The valuation of wetland conservation in an urban/peri urban watershed

Regional Environmental Change

Volumn 13, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 939-953

  Lantz, V ^a   Boxall, Peter C ^b   Kennedy, Mike ^c   Wilson, Jeff ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c Green Analytics Inc   (Canada)

Author keywords

Canada; Contingent valuation method; Respondent heterogeneity; Yea saying bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 84884699732     PISSN: 14363798     EISSN: 1436378X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10113-012-0393-3     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Arrow K, Solow R, Portney PR, Learner EE, Radner R, Schuman H (1993) Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation. Fed Reg 58: 4601-4614.
2. Barbier E, Acreman M, Knowler D (1997) Economic valuation of wetlands: a guide for policy makers and planners. Ramsar Convention Bureau, Gland, Switzerland.
3. Bateman IJ, Willis KG, Garrod GD, Doctor P, Langford I, Turner RK (1992). Recreation and environmental preservation value of the Norfolk broads: a contingent valuation study. Technical report, Environmental Appraisal Group, University of East Anglia, UK.
4. Bateman IJ, Carson RT, Day B, Hanemann WM, Hanley ND, Hett T et al (2002) Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: a manual. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
5. Berenguer J, Corraliz JA, Martín R (2005) Rural-urban differences in environmental concern, attitudes, and actions. Eur J Psychol Assess 21(2): 128-138.
6. Birol E, Karousakis K, Koundouri P (2006) Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: the case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece. Ecol Econ 60: 145-156.
7. Blamey RK, Bennet JW, Morrison MD (1999) Yea-saying in contingent valuation surveys. Land Econ 75: 126-141.
8. Blumenschein K, Johannesson M, Blomquist GC, Liljas B, O'Conor RM (1998) Experimental results on expressed certainty and hