Incorporated into my book

Abstract: The neoclassical choice-theory that supports the monetary valuation of environmental resources assumes you have a complete ordering of bundles in terms of well-being, WB. But there are different kinds of WB (and ill-being): pleasurable and unpleasant sensations, and positive and negative thoughts and emotions. So, the existence of a complete ordering based on a monotonic index of the different kinds of WB (e.g. “utility”) requires that all the different kinds of WB (and ill-being) are WB-commensurable (you can, e.g., compare the pleasures of chocolate with global-warming angst). But many/most people, including ecological economists, don’t believe the kinds of WB produced by environmental amenities are all WB-commensurable with those produced by other goods and amenities. I show that, if they are correct, a compensating variation, CV, for an environmental policy often does not exist: it is a meaningless construct. Then, arguments and findings for and against complete WB-commensurability are presented in the context of the environment.     
Keywords: compensating variation (CV), valuation, well-being (WB) and bearers-of-WB, WB-incomparable and WB-incommensurable, WB/bearer separability, neuroeconomics, and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex