The economic value of mangroves: A meta-analysis

Sustainability

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 359-383

  Salem, Marwa E ^a,b   Mercer, D Evan ^c  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Cairo University   (Egypt)

^c USDA FOREST SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

Mangroves; Meta regression analysis; Nonmarket valuation

Indexed keywords

ECOSYSTEMS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS;

CONTINGENT VALUATION METHODS; FORECAST PERFORMANCE; INTERACTION EFFECT; MANGROVE ECOSYSTEMS; MANGROVES; NON-MARKET VALUATION; REPLACEMENT COSTS; WEIGHTED REGRESSION;

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS;

RHIZOPHORACEAE;

EID: 84861376936     PISSN: 20711050     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su4030359     Document Type: Article

References (78)

1. Warne, K. Forests of the tides. National Geographic Magazine, February 2007. Available online: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2007/02/mangroves/warne-text (accessed on 27 December 2011).
2. Stedman, S.; Dahl, T.E. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Coastal Watersheds of the Eastern United States 1998 to 2004; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service: Charleston, SC, USA, 2008; p. 32.
3. Sathirathai, S. Economic Valuation of Mangroves and the Roles of Local Communities in the Conservation of Natural Resources: Case Study of Surat Thani, South of Thailand; Research Report no. rr1998061; Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA): Bangkok, Thailand, 1997.
4. Mitsch, W.J., Gosselink, J.G. Wetlands; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2000.
5. For a review of mangroves, see William J. Mitsch and James G. Gosselink. Wetlands; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2000.
6. Dahdouh-Guebas, F.; Jayatissa, L.P.; di Nitto, D.; Bosire, J.O.; Lo Seen, D.; Koedam, N. How effective were mangroves as a defence against the recent tsunami. Curr. Biol. 2005, 15, 443-447.
7. Barbier, E. Valuing ecosystem services as productive inputs. Econ. Policy 2007, 22, 177-230.
8. Blaber, S.J. Mangroves and fishes: Issues of diversity, dependence, and dogma. Bull. Mar. Sci. 2007, 80, 457-472.
9. Bann, C. An Economic Analysis of Alternative Mangrove Management Strategies in Koh Kong Province, Cambodia; EEPSEA Research Report, p. 58; Environment and Economics Program for South East Asia, International Development Research Centre: Ottawa, Canada, 1997.
10. Chong, J. Protective Values of Mangrove and Coral Ecosystems: A Review of Methods and Evidence; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 2005.
11. Badola, R.; Hussain, S.A. Valuing ecosystem functions: An empirical study on the storm protection function of Bhitarkanika mangrove ecosystem, India. Environ. Conserv. 2005, 32, 85-92.
12. Spalding, M. The global distribution and status of mangrove ecosystems. Int. Newsl. Coast. Manag. Intercoast Netw. 1997, 1, 20-21.
13. Untawale, A.G. Asia Country Reports: India. In Mangroves of Asia and the Pacific: Status and Management; Technical Report, UNDP/UNESCO Research and Training Pilot Programme on Mangrove Ecosystems in Asia and the Pacific; Natural Resources Management Center and National Mangrove Committee, Ministry of Natural Resources: Quezon City, Philippines, 1986; pp. 51-87.
14. Ruitenbeek, J. Mangrove Management: An Economic Analysis of Management Options with a Focus on Bintuni Bay, Irian Jaya; Environmental Management Development in Indonesia Project (EMDI) Environmental Reports; School for Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada and the Ministry of State for Population and Environment, Jakarta, Indonesia; Dalhousie University Printing Centre: Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 1992; Volume 8, p. 51.
15. Hirway, I.; Goswami, S. Valuation of Coastal Resources: The Case of Mangroves in Gujarat; Academic Foundation/ Centre for Development Alternatives: Ahmedabad, India, 2007; p. 49.
16. Ronnback, P. The ecological basis for economic value of seafood production supported by mangrove ecosystems. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 29, 235-252.
17. Brander, L.; Florax, R.; Vermaat, J. The empirics of wetland valuation: A comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2006, 33, 223-250.
18. Mangroves are highly susceptible to oil exposure due to the fact that they, where present, are a boundary between land and sea and are hence prime locations for oil accumulation after spills. Past oil spills have resulted in both lethal and sub-lethal effects to mangrove forests. Furthermore, once a spill has occurred, the forests are difficult to protect and clean up due to the convoluted nature of the trees and the fact that the forests are relatively hard to access by humans (Hoff, R. Oil Spills in Mangroves: Planning & Response Considerations; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA Ocean Service, Office of Response and Restoration: Seattle, WA, USA, 2002. Available Online: http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/book_shelf/34_mangrove_complete.pdf (accessed on 12/5/2010).
19. Added to this are the burrowing activities of crustaceans, which are typically found in mangrove forests. Increasingly high quantities of oil are entering the marine environment through three main routes: Natural seeps, offshore drilling and production and transportation losses. Together, these factors lead to persistent and high levels of oil pollution both on the surface and deep within the soil
20. Lewis, R. Impact of oil spills on mangrove forests. In Biology and Ecology of Mangroves, Tasks for Vegetation Science; Teas, H.J., Junk, W., Eds.; Springer: Hague, the Netherlands, 1983).
21. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Available online: http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/topic_subtopic_entry (accessed on 12 March 2011).
22. Bennett, E.; Reynolds, C. The value of a mangrove area in sarawak. Biodivers. Conserv. 1993, 2, 359-375.
23. Costanza, R.; d'Arge, R.; de Groot, R.; Farber, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; Limburg, K.; Naeem, S.; O'Neill, R.; Paruelo, J.; et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387, 253-261.
24. Barbier, E.; Strand, I. Valuing mangrove-fishery linkages. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1998, 12, 151-166.
25. Bann, C. A Contingent Valuation of the Mangroves of Benut, Johor State, Malaysia; Preparation of an Integrated Management Plan for the Sustainable Use of the Johor Mangrove Forest; Johor State Forestry Dapartment/ DANCED/ Darudec: Johor, Malaysia, 1999; p. 79.
26. Cooper, E.; Burke, L.; Bood, N. Coastal Capital: Belize the Economic Contribution of Belize's Coral Reefs and Mangroves; World Resources Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2009; p. 54.
27. Brower, R.; Langford, I.; Bateman, I.; Crowards, T.; Turner, R. A Meta-Analysis of Wetland Contingent Valuation Studies; CSERGE Working Paper GEC 97-20; the Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment (CSERGE): Norwich, UK, 1997.
28. Heimlich, R.; Wiebe, K.; Claassen, R.; Gadsby, D.; House, R. Wetlands and agriculture: Private interests and public benefits. In Agricultural Economic Report; Resource Economic Division, Economic Research Service, USDA: Washington, DC, USA, 1998; p. 94.
29. Woodward, R.; Wui, Y. The economic value of wetland services: A meta-analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2001, 257-270.
30. Chen, D.-R. Essays on Improving the Econometric Estimation of Wetlands Values via Meta-Analysis. Master Thesis, Agricultural, Environmental, and Development Economics, Ohio State University: Columbus, OH, USA, 2010.
31. Ghermandi, A.; van den Bergh, J.C.J.M.; Brander, L.; de Groot, H.; Nunes, P.A.L.D. The Values of Natural and Constructed Wetlands: A Meta-Analysis; Tinbergen Institute: Amsterdam, Holland, 2009; Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper, p. 22.
32. Hamilton, L.S.; Snedaker, R.E. Handbook for Mangrove Area Management; UNEP and East West Center, Environment and Policy Institute: Honolulu, HI, USA, 1984; p. 126.
33. Martosubroto, P.; Naamin, N. Relationship between tidal forests (mangroves) and commercial shrimp production in Indonesia. Mar. Res. Indones. 1977, 18, 81-86.
34. Turner, R.E. Intertidal vegetation and commercial yields of penaeid shrimp. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 1977, 106, 411-416.
35. Pauly, D.; Ingles, J. The relationship between shrimp yields and intertidal vegetation (mangrove) areas: A reassessment. In Ecosistemas de Manglar en América Tropical. Instituto de Ecología A.C. México; Yáñez-Arancibia, A., Lara-Domínguez, A.L., Eds.; UICN/ORMA, Costa Rica, NOAA/NMFS: Silver Spring, MD, USA, 1999; pp. 311-318.
36. National Research Council of the National Academies. Valuing Ecosystem Services: Toward Better Environmental Decision-Making; Committee on Assessing and Valuing the Services of Aquatic and Related Terrestrial Ecosystems, Water Science and Technology Board, Division on Earth and Life Studies, The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005.
37. Barbier, E.B. Valuing the environment as input: Review of applications to mangrove-fishery linkages. Ecol. Econ. 2000, 35, 47-61.
38. Freeman, A.M. The Measurement of Environmental & Resource Values: Theory and Methods, 2nd ed.; Resources for the Future Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2003.
39. Barbier, E.B. An approach to economic evaluation of tropical wetlands: With examples from Guatemala and Nicaragua. In Caribbean Ecology and Economics; Girvan, N.P., Simons, D., Eds.; Caribbean Conservation Association: St. Michael, Barbados, 1991; pp. 207-231.
40. Barbier, E.B.; Acreman, M.; Knowler, D. Economic Valuation of Wetlands: A Guide for Policy Makers and Planners; Ramsar Convention Bureau: Gland, Switzerland, 1997.
41. Brouwer, R. Environmental value transfer: State of the art and future prospects. Ecol. Econ. 2000, 32, 137-152.
42. Carson, R.T.; Hanemann, W.M. Contingent Valuation. In the Handbook of Environmental Economics: Valuing Environmental Changes; Maler, K.-G., Vincent, J.R., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2005; Volume 2.
43. For more details about conducting a proper CV study, see Carson, R.T.; Hanemann, W.M. Contingent Valuation. In the Handbook of Environmental Economics: Valuing Environmental Changes; Maler, K.-G., Vincent, J.R., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2005; Volume 2
44. Boyle, K. Contingent valuation in practice. In A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation; Champ, P., Boyle, K., Brown, T., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, the Netherlands, 2003.
45. Parsons, G.R. The travel cost model. In A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation; Champ, P., Boyle, K., Brown, T., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2003.
46. Phaneuf, D.J.; Smith, V.K. Recreation demand models. In the Handbook of Environmental Economics: Valuing Environmental Changes, Maler, K.-G., Vincent, J.R., Eds., Elsevier: Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 2005; Volume 2.
47. The proper definition involves the use of the compensated demand curve, but it may not be observable, so the ordinary demand curve is used (Brouwer, R. Environmental value transfer: State of the art and future prospects. Ecol. Econ. 2000, 32, 137-152).
48. Stanley, T.D.; Jarrell, S.B. Meta-regression analysis: A quantitative method of literature surveys. J. Econ. Surv. 1989, 3, 161-170.
49. Stanley, T.D. Wheat from chaff: Meta-analysis as quantitative literature review. J. Econ. Perspect. 2001, 15, 131-150.
50. Mangroves generally occur in the region confined by 30° north and south of the equator. The exceptions to this are a few areas in the North (Japan and Bermuda) and South (New Zealand, Australia and the east coast of South Africa) (Spalding, M. The global distribution and status of mangrove ecosystems. Int. Newsl. Coast. Manag. Intercoast Netw. 1997, 1, 20-21). However, none of these countries are included in our valuations.
51. Bennett, E.M.; Peterson, G.D.; Gordon, L.J. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecol. Lett. 2009, 12, 1394-1404.
52. Barbier, E.B. Progress and challenges in valuing coastal and marine ecosystem services. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy. 2012, 6, 1-19.
53. Guerrya, A.D.; Ruckelshausa, M.H.; Arkemaa, K.K.; Bernhardta, J.R.; Guannela, G.; Kima, C.-K.; Marsikb, M.; Papenfusa, M.; Tofta, J.E.; Verutesa, G.; et al. Modeling benefits from nature: Using ecosystem services to inform coastal and marine spatial planning. Int. J. Biodivers. Sci. Ecosyst. Serv. Manag. 2012, iFirst, 1-15.
54. Ong, P.; Padilla, J. Assessment of fisheries-related functions of the Pagbilao experimental mangrove forest. In Mangroves or Fishponds? Valuation and Evaluation of Alternative uses of a Mangrove Forest in the Philippines; Janssen, R., Padilla, J.E., Eds.; Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit: Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 1996.
55. Gammage, S. Estimating the Returns to Mangrove Conversion: Sustainable Management or Short Term Gain? Environmental Economics Programme, Discussion Paper; International Institute for Environment and Development: London, UK, 1997; p. 48.
56. Spaninks, F.; Beukering, P. Economic Valuation of Mangrove Ecosystems: Potential and Limitations; CREED Working Paper Series; International Institute for Environment and Development, Vrije Universiteit: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1997; Working paper No. 14, p. 53.
57. Sanchirico, J.N.; Mumby, P. Mapping ecosystem functions to the valuation of ecosystem services: Implications of species-habitat associations for coastal land-use decisions. Theor. Ecol. 2009, 2, 67-77.
58. Sanchirico, J.N.; Springborn, M. How to get there from here: Ecological and economic dynamics of ecosystem service provision. Environ. Resource Econ. 2011, 48, 243-267.
