The benefits and costs of riparian analysis habitat preservation: A willingness to accept/willingness to pay contingent valuation approach

Ecological Economics

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 17-31

  Amigues, Jean Pierre ^a   Boulatoff, Catherine ^b   Desaigues, Brigitte ^c   Gauthier, Caroline ^d   Keith, John E ^e  

^a CEMAGREF   (France)

^b CLARKSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITÉ PARIS 1 PANTHÉON SORBONNE   (France)

^d Utah State University ^*  (France)

^e UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Contingent valuation; Riparian habitat preservation; Willingness to pay; Willingness to accept

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; HABITAT CONSERVATION; RIPARIAN ZONE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

FRANCE;

EID: 0036858107     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00172-6     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Amigues, J.P., 1998. L'Evaluation d'Une Politique de Protection de la Biodiversité des ForLts Riveraines de la Garonne. Toulouse, France; ERNA-INRA ESR.
2. Amigues, J.P., Desaigues, B, 1999a. France: A cost-benefit analysis of biodiversity conservation programs in the Garonne Valley. In: OECD Handbook of Incentive Measures for Biodiversity: Design and Implementation. OECD, Brussels.
3. Amigues, J.P., Desaigues, B. 1999b. A cost-benefit analysis of preserving biodiversity, Paper presented at the AERE Conference, Oslo.
4. Amigues, J.P., Desaigues, B., di Sima, O. 1999. L'Application du Modèle Spike a l'Evaluation Contingente, INRA and University of Paris 1 Working Paper.
5. Bishop, R., Heberlein, T., 1979. Measuring values of extra market goods: Are indirect measures biased. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61 (4), 926-939.
6. Bonnieux, F., Rainelli, P., 1996. Les politiques agri-environnementales, premières réflexions pour un eclairage théoique. Revue d'Economie Régionale et Urbaine 2, 407-421.
7. Bonnieux, F., Rainelli, P., Vermersch, D., 1998. Estimating the supply of environmental benefits by agriculture: A french case study. Environmental and Resource Economics 11, 135-153.
8. Broadhead (Boulatoff) C.A., 1997. Les Propriétaires Riverains des Bords de Garonne entre Portet sur Garonne et Moissac. Report to INRA-ESR Toulouse.
9. Desaigues, B., Ami, D., 1999. An estimation of the social benefits of preserving biodiverity. International Journal of Enivronment and Pollution 12 (4), 400-413.
10. Descamps, H., 1987. Les Boisements Riverains de la Garonne, un Patrimoine Méconnu. C.E.R.R., Toulouse.
11. Descamps, H., Desaigues, B., Muller, E., Tabacchi, E., Guilloy, H., James, M., Salinas, M., Tabacchi-Planty, A., 1998. Préserver la Biodiversité des Ripisylves: Bases Ecologique et Paysagères pour Déterminer un Consentement à Payer. Final Report to the Ministère de l'Aménagement de Territoire et de l'Evironnement. DGAD/SRAE/94174, Convention CNRS: 9502.
12. Devousges, W.H., Johnson, F.R., Dunford, R.W., Hudson, S.P., Wilson, K.N., Boyle, K.J., 1993. Measuring natural resource damages with contingent valuation: Tests of validity and reliability. In: Hausman, J.A. (Ed.), Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. North Holland Press, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. 91-159.
13. Diamond, P.A., Hausman, J.A., Leonard, G.K., Denning, M.A., 1993. Does contingent valuation measure preferences? Experimental evidence. In: Hausman, J.A. (Ed.), Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. North Holland Press, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. 41-90.
14. Ferraro, P.J., Simpson, R.D., 2000. The Cost-Effectiveness of Conservation Payments, Resources for the Future, discussion paper 00-31.
15. Garrod, G.D., Willis, K.G., 1997. The non-use benefits of enhancing forest biodiversity: A contingent ranking study. Ecological Economics 21, 45-61.
16. Greene, W.H., 1998. LIMDEP, Version 7.0. Econometric Software, Inc., Bellport, New York.
17. Green, D., Jakiwitz K., Kahneman D., Mcfadden, D., 1995. Referendum, Contingent Valuation, Anchoring, and Willingness to Pay for Public Goods, First Toulouse Conference on Environmental and Resource Economics, Toulouse, France, INRA.
18. Gauthier, C., 1997. Evaluation Economique des Ressources Naturelles: Le Cas Particulier de la Biodiversité, Thèse pour le Doctorat en Science Economique, Université des Sciences Sociales de Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
19. Haab, T., Mcconnell, K., 1997. Referendum models and negative willingness to pay: Alternative solutions. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 32 (3), 251-270.
20. Hanemann, W.M., 1984. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66 (3), 332-341.
21. Herriges, J.A., Shogren, J.F., 1996. Starting point bias in dichotomous choice valuation with follow-up questioning. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 30 (1), 112-131.
22. Hoehn, J.P., Randall, A., 1987. A satisfactory benefit cost indicator from contingent valuation. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 14 (3), 226-247.
23. Just, R., Hueth, D.L., Schmitz, A., 1982. Applied Welfare Economics and Public Policy. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
24. Kriström, B., 1997. Spike models in contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79 (4), 1013-1023.
25. Macmillan, D.C, Harley, D., Morrison, R., 1998. Cost-effectiveness analysis of woodland ecosystem restoration. Ecological Economics 27, 313-324.
26. Montgomery, C.A., Pollak, R.A., Freemark, K., White, D., 1999. Pricing biodiversity. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 38 (1), 1-19.
27. Reiser, B., Shechter, M., 1999. Incorporating zero values in the economic evaluation of enivironmental program benefits. Environmetrics 10, 87-101.
28. Shyamsundar, P., Kramer, R.A., 1996. Tropical forest protection: An empirical analysis of the costs borne by local people. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 31, 129-144.
29. van Kooten, G.C., Schmitz, A., 1992. Preserving waterfowl habitat on the Canadian prairies: Economic incentives versus moral suasion. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 74 (1), 79-89.
30. Whitby, M., Saunders, C., 1996. Estimating conservation goods in Britain. Land Economics 72 (3), 313-325.
31. Wynn, G., 2001. The cost-effectiveness of biodiversity management: Rural land uses in extensively farmed areas of Scotland. 2001 AERE Conference, Southampton, England.