Análise de Contingência pelo Método de Turnbull: Estudo de Caso em Projeto Ambiental e Paisagístico
AbstractThe empiric distribution of Turnbull is a distribution that assumesfunction usefulness or a specific distribution for the Disposition toPay (DP). It was used by Carson et al. (1994) and adopted by Haab &McConnell (1995). Carson used Turnbull in the context of the verificationof damages and it emphasized the natural conservation of the Dispositionto pay (DP), he made a minimization of the supposition of DP in functionof an estimate of DP as a form of the smallest value, through the average ofthe benefit of the estimate of the smallest value of DP. To determine theviability of the environmental project of landscape of the neighborhoodHumaitá/Navegantes of Porto Alegre - RS, the methodology of theUncertain Evaluation was used (Contigent Valuation) for the Method ofTurnbull. This methodology will be to evaluate the environmentalpreservation, recovery of squares, parks and leisure areas; treatment ofsanitary sewers; canalization of courses of water, etc, as well as to determinethrough the analysis of the subjects elaborated for the field research,the Disposition to Pay (DP) of the population beneficiary for the offeredservice. In the questionnaires questions related to the environment and thesituation of landscape were made available, with the respective strips ofprices. In function of the answers viability of the population, was arrivedpotentially to a dear value for DP for the execution of the environmentalprojects of landscape of R$ 9.18 for family. For the execution of theenvironmental project DP was dear in R$ 6.62 for family and for the projectof landscape it was considered DP in R$ 8.12 for family. Those values willbe I paid a month for 20 years. Comparing the found values was observedthat the residents give more importance for the preservation and recoveryof squares, parks and leisure areas (of landscape) than of the treatment ofsanitary sewers and canalization of courses of water (it adapts).
How to Cite
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.