Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-m9kch Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-09T06:13:25.927Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stated Preferences for Intermediate versus Final Ecosystem Services: Disentangling Willingness to Pay for Omitted Outcomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Robert J. Johnston ,
Eric T. Schultz ,
Kathleen Segerson ,
Elena Y. Besedin  and
Mahesh Ramachandran
Robert J. Johnston*
Affiliation:
George Perkins Marsh Institute and a professor in the Department of Economics at Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts
Eric T. Schultz
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut at Storrs
Kathleen Segerson
Affiliation:
University of Connecticut at Storrs
Elena Y. Besedin
Affiliation:
Environment and Resources Division of Abt Associates, Inc
Mahesh Ramachandran
Affiliation:
School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University
*
Corresponding Author: Robert J. Johnston ▪ George Perkins Marsh Institute ▪ Clark University ▪ 950 Main Street ▪ Worcester, MA 01610 ▪ Phone 508.751.4619 ▪ Email rjohnston@clarku.edu.
Get access

Abstract

Stated preference scenarios often provide information on intermediate biophysical processes but omit information on the resulting final services that provide utility. This may cause respondents to speculate about the effects of intermediate outcomes on their welfare, leading to biased welfare estimates. This work clarifies distinctions between intermediate and final ecosystem services within stated preference valuation and develops a structural model by which to infer respondents’ speculations when a final ecosystem service is omitted. The model also derives implications for welfare estimates. Methods and results are illustrated using an application of choice experiments to fish restoration in Rhode Island's Pawtuxet watershed.

Keywords

choice experimentchoice modelingecosystem serviceriver restorationvaluationwillingness to pay
Type
Selected Papers
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , April 2013 , pp. 98 - 118
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bateman, I.J., Mace, G.M., Fezzi, C., Atkinson, G., and Turner, K. 2011. “Economic Analysis for Ecosystem Service Assessments.” Environmental and Resource Economics 48(3): 177–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blamey, R.K., Bennett, J.W., Louviere, J.J., Morrison, M.D., and Rolfe, J.C. 2002. “Attribute Causality in Environmental Choice Modeling.” Environmental and Resource Economics 23: 167–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boxall, P.C., Adamowicz, W.L., Swait, J., Williams, M., and Louviere, J. 1996. “A Comparison of Stated Preference Methods for Environmental Valuation.” Ecological Economics 18: 243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, J., and Krupnick, A. 2009. The Definition and Choice of Environmental Commodities for Nonmarket Valuation. Report RFF DP 09-35, Resources for the Future, Washington, D.C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, J., and Banzhaf, S. 2007. “What Are Ecosystem Services? The Need for Standardized Environmental Accounting Units.” Ecological Economics 63(2/3): 616–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, K.J. 2003. “Contingent Valuation in Practice.” In Champ, P.A., Boyle, K.J. and Brown, T.C., eds., A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Brown, T.C., Bergstrom, J.C., and Loomis, J.B. 2007. “Defining, Valuing, and Providing Ecosystem Goods and Services.” Natural Resources Journal 47(3): 329–376.Google Scholar
Carson, R.T. 1998. “Valuation of Tropical Rainforests: Philosophical and Practical Issues in the Use of Contingent Valuation.” Ecological Economics 24(2): 15–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christie, M., Hanley, N., Warren, J., Murphy, K., Wright, R., and Hyde, T. 2006. “Valuing the Diversity of Biodiversity.” Ecological Economics 58(3): 304–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czajkowski, M., Buszko-Briggs, M., and Hanley, N. 2009. “Valuing Changes in Forest Biodiversity.” Ecological Economics 68(3): 2910–2917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deegan, L.A., Finn, J.T., Ayvazian, S.G., Ryder-Kieffer, C.A., and Buonaccorsi, J. 1997. “Development and Validation of an Estuarine Biotic Integrity Index.” Estuaries 20: 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillman, D.A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Erkan, D.E. 2002. Strategic Plan for the Restoration of Anadromous Fishes to Rhode Island Coastal Streams. Wakefield, RI: Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Division of Fish and Wildlife.Google Scholar
Fisher, B., Turner, R.K., and Morling, P. 2009. “Defining and Classifying Ecosystem Services for Decision Making.” Ecological Economics 68(4): 643–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, B., Turner, K., Zylstra, M., Brouwer, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Ferraro, P., Green, R., Hadley, D., Harlow, J., Jefferiss, P., Kirkby, C., Morling, P., Mowatt, S., Naidoo, R., Paavola, J., Strassburg, B., Yu, D., and Balmford, A. 2008. “Ecosystem Services and Economic Theory: Integration for Policy Relevant Research.” Ecological Applications 18(9): 2050–2067.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haab, T.C., and McConnell, K.E. 2002. Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: The Econometrics of Non-Market Valuation. Cheltenham, UK. Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hensher, D.A., and Greene, W.H. 2003. “The Mixed Logit Model: The State of Practice.” Transportation 30(3): 133–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, T.P., Bergstrom, J.C., Huszar, E., Kask, S.B., and Orr, F. III. 2004. “Contingent Valuation, Net Marginal Benefits, and the Scale of Riparian Ecosystem Restoration.” Ecological Economics 49(2): 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackson, L.E., Kurtz, J.C., and Fisher, W.S., eds. 2000. Evaluation Guidelines for Ecological Indicators. Report EPA/620/R-99/005, Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
Jakus, P.M., and Shaw, W.D. 2003. “Perceived Hazard and Product Choice: An Application to Recreational Site Choice.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 26(1): 77–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, R.J., and Duke, J.M. 2007. “Willingness to Pay for Agricultural Land Preservation and Policy Process Attributes: Does the Method Matter?” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 89(5): 1098–1115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, R.J., and Russell, M. 2011. “An Operational Structure for Clarity in Ecosystem Service Values.” Ecological Economics 70(13): 2243–2249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, R.J., Schultz, E.T., Segerson, K., Besedin, E.Y., and Ramachandran, M. 2012. “Enhancing the Content Validity of Stated Preference Valuation: The Structure and Function of Ecological Indicators.” Land Economics 88(2): 102–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, R.J., Segerson, K., Schultz, E.T., Besedin, E.Y., and Ramachandran, M. 2011. “Indices of Biotic Integrity in Stated Preference Valuation of Aquatic Ecosystem Services.” Ecological Economics 70(12): 1946–1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, S.J., and Smith, L.M. 2005. “Indicators of Ecosystem Integrity for Estuaries.” In Bortone, S.A., ed., Estuarine Indicators. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Kaplowitz, M.D., Lupi, F., and Hoehn, J.P. 2004. “Multiple Methods for Developing and Evaluating a Stated-Choice Questionnaire to Value Wetlands.” In Presser, S., Rothget, J.M., Coupter, M.P., Lesser, J.T., Martin, E., Martin, J., and Singer, E., eds., Methods for Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Karr, J.R. 1981. “Assessment of Biotic Integrity Using Fish Communities.” Fisheries 6(7): 21–27.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karr, J.R. 1991. “Biological Integrity: A Long-neglected Aspect of Water Resource Management.” Ecological Applications 1(2): 66–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karr, J.R., Yant, P.R., and Fausch, K.D. 1987. “Spatial and Temporal Variability of the Index of Biotic Integrity in Three Midwestern Streams.” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 116(1): 1–11.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krinsky, I., and Robb, A.L. 1986. “On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities.” Review of Economics and Statistics 68(4): 715–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhfeld, W.F. 2010. Marketing Research Methods in SAS: Experimental Design, Choice, Conjoint, and Graphical Techniques. Cary, NC: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Kuhfeld, W.F., and Tobias, R.D. 2005. “Large Factorial Designs for Product Engineering and Marketing Research Applications. Technometrics 47: 132–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loesch, J.G. 1987. “Overview of Life History Aspects of Anadromous Alewife and Blueback Herring in Freshwater Habitats.” In Dadswell, M.J., Klauda, R.J., Moffitt, C.M., Saunders, R.L., Rulifson, R.A., and Cooper, J.E., eds., International Symposium on Common Strategies of Anadromous and Catadromous Fishes. Boston, MA: American Fisheries Society.Google Scholar
Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., and Swait, J.D. 2000. Stated Preference Methods: Analysis, and Application. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Naweedi, M.J. 2005. “Environmental Indicators as Performance Measures for Improving Estuarine Environmental Quality.” In Bortone, S.A., ed., Estuarine Indicators. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Poe, G.L., Giraud, K.L., and Loomis, J.B. 2005. “Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference in Empirical Distributions.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(2): 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Provencher, B., Lewis, D.J., and Anderson, K. 2012. “Disentangling Preference and Expectations in Stated Preference Analysis with Respondent Uncertainty: The Case of Invasive Species Prevention.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 64(2): 169–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schilt, C.R. 2007. “Developing Fish Passage and Protection at Hydropower Dams. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 104: 295–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schkade, D.A., and Payne, J.W. 1994. “How People Respond to Contingent Valuation Questions: A Verbal Protocol Analysis of Willingness to Pay for an Environmental Regulation.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 26(2): 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schultz, E.T., Johnston, R.J., Segerson, K., and Besedin, E.Y. 2012. “Integrating Ecology and Economics for Restoration: Using Ecological Indicators in Valuation of Ecosystem Services.” Restoration Ecology 20(4): 304–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spash, C.L., and Hanley, N. 1995. “Preferences, Information, and Biodiversity Preservation.” Ecological Economics 12(4): 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suter, G.W. 1993. Ecological Risk Assessment. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publishers.Google Scholar
Suter, G.W. 2001. “Applicability of Indicator Monitoring to Ecological Risk Assessment.” Ecological Indicators 1: 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Train, K.E. 2009. Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Turner, R.K., and Daily, G.C. 2008. “The Ecosystem Services Framework and Natural Capital Conservation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 39(2): 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallace, K.J. 2007. “Classification of Ecosystem Services: Problems and Solutions.” Biological Conservation 139(3/4): 235–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar