The geography of ecosystem service value: The case of the des plaines and cache river wetlands, Illinois

Applied Geography

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 303-311

  Kozak, Justin ^a   Lant, Christopher ^a   Shaikh, Sabina ^b   Wang, Guangxing ^a  

^a SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Distance decay functions; Ecosystem services; Spatial discounting

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; LINEARITY; NATURE CONSERVATION; NATURE RESERVE; VALUATION;

CACHE RIVER BIORESERVE; DES PLAINES RIVER; ILLINOIS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 78649445095     PISSN: 01436228     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.07.001     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Anielski M., Wilson S. The real wealth of the Mackenzie Region 2007, Canadian Boreal Initiative.
2. Arrow K., Dasgupta P., Goulder L., Daily G., Ehrlich P., Heal G., et al. Are we consuming too much?. Journal of Economic Perspectives 2004, 18:147-172.
3. Bateman I.J., Cole M.A., Georgiou S., Hadley D.J. Comparing contingent valuation and contingent ranking: a case study considering the benefits of urban river water quality improvements. Journal of Environmental Management 2006, 79:221-231.
4. Bateman I.J., Day B.H., Georgiou S., Lake I. The aggregation of environmental benefit values: welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP. Ecological Economics 2006, 60:450-460.
5. Bateman I.J., Langford I.H., Nishikawa N., Lake I. The Axford debate revisited: a case study illustrating different approaches to the aggregation of benefits data. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2000, 43(2):291-302.
6. Boyd J. Location, location, location: the geography of ecosystem services. Resources. Resources for the Future 2008, 11-15.
7. Boyle K.J., Welsh M.P., Bishop R.C. The role of question order and respondent experience in contingent valuation studies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1993, 95:S80-S90.
8. Brander L.M., Florax R., Vermaat J.E. The empirics of wetland valuation: a comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature. Environmental and Resource Economics 2006, 33:223-250.
9. Brouwer R., Spaninks F.A. The validity of environmental benefits transfer: further empirical testing. Environmental and Resource Economics 1999, 14:95-117.
10. Brouwer R.I., Langford H., Bateman I.J., Turner R.K. A meta-analysis of wetland contingent valuation studies. Regional Environmental Change 1999, 1(1):47-57.
11. Costanza R., D'Arge R., De Groot R., Farber S., Grasso M., Hannon B., et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387:253-260.
12. Costanza R., Stern D., Fisher B., He L., Ma C. Influential publications in ecological economics: a citation analysis. Ecological Economics 2005, 50:261-292.
13. Daily G.C. Nature's services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems 1997, Island Press, Washington, DC.
14. Daly H.E., Farley J. Ecological economics: Principles and applications 2004, Island Press, Washington, D.C.
15. Georgiou S., Bateman I., Cole M., Hadley D. Contingent ranking and valuation of river water quality improvements: Testing for scope sensitivity, ordering and distance decay effects 2000, CSERGE working paper GEC 2000-18, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, University of East Anglia and University College London, Norwich, UK.
16. de Groot R.S., Wilson M.A., Boumans R.M.J. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 2002, 41:393-408.
17. Hanemann W.M. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1984, 66:332-341.
18. Hanemann W.M. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1994, 8(4):19-43.
19. Hanemann W.M., Loomis J.B., Kanninen B.J. Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1991, 73:1255-1263.
20. Hanley N., Schlapfer F., Spurgeon J. Aggregating the benefits of environmental improvements: distance-decay functions for use and non-use values. Journal for Environmental Management 2003, 69:297-304.
21. Hardin G. The tragedy of the commons. Science 1968, 162:1243-1248.
22. Heal G. Nature and the marketplace: Capturing the value of ecosystem services 2000, Island Press, Washington, DC.