59. OLS estimates in meta-analyses should only be used for hypothesis-testing if robust standard errors are used (Nelson, J.P.; Kennedy, P.E. The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: An assessment. Pennsylvania State University, unpublished paper, 2008. Available online: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1117490 (accessed on 12 November 2011)).
60. Nevertheless, we ran the OLS regression with standard errors, but got results that were very similar to those with robust standard errors
61. We also ran the regression while manually excluding outliers that lie outside of logical cutoff points revealed by the data. Hence, we excluded observations representing the 3 lowest values and 4 highest values of annual per hectare values. The results were very similar to the those obtained by the robust regression, with the only difference being that in the former the estimated coefficient of per capita GDP was significant. Consequently, we have not reported the results of the OLS regression.
62. The robust regression process is one whereby a regression is first run and the observations with a Cook's D (Cook, R.D. Detection of influential observation in linear regression. Technometrics 1977, 19, 15-18) greater than 1 are excluded to eliminate gross outliers.
63. An iterative process then proceeds where case weights from absolute residuals are generated in each step and used for the regression in the following step. The process continues until the maximum change in weights falls below a pre-determined tolerance threshold.
64. Mrozek, J.R.; Taylor, L.O. What determines the value of life? A meta-analysis. J. Policy Anal. Manag. 2002, 21, 253-270.
65. Nelson, J.P.; Kennedy, P.E. The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: An assessment. Pennsylvania State University, unpublished paper, 2008. Available online: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1117490 (accessed on 12 November 2011).
66. We also ran the regression while clustering the observations of each to study to allow correlations between them while maintaining independence across studies. The results were very similar to those reported for OLS with robust standard errors, with the only exception that the estimated coefficient for area became insignificant. Consequently, we have not reported the results of the cluster regression.
67. Another consideration taken into account when choosing the studies to be included is that the valuations be measured in the absence of mangrove conversion into other uses. For example, aquaculture is only considered if the existing mangrove swamps are used for this activity, but not if the mangroves are cleared for the purposes of aquaculture.
68. Costanza, R.; Farber, S.; Maxwell, J. Valuation and management of wetland ecosystems. Ecol. Econ. 1989, 1, 335-361.
69. The first approach was used by Barbier, E.; Strand, I. Valuing mangrove-fishery linkages. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1998, 12, 151-166.
70. the second and third were used by Gammage, S. Estimating the Returns to Mangrove Conversion: Sustainable Management or Short Term Gain? Environmental Economics Programme, Discussion Paper; International Institute for Environment and Development: London, UK, 1997; p. 48
71. Spaninks, F.; Beukering, P. Economic Valuation of Mangrove Ecosystems: Potential and Limitations; CREED Working Paper Series; International Institute for Environment and Development, Vrije Universiteit: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1997; Working paper No. 14, p. 53
72. and the fourth was used by Aburto-Oropeza, O.; Ezcurra, E.; Danemann, G.; Valdez, V.; Murray, J.; Sala, E. Mangroves in the Gulf of California increase fishery yields. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 10456-10459.
73. Engle, V. Estimating the provision of ecosystem services by gulf of mexico coastal wetlands. Wetlands. 2011, 31, 179-193.
74. This fact also holds for the original number of observations before exclusion of studies
75. Note that the their study includes all types of wetlands and not just mangroves (Brander, L.; Florax, R.; Vermaat, J. The empirics of wetland valuation: A comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2006, 33, 223-250).
76. Halvorsen, R.; Palmquist, R. The interpretation of dummy variables in semilogarithmic equations. Am. Econ. Rev. 1980, 70, 474-475.
77. 0 denote the value of the dependent variable when the categorical variable takes the value of 1 and 0, respectively (Halvorsen, R.; Palmquist, R. The interpretation of dummy variables in semilogarithmic equations. Am. Econ. Rev. 1980, 70, 474-475).
78. Barbier, E.; Strand, I.; Sathirathai, S. Do open access conditions affect the valuation of an externality? Estimating the welfare effects of mangrove-fishery linkages in Thailand. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2002, 21, 343-367.