorting in Suburbia,  Regional Science and Urban Economics.

Hicks, R.L., Horrace, W.C. and K.E. Schnier. Forthcoming.  Strategic Substitutes or Complements: The Game of Where to Fish?,  Journal of Econometrics.

Hicks, R.L. and K.E. Schnier. Forthcoming. Spatial Regulations and Endogenous Consideration Sets in Fisheries. Resource and Energy Economics.

Hicks, R. L. and K. E. Schnier. 2008.  Eco-labeling and Dolphin Avoidance: A Dynamic Model
of Tuna Fishing in the Eastern Tropical Pacific,  Journal of Environmental Economics
and Management 56: 103-116.

Millimet, D. and R. Tchernis. 2009. On the Specification of Propensity Scores. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 27(3): 397-415.

Pattanayak, SK, S Wunder and PJ Ferraro. 2010. Show Me the Money: do payments supply ecosystem services in developing countries?Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 4(2): 254-274.

Pfaff, A, J Robalino, GA Sanchez-Azofeifa, KS Andam, and PJ Ferraro. 2009. Park Location Affects Forest Protection: land characteristics cause differences in park impacts across Costa Rica. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy (Contributions) 9(2), Article 5.

Sandy R., Liu, G., Ottensmann J., Tchernis R., Wilson J., and O.T. Ford. Forthcoming. Studying the Child Obesity Epidemic with Natural Experiments. Economic Aspects of Obesity, Eds. MichaelGrossman and Naci Mocan, University of Chicago Press.

Schnier, K.E. and R.G. Felthoven. 2011.  Accounting for Spatial Heterogeneity and Autocorrelation in Spatial Discrete Choice Models: Implications for Behavioral Predictions,  Land Economics 87: 382-402.

Tchernis R., Horvitz-Lennon M., and Normand S-L. 2005. On the Use of Discrete Choice Models for Causal Inference.Statistics in Medicine 24(14): 2197 - 2212.