Are there income effects on global willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation?

Environmental and Resource Economics

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 137-160

  Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl ^a   Hanley, Nick ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Environmental Kuznets Curve; Existence values; Income effects; Meta analysis

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; ECONOMICS; ECOSYSTEMS; RANDOM PROCESSES; RESOURCE VALUATION;

CONTINGENT VALUATIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL KUZNETS CURVES; EXISTENCE VALUES; INCOME EFFECTS; META ANALYSIS;

CONSERVATION;

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; CONTINGENT VALUATION; GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT; INCOME DISTRIBUTION; KUZNETS CURVE; META-ANALYSIS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 67349229270     PISSN: 09246460     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-008-9226-8     Document Type: Article

References (97)

1. JP Amigues C Boulatoff B Desaigues C Gauthier JE Keith 2002 The benefits and costs of riparian analysis habitat preservation: a willingness to accept/willingness to pay contingent valuation approach Ecol Econ 43 17 31 10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00172-6
2. H Armirnejad S Khalilian MH Assareh M Ahmadian 2006 Estimating the existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method Ecol Econ 58 665 675 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.08.015
3. F Bal KJ Button P Nijkamp 2002 Ceteris paribus, meta-analysis and the value transfer Socioecon Plann Sci 36 127 138 10.1016/S0038-0121(01)00022-2
4. R Bandera C Tisdell 2004 The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study Ecol Econ 48 93 107 10.1016/j.ecolecon. 2003.01.001
5. EB Barbier 1997 Introduction to the environmental Kuznets curve Environ Dev Econ 2 369 381 10.1017/S1355770X97000193
6. IJ Bateman IH Langford 1997 'Non-users' willingness to pay for a national park: an application and critique of the contingent valuation method Reg Stud 31 571 582 10.1080/00343409750131703
7. IJ Bateman AP Jones 2003 Contrasting conventional with multi-level modelling approaches to meta-analysis: expectation consistency in UK woodland recreation values Land Econ 79 2 235 258 10.2307/3146869
8. IJ Bateman J Mawby 2004 First impressions count: interviewer appearance and information effects in stated preference studies Ecol Econ 49 47 55 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.12.006
9. IJ Bateman IH Langford RK Turner KG Willis GD Garrod 1995 Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies Ecol Econ 12 161 179 10.1016/0921-8009(94)00044-V
10. Bateman I, Carson R, Day B, Hanemann M, Hanley N et al (2002) Economic valuation with stated preference techniques. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham
11. JW Bennett 1984 Using direct questioning to value the existence benefits of preserved natural areas Aust J Agric Econ 28 136 152
12. Bergstrom JC, Dillman BL, Stoll JR (1985) Public environmental amenity benefits of private land: the case of prime agricultural land. South J Agric Econ, July 139-149
13. Boiesen JH, Jacobsen JB, Thorsen BJ, Strange N, Dubgaard A (2005) Værdisætning af de danske lyngheder [Valuation of Danish heathland]. Working paper 14, Forest & Landscape, p 68
14. JM Bowker JR Stoll 1988 Use of dichotomous choice nonmarket methods to value the whooping crane resource Am J Agric Econ 70 372 381 10.2307/1242078
15. PC Boxall WL Adamowicz J Swait M Williams J Louviere 1996 A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation Ecol Econ 18 243 253 10.1016/0921-8009(96)00039-0
16. LM Brander RJGM Florax JE Vermaat 2006 The empirics of wetland valuation: a comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature Environ Resour Econ 33 223 250 10.1007/s10640-005-3104-4
17. LM Brander P Van Beukering SJC Herman 2007 The recreational value of coral reefs: a meta-analysis Ecol Econ 63 209 218 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.11.002
18. Brouwer R, Bateman I (2001) The temporal stability of contingent WTP values. In: Proceedings from EEARE 11th annual conference, University of Southampton, UK, 28-30 June 2001
19. R Brouwer IH Langford IJ Bateman RK Turner 1999 A meta-analysis of wetland contingent valuation studies Reg Environ Change 1 47 57 10.1007/s101130050007
20. A Bruvoll T Faehn B Strom 2003 Quantifying central hypotheses on environmental Kuznets curves for a rich economy Scott J Polit Econ 50 2 149 173 10.1111/1467-9485.5002003
