Willingness to pay among households to prevent coastal resources from polluting by oil spills: A pilot survey

Marine Pollution Bulletin

Volumn 58, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 1514-1521

  Liu, Xin ^a   Wirtz, Kai W ^b   Kannen, Andreas ^b   Kraft, Dietmar ^c  

^a YANTAI INSTITUTE OF COASTAL ZONE RESEARCH   (China)

^b INSTITUTE OF MATERIALS RESEARCH   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OLDENBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Choice experiments; Coastal resources; Contingency management; Oil spill; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; COASTAL ENVIRONMENTS; COASTAL REGIONS; COASTAL RESOURCES; COASTAL WATERS; CONTINGENCY MANAGEMENT; PILOT SURVEYS; STATED CHOICE; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

BEACHES; COASTAL ZONES; ECONOMICS; EXPERIMENTS; HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SPILLS; OIL SPILLS; SURVEYS;

NATURAL RESOURCES;

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT; DECISION MAKING; NATURAL RESOURCE; OIL SPILL; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ARTICLE; COASTAL WATERS; DUCK; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; OIL SPILL; PILOT STUDY; SEA POLLUTION; SEASHORE; WATER POLLUTION CONTROL;

CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; DATA COLLECTION; DISASTERS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PETROLEUM; PILOT PROJECTS; RISK MANAGEMENT;

ANAS; AVES;

EID: 70349287572     PISSN: 0025326X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2009.05.015     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Álvarez-Farizo B., and Hanley N. Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms: an example from Spain. Energy Policy 30 (2002) 107-116
2. Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Leamer E.E., Radner R., and Schuman H. Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register 58 (1993) 4601-4614
3. Baral N., Stern M.J., and Bhattarai R. Contingent valuation of ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: implications for sustainable park finance and local development. Ecological Economics 66 (2008) 218-227
4. Bennett J., and Blamey R. The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation (2001), Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, UK
5. Boxall P.C., Adamowicz W.L., Swait J., Williams M., and Louviere J. A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation. Ecological Economics 18 (1996) 243-253
6. Braeuer I. Money as an indicator: to make use of economic evaluation for biodiversity conservation. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 98 (2003) 483-491
7. Brown K., Adger W.N., Tompkins E., Bacon P., Shim D., and Young K. Trade-off analysis for marine protected area management. Ecological Economics 37 (2001) 417-434
8. Bullock C.H., Elston D.A., and Chalmers N.A. An application of economic choice experiments to a traditional land use - deer hunting and landscape change in the Scottish Highlands. Journal of Environmental Management 52 (1998) 335-351
9. Carlsson F., Frykblom P., and Liljenstolpe C. Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments. Ecological Economics 47 (2003) 95-103
10. Federal Statistical Office Germany, 2006. .
11. Garrod G., and Willis K. Estimating lost amenity due to landfill waste disposal. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 22 (1998) 83-95
12. Guikema S.D. An estimation of the social costs of landfill siting using a choice experiment. Waste Management 25 (2005) 331-333
13. Haekan, E., Bjoern, O., 2000. Heterogeneous preferences for marine amenities a choice experiment applied to water quality. Working paper in Economics 126, Goeteborg University.
14. Haider W., and Rasid H. Eliciting public preferences for municipal water supply options. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 22 (2002) 337-360
15. Hanemann W.M. Welfare evaluation in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66 (1984) 332-341
16. Hanemann, W.M., Kanninen, B., 1996. The statistical analysis of discrete-response CV data. Working Paper No. 798. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California at Berkeley.
17. Hanley N., Adamowicz W.L., and Wright R.E. Price vector effects in choice experiments: an empirical test. Resource and Energy Economics 27 (2005) 227-234
18. Horne P., Boxall P.C., and Adamowicz W.L. Multiple-use management of forest recreation sites: a spatially explicit choice experiment. Ecology and Management 207 (2003) 189-199
19. Karousakis K., and Birol E. Investigating household preferences for kerbside recycling services in London: a choice experiment approach. Journal of Environmental Management 88 (2008) 1099-1108
20. Kristina, E., 2002. Valuing the environmental impacts of wind power: a choice experiment approach. Thesis. Lulea University, Sweden.
21. Kuriyama, K., 1998. Measuring the value of the ecosystem in the Kushiro wetland: an empirical study of choice experiments. Forest Economics and Policy Working Paper 9802.
22. Lehtonen E., Kuuluvainen J., Pouta E., Rekola M., and Li C. Non-market benefits of forest conservation in southern Finland. Environmental Science and Policy 6 (2003) 195-204
23. Liu X., and Wirtz KW. Sequential negotiation in multiagent systems for oil spill response decision-making. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50 (2005) 463-484
24. Melman Th.C.P., Schotman A.G.M., Hunink S., and de Snoo G.R. Evaluation of meadow bird management, especially black-tailed godwit (Limosa limosa L.), in the Netherlands. Journal for Nature Conservation 16 (2008) 88-95
25. Malhotra N.K. The use of linear logit models in marketing research. Journal of Marketing Research 21 (1984) 20-31
26. Ojeda M.I., Mayer A.S., and Solomon B.D. Economic valuation of environmental services sustained by water flows in the Yaqui River Delta. Ecological Economics 65 (2008) 155-166
27. Park T., Loomis J.B., and Creel M. Confidence intervals for evaluating benefits estimates from dichotomous choice contingent valuation studies. Land Economics 67 (1991) 64-73
28. Reineking, B., 1999. The Pallas accident. Wadden Sea Newslettter.
29. Rolfe J., Bennett J., and Louviere J. Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation. Ecological Economics 35 (2000) 289-302
30. Schläpfer F. Contingent valuation: a new perspective. Ecological Economics 64 (2008) 729-740
31. Spurgeon J. The socio-economic costs and benefits of coastal habitat. rehabilitation and creation. Marine Pollution Bulletin 37 (1999) 373-382
32. Stål J., Paulsen S., Pihl L., Rönnbäck P., Söderqvist T., and Wennhage H. Coastal habitat support to fish and fisheries in Sweden: integrating ecosystem functions into fisheries management. Ocean and Coastal Management 51 (2008) 594-600
33. Street D.J., and Burgess L. Some open combinatorial problems in the design of stated choice experiments. Discrete Mathematics 308 (2008) 2781-2788
34. Turner, R.K., Adger, W.N., Lorenzoni, I., 1998. Towards Integrated Modelling and Analysis in Coastal Zones: Principles and Practice. LOICZ Reports and Studies No. 11. Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, University of East Anglia and University College London.
35. Wadden Sea Forum, 2004. The Wadden Sea Maritime Safety and Pollution Prevention of Shipping. Final Report by GAUSS mbH, Final report, Wadden Sea Forum Report No. 5 (downloadable from ).
36. Wattage P., Mardle S., and Pascoe S. Evaluation of the importance of fisheries management objectives using choice-experiments. Ecological Economics 55 (2005) 85-95