National values for regional aquatic species at risk in Canada

Endangered Species Research

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 239-249

  Rudd, Murray A ^a  

^a MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY OF NEWFOUNDLAND   (Canada)

Author keywords

Choice experiment; Endangered species; Internet survey; Latent class analysis; Passive use value; Species at Risk Act

Indexed keywords

ABUNDANCE; AQUATIC ORGANISM; ENDANGERED SPECIES; INTERNET; SPECIES CONSERVATION; SPECIES INVENTORY; WHALE;

ATLANTIC OCEAN; ATLANTIC OCEAN (NORTH); CANADA; NORTH AMERICA;

ACIPENSER TRANSMONTANUS; CETACEA; CHONDRICHTHYES; COREGONUS HUNTSMANI; DERMOCHELYIDAE; DERMOCHELYS CORIACEA; EUBALAENA GLACIALIS; LAMNA NASUS; LAMNIDAE; SALMO SALAR; TESTUDINES;

EID: 59849090442     PISSN: 18635407     EISSN: 16134796     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3354/esr00160     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Alvarez RM, Sherman RP, VanBeselaere C (2003) Subject acquisition for web-based surveys. Polit Anal 11:23-43
2. Bergstrom JC, Boyle KJ, YabeM(2004) Trading taxes vs. paying taxes to value and finance public environmental goods. Environ Resour Econ 28:533-549
3. Birol E, Karousakis K, Koundouri P (2006) Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: the case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece. Ecol Econ 60:145-156
4. Boxall PC, Adamowicz WL (2002) Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: a latent class approach. Environ Resour Econ 23:421-446
5. Carson RT, Mitchell RC, Hanemann M, Kopp RJ, Presser S, Ruud PA (2003) Contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environ Resour Econ 25:257-286
6. Christie M, Hanley N, Warren J, Murphy K, Wright R, Hyde T (2006) Valuing the diversity of biodiversity. Ecol Econ 58: 304-317
7. Couper MP, Kapteyn A, Schonlau M, Winter J (2007) Noncoverage and nonresponse in an Internet survey. Soc Sci Res 36:131-148
8. DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans) (2006) Potential socio-economic implications of adding porbeagle shark to the list of wildlife species at risk in the Species at Risk Act (SARA). Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth
9. Environment Canada (2003) Species at Risk Act: a guide. Environment Canada, Ottawa
10. Government of Canada (2006) Order giving notice of decisions not to add certain species to the List of Endangered Species. Can Gaz 140(Part II):1127-1131
11. Hanley N, Mourato S, Wright RE (2001) Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation? J Econ Surv 15:435-462
12. Hein L, van Koppen K, de Groot RS, van Ireland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57:209-228
13. Hu W, Hunnemeyer A, Veeman M, Adamowicz W, Srivastava L (2004) Trading off health, environmental and genetic modification attributes in food. Eur Rev Agric Econ 31:389-408
14. Hu W, Veeman M, Adamowicz W, Gao G (2006) Consumers' food choices with voluntary access to genetic modification information. Can J Agric Econ 54:585-604
15. Kotchen MJ, Reiling SD (2000) Environmental attitudes, motivations, and contingent valuation of nonuse values: a case study involving endangered species. Ecol Econ 32:93-107
16. Loomis JB, White DS (1996) Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 18:197-206
17. Martín-Lopéz B, Montes C, Benayas J (2008) Economic valuation of biodiversity conservation: the meaning of numbers. Conserv Biol 22:624-635
18. McFadden D (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In: Zarembka P (ed) Frontiers in Econometrics. Academic Press, New York, p 105-142
19. Milon JW, Scrogin D (2006) Latent preferences and valuation of wetland ecosystem restoration. Ecol Econ 56: 162-175
20. Mooers AO, Prugh LR, Festa-Bianchet M, Hutchings JA (2007) Biases in legal listing under Canadian endangered species legislation. Conserv Biol 21:572-575
21. Ojea E, Loureiro ML (2007) Altruistic, egoistic and biospheric values in willingness to pay (WTP) for wildlife. Ecol Econ 63:807-814
22. Pearce D (1998) Cost-benefit analysis and environmental policy. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 14:84-100
23. Pearce C, Moran D (1994) The economic value of biodiversity. Earthscan, London
24. Rudd MA, Tupper MH, Folmer H, van Kooten GC (2003) Policy analysis for tropical marine reserves: directions and challenges. Fish Fish 4:65-85
25. Spash CL, Hanley N (1995) Preferences, information and biodiversity preservation. Ecol Econ 12:191-208
26. Statistics Canada (2004) Postal code conversion file (PCCF), reference guide. Statistics Canada, Ottawa
27. Statistics Canada (2008) Canadian Internet use survey. The Daily (12 June 2008), Statistics Canada, Ottawa. www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/ 080612/d080612.pdf
28. Stevens TH, Echeverria J, Glass RJ, Hager T, More TA (1991) Measuring the existence value of wildlife: What do CVM estimates really show? Land Econ 67:390-400
29. Swallow SK, McGonagle MP (2006) Public funding of environmental amenities: Contingent choices using new taxes or existing revenues for coastal land conservation. Land Econ 82:56-67
30. TBS (Treasury Board Secretariat) (2007) Canadian cost-benefit analysis guide: regulatory proposals. Treasury Board Secretariat, Ottawa
31. Tisdell C, Wilson C, Nantha HS (2005) Policies for saving a rare Australian glider: economics and ecology. Biol Conserv 123:237-248
32. Train KE (2003) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
33. Venter O, Brodeur NN, Nemiroff L, Belland B, Dolinsek IJ, Grant JWA (2006) Threats to endangered species in Canada. Bioscience 56:903-910
34. Vermunt JK, Magidson J (2005) Technical guide for Latent GOLD Choice 4.0: basic and advanced. Statistical Innovations Inc., Belmont, MA
35. Zhang Y, Pang S, Wang Y (2001) Orthogonal arrays obtained by generalized Hadamard product. Discrete Math 238: 151-170