23. Heal G. Valuing ecosystem services. Ecosystems 2000, 3:24-30.
24. Hein L., van Koppen K., de Groot R.S., van Ierland E.C. Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecological Economics 2006, 57:209-228.
25. Kaninnen B.J. Optimal experimental design for double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Land Economics 1993, 69:138-146.
26. Kates R.W., Clark W.C., Corell R., Hall J.M., Jaeger C.C., Lowe I., et al. Environment and development: sustainability science. Science 2001, 292(5517):641-642.
27. Koch E.W., Barbier E.D., Silliman B.R., Reed D.J., Perillo G.M.E., Hacker S.D., et al. Non-linearity in ecosystem services: temporal and spatial variability in coastal protection. Frontiers in Ecology and Environment 2009, 7(1):29-37.
28. Konarska K.M., Sutton P.C., Sutton M. Evaluating scale dependence of ecosystem service valuation: a comparison of NOAA-AVHRR and Landsat TM Datasets. Ecological Economics 2002, 41:491-507.
29. Lant C.L., Loftus T., Kraft S., Bennett D. Land-use dynamics in a southern Illinois (USA) watershed. Environmental Management 2001, 28(3):325-340.
30. Lant C.L., Roberts R.S. Greenbelts in the Cornbelt: riparian wetlands, intrinsic values, and market failure. Environment and Planning 1990, 22:1375-1388.
31. Loomis J.B. Comparative reliability of the dichotomous choice and open-ended contingent valuation techniques. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1990, 18:78-85.
32. Loomis J.B. How large is the extent of the market for public goods: evidence from a nationwide contingent valuation survey. Applied Economics 1996, 28:779-782.
33. Loomis J.B. Vertically summing public good demand curves: an empirical comparison of economic versus political jurisdictions. Land Economics 2000, 76(2):312-321.
34. Martin-Lopez B., Montes C., Benayas J. Influence of user characteristics on valuation of ecosystem services in Doñana Natural Protected Area (south-west Spain). Environmental Conservation 2007, 34:215-224.
35. Mendelsohn R., Markstrom D. The use of travel costs and hedonic methods in assessing environmental benefits. Amenity resource valuation: Integrating economics with other disciplines 1988, Venture Publishing, State College, PA. G.L. Peterson, B.L. Driver, R. Gregory (Eds.).
36. Middleton B.A. The role of flooding in seed dispersal: Restoration of cypress swamps along the Cache River 1995, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Water Resources Center, Illinois, Research report 220.
37. Middleton B.A. Wetland restoration, flood pulsing, and disturbance 1999, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
38. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
39. Mitchell R.C., Carson R.T. Using surveys to value public goods: The contingent valuation method 1989, Resources for the Future, Inc., Washington, DC.
40. Mullarkey D.J., Bishop R.C. Sensitivity to scope: evidence from a CVM 89 study of wetlands. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 1999, 88(5):1313.
41. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Report of the NOAA Panel on contingent valuation. Federal Register 1993, 58:4602-4614.
42. Pate J., Loomis J.B. The effect on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California. Ecological Economics 1997, 20:199-207.
43. Portney P.R. The contingent valuation debate: why economists should care. Journal of Economic Perspectives 1994, 8:3-17.
44. Ruhl J.D., Salzman J. The effects of wetland mitigation banking on people. National Wetlands Newsletter 2006, 28(2):9-14.
45. Smith V.K. Nonmarket valuation of environmental resources: an interpretive appraisal. Land Economics 1993, 69(1):1-26.
46. Smith V.K., Osborne L.L. Do contingent valuation estimates pass a 'scope' test? A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1996, 31:287-301.
47. Stevens T.H., Benin S., Larson J.S. Public attitudes and economic values for wetland preservation in New England. Wetlands 1995, 15:226-231.
48. U.S. Census Bureau Available at:. http://www.census.gov/.
49. Wilson M.A., Carpenter S.R. Economic valuation of freshwater ecosystem services in the United States: 1971-1997. Ecological Applications 1999, 9(3):772-783.