21. TA Cameron J Quiggin 1994 Estimation using contingent valuation data from a "Dichotomous choice with follow-up" questionnaire J Environ Econ Manage 27 218 234 10.1006/jeem.1994.1035
22. TA Cameron J Quiggin 1998 Estimation using contingent valuation data from a "Dichotomous choice with follow-up" questionnaire: reply J Environ Econ Manage 35 195 199 10.1006/jeem.1998.1026
23. RT Carson L Wilks D Imber 1994 Valuing the preservation of Australia's Kakadu conservation zone Oxf Econ Pap 46 727 749
24. K Chang YH Ying 2005 'External benefits of preserving agricultural land: Taiwan's rice fields Soc Sci J 42 285 293 10.1016/j.soscij.2005.03.008
25. M Christie N Hanley J Warren K Murphy R Wright T Hyde 2006 Valuing diversity of biodiversity Ecol Econ 58 304 317 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.07.034
26. RT Deacon CS Norman 2006 Does the environmental Kuznets Curve describe how countries behave Land Econ 82 2 291 315
27. U Ebert 2003 Environmental goods and the distribution of income Environ Resour Econ 25 435 459 10.1023/A:1025052225929
28. NE Flores RT Carson 1997 The Relationship between the income elasticities of demand and willingness to pay J Environ Econ Manage 33 287 295 10.1006/jeem.1997.0998
29. D Franco D Franco I Mannino G Zanetto 2001 The role of agroforestry networks in landscape socioeconomic processes: the potential and limits of the contingent valuation method Landsc Urban Plan 55 239 256 10.1016/S0169-2046(01) 00158-X
30. Garcia-Lopez G (2006) Evaluating the validity of the benefit transfer approach: the case of manatee protection in Florida and Puerto Rico. Masters Thesis, Department of Land Economy, Cambridge University
31. KL Giraud JB Loomis RL Johnson 1999 Internal and external scope in willingness-to-pay estimates for threatened and endangered wildlife J Environ Manage 56 221 229 10.1006/jema.1999.0277
32. K Giraud B Turcin J Loomis J Cooper 2002 Economic benefit of the protection program for the Steller sea lion Mar Policy 26 451 458 10.1016/S0308-597X(02)00025-8
33. Gong Y (2003) Opportunity cost of local people and WTP of off-site residents for biodiversity conservation in Fanjingshan National Nature Reserve in China. CCAP Working Paper 04-E1, 39 pp
34. Greene WH (2002) Econometric analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, New Jersey, p 1026
35. GM Grossman AB Krueger 1995 Economic growth and the environment Q J Econ 110 353 377 10.2307/2118443
36. N Hadker S Sharma A David TR Muraleedharan 1997 Willingness-to-pay for Borivli National Park: evidence from a contingent valuation Ecol Econ 21 105 122 10.1016/S0921-8009(96)00094-8
37. A Hailu WL Adamowicz PC Boxall 2000 Complements, substitutes, budget constraints and valuation Environ Resour Econ 16 51 58 10.1023/A:1008328920083
38. J Hammitt J-T Liu J-L Liu 2001 Contingent valuation of a Taiwanese wetland Environ Dev Econ 6 259 268 10.1017/S1355770X01000146
39. N Hanley D Macmillan RE Wright C Bullock I Simpson D Parsisson 1998 Contingent valuation versus choice experiments: estimating the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas in Scotland J Agric Econ 49 1 15
40. N Hanley RE Wright V Adamowicz 1998 Using choice experiments to value the environment Environ Resour Econ 11 413 428 10.1023/A:1008287310583
41. N Hanley D Macmillan I Patterson RE Wright 2003 Economics and the design of nature conservation policy: a case study of wild goose conservation in Scotland using choice experiments Anim Conserv 6 123 129 10.1017/ S1367943003003160
42. TA Heberlein MA Matthew RC Bishop NC Schaeffer 2005 Rethinking the scope test as a criterion for validity in contingent valuation J Environ Econ Manage 50 1 22 10.1016/j.jeem.2004.09.005
43. S Hökby T Söderqvist 2003 Elasticities of demand and willingness to pay for environmental services in Sweden Environ Resour Econ 26 361 383 10.1023/B:EARE.0000003581.97411.75
44. TP Holmes JC Bergstrom E Huszar SB Kask F Orr 2004 Contingent valuation, net marginal benefits, and the scale of riparian ecosystem restoration Ecol Econ 49 19 30 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.10.015
45. Hunter JE, Schmidt FL (2004) Methods of meta-analysis, correcting error and bias in research findings, 2nd edn. SAGE Publications, London, p 582
46. IMF (2007a) World economic outlook database, September 2006 edition. Downloaded from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2006/02/data/download. aspx on 5 January 2007
47. IMF (2007b) World Economic Outlook, October 2007, Globalization and inequality. International Monetary Fund, Washington, 275 pp
48. Jacobsen JB, Thorsen BJ (2008) Where to put a national park and what to put in it? An a priori study of the willingness-to-pay for coming national parks. Working paper, Forest & Landscape, Copenhagen University, p 31
49. Jacobsen JB, Thorsen BJ, Boiesen JH, Anthon S, Tranberg J (2006) Værdisætning af syv mulige nationalparker i Danmark [Valuation of seven potential national parks in Denmark], Summary in English, Arbejdsrapport 28. Forest & Landscape KVL, Frederiksberg, p 63
50. Jakobsson KM, Dragun AK (1996) Contingent valuation and endangered species. Methodological issues and applications. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, p 269
51. KM Jakobsson AK Dragun 2001 The worth of a Possom: valuing species with the contingent valuation method Environ Resour Econ 19 211 227 10.1023/A:1011128620388
52. Johnson RL, Bregenzer NS, Shelby B (1990) Contingent valuation question formats: dichotomous choice versus open-ended responses, pp 193-204. In: Johnson RL, Johnson GV(eds) Economic valuation of natural resources. Issues, theory and applications. Social Behaviour and Natural Resource Series. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, USA, p 220
53. B Kriström P Riera 1996 Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one? Environ Resour Econ 7 45 55 10.1007/BF00420426
54. Krutilla JV, Fisher AC (1975) The economics of natural environments. Studies in the valuation of commodity and amenity resources, resources for the future. Colorado, Washington, DC
55. Kuznets 1955 Economic growth and income inequality The American Economic Review 49 1 28
56. S-J Kwak S-H Yoo S-Y Han 2003 Estimating the public's value for urban forest in the Seoul metropolitan area of korea: a contingent valuation study Urban Stud 40 2207 2221 10.1080/0042098032000123259
57. E Lehtonen J Kuulivainen E Pouta M Rekola L Chian-Zhong 2003 Non-market benefits of forest conservation in southern Finland Environ Sci Policy 6 195 204 10.1016/S1462-9011(03)00035-2
58. CJ León 1996 Double bounded survival values for preserving the landscape of natural parks J Environ Manage 46 103 118
59. H Lindhjem 2007 20 years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: a meta-analysis J For Econ 12 251 277
60. Lockwood M, Carberry D (1998) Stated preference surveys of remnant native vegetation conservation. Johnstone Centre, Report No. 104, Albury, 30 pp
61. JB Loomis 1987 Expanding contingent value sample estimates to aggregate benefit estimates: current practices and proposed solutions Land Econ 63 396 402 10.2307/3146296
62. JB Loomis DS White 1996 Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis Ecol Econ 18 197 206 10.1016/0921-8009(96)00029-8
63. JB Loomis A Gonzales-Caban 1998 A willingness-to-pay function for protecting acres of spotted owl habitat from fire Ecol Econ 25 315 322 10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00044-X
64. J Loomis M Lockwood T DeLacy 1993 Some empirical evidence on embedding effects in contingent valuation of forest protection J Environ Econ Manage 24 45 55 10.1006/jeem.1993.1025
65. JB Loomis P Kent L Strange K Fausch A Covich 2000 Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey Ecol Econ 33 103 117 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00131-7
66. DC Macmillan EI Duff DA Elston 2001 Modelling the non-market environmental costs and benefits of biodiversity projects using contingent valuation data Environ Resour Econ 18 391 410 10.1023/A:1011169413639
67. MA McPherson ML Nieswiadomy 2005 Environmental Kuznets curve: threatened species and spatial effects Ecol Econ 55 395 407 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.12.004
68. Metrick A, Weitzman ML (1994) Patterns of behavior in biodiversity preservation. The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 1358, 36 pp
69. Mitchell RC, Carson RT (1989) Using surveys to value public goods, The contingent valuation method. Resources for the Future, Washington DC, 463 pp
70. A Munro 2005 Household willingness to pay equals individual willingness to pay if and only if the household income pools Econ Lett 88 227 230 10.1016/j.econlet.2005.02.011
71. K Nyborg 2000 Homo Economicus and Homo Politicus: interpretation and aggregation of environmental values J Econ Behav Organ 42 305 322 10.1016/S0167-2681(00)00091-3
72. Pang F, Drummond M, Song F (1999) The use of meta-analysis in economic valuation. Discussion Paper 173, Centre for Health Economics, The University of York, 25 pp
73. J Pate L Loomis 1997 The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California Ecol Econ 20 199 207 10.1016/S0921-8009(96)00080-8
