Managing coastal area resources by stated choice experiments

Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science

Volumn 86, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 512-517

  Liu, Xin ^a   Wirtz, Kai W ^b  

^a YANTAI INSTITUTE OF COASTAL ZONE RESEARCH   (China)

^b INSTITUTE OF MATERIALS RESEARCH   (Germany)

Author keywords

coastal resources; contingency management; integrated coastal zone management; oil spill; stated choice experiments; willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; MARINE POLLUTION; OIL SPILL; OIL SPILL RESPONSE; POLLUTION EFFECT; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ATLANTIC OCEAN; GERMANY; NORTH SEA;

ANAS;

EID: 74649086005     PISSN: 02727714     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecss.2009.02.020     Document Type: Article

References (30)

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. 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
3. Ben-Akiva M.E., and Lerman S.R. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand (1985), MIT Press, Cambridge
4. Bennett J., and Blamey R. The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation (2001), Edward Elgar Publishng Limited, UK 288 pp.
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. Brown K., Aedger 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
7. Braeuer I. Money as an indicator: to make use of economic evaluation for biodiversity conservation. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 98 (2003) 483-491
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. Garrod G., and Willis K. Estimating lost amenity due to landfill waste disposal. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 22 (1998) 83-95
11. Guikema S.D. An estimation of the social costs of landfill siting using a choice experiment. Waste Management 25 (2005) 331-333
12. Haekan, E., Bjoern, O., 2000. Heterogeneous Preferences for Marine Amenities a Choice Experiment Applied to Water Quality. Working Paper in Economics 126, Goeteborg University.
13. Haider W., and Rasid H. Eliciting public preferences for municipal water supply options. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 22 (2002) 337-360
14. Hanemann W.M. Welfare evaluation in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 66 (1984) 332-341
15. 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.
16. 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
17. 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
18. Insel and Halligkonferenz, 2008. Erklaerung von Cuxhaven, 29 October 2008. Available from: www.inselundhalligkonferenz.de.
19. Kannen, A., 2005. The need for integrated assessment of large-scale offshore wind farm development. In: Allan, R., et al. (Ed.), Managing Europe Coast, pp. 365-378.
20. 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.
21. 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
22. Liu X., and Wirtz K.W. Sequential negotiation in multiagent systems for oil spill response decision-making. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50 (2005) 463-484
23. Malhotra N.K. The use of linear logit models in marketing research. Journal of Marketing Research 21 (1984) 20-31
24. 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
25. Rolfe J., Bennett J., and Louviere J. Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation. Ecological Economics 35 (2000) 289-302
26. Schläpfer F. Contingent valuation: a new perspective. Ecological Economics 64 (2008) 729-740
27. Spurgeon J. The socio-economic costs and benefits of coastal habitat. Rehabilitation and creation. Marine Pollution Bulletin 37 (1999) 373-382
28. 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
29. 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.
30. Wattage P., Mcardle S., and Pascoe S. Evaluation of the importance of fisheries management objectives using choice-experiments. Ecological Economics 55 (2005) 85-95