74. Poe GL, Boyle KJ, Bergstrom JC (2000) A meta analysis of contingent values for groundwater quality in the United States. In: 10th Annual conference of the European association of environmental and resource economists, 30 June-2 July, University of Crete, Greece
75. DW Reaves RA Kramer TP Holmes 1999 Does question format matter? Valuing endangeres species Environ Resour Econ 14 365 383 10.1023/A:1008320621720
76. J Richer 1995 Willingness to pay for desert protection Contemp Econ Policy 13 93 104
77. Riera P, Mogas J, Bennett J (2008) Forest value inference using contingent valuation and choice experiments. In: Birol E, Koundouri P(eds) Choice experiments informing European environmental policy. Edward-Elgar Publishing, Wally Oates and Henk Folmer's 'New Horizons in Environmental Economics' Series. Cheltenham, UK, p 368
78. D Rondeau W Schulze G Poe 1999 Voluntary revelation of the demand for public goods using a provision point mechanism J Public Econ 72 455 470 10.1016/S0047-2727(98)00104-2
79. RS Rosenberger JB Loomis 2000 Panel stratification in meta-analysis of economic studies: an investigation of its effects in the recreation valuation literature J Agric Appl Econ 32 459 470
80. F Schläpfer 2006 Survey protocol and income effects in the contingent valuation of public goods: a meta-analysis Ecol Econ 57 415 429 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.019
81. M Shechter B Reiser N Zaitsev 1998 Measuring passive use value, pledges, donations and CV responses in connection with an important natural resource Environ Resour Econ 12 457 478 10.1023/A:1008397411466
82. VK Smith Y Kaoru 1990 Signals or noise? Explaining the variation in recreation benefit estimates Am J Agric Econ 72 419 433 10.2307/1242344
83. VK Smith LL Osborne 1996 Do contingent valuation estimates pass a "scope" test? A meta-analysis J Environ Econ Manage 31 287 301 10.1006/jeem.1996.0045
84. BD Solomon CM Corey-Luse KE Halvorsen 2004 The Florida manatee and eco-tourism: toward a safe minimum standard Ecol Econ 50 101 115 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.03.025
85. Spanniks F, Hoevenagel R (1995) Temporal embedding in contingent valuation: evidence from a study investigating the value of Wildlife Management in Agricultural Areas. In: Proceedings from the Sixth Annual Conference of the European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, Umeå, Sweden, June 18-20, 1995
86. WJ Streever M Callaghan-Perry A Searles T Stevens P Svoboda 1998 Public attitudes and values for wetland conservation in New South Wales, Australia J Environ Manage 54 1 14 10.1006/jema.1998.0224
87. Subade RF (2005) Valuing biodiversity conservation in a world heritage site. Citizens Non-use B values for Tubbataha Reefs National Marine Park, Philippines. Economy and Environmental Program for Southeast Asia, Research Report No. 2005-RP4, 68 pp
88. T Tsuge T Washida 2003 Economic valuation of the Seto Inland Sea by using an Internet CV survey Mar Pollut Bull 47 230 236 10.1016/S0025-326X(03)00058-4
89. JK Turpie 2003 The existence value of biodiversity in South Africa: how interest, experience, knowledge, income and perceived level of threat influence local willingness to pay Ecol Econ 46 199 216 10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00122-8
90. van den Bergh J, Button KJ, Nijkamp P, Pepping GC (1997) Meta-analysis in environmental economics. Economy & Environment, Kluwer Academic Publishers, p 240
91. K Veisten HF Hoen S Navrud J Strand 2004 Scope insensitivity in contingent valuation of complex environmental amenities J Environ Manage 73 317 331 10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.07.008
92. RG Walsh JB Loomis RA Gillman 1984 Valuing option, existence, and bequest demands for wilderness Land Econ 60 14 29 10.2307/3146089
93. MP Welsh GL Poe 1998 Elicitation effects in contingent valuation: comparisons to a multiple bounded discrete choice approach J Environ Econ Manage 36 170 185 10.1006/jeem.1998.1043
94. PCL White KW Gregory PJ Lindley G Richards 1997 Economic values of threatened mammals in Britain: a case study of the otter Lutra lutra and the water vole Arvicola terrestris Biol Conserv 82 345 354 10.1016/S0006-3207(97) 00036-0
95. PCL White AC Bennett EJV Hayes 2001 The use of willingness-to-pay approaches in mammal conservation Mammal Rev 31 151 167 10.1046/j.1365-2907. 2001.00083.x
96. RT Woodward Y-S Wui 2001 The economic value of wetland services: a meta-analysis Ecol Econ 37 257 270 10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00276-7
97. X Zhongmin C Guodong Z Zhiqiang S Zhiyong J Loomis 2003 Applying contingent valuation in China to measure the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Ejina region Ecol Econ 44 345 358 10.1016/S0921-8009(02) 00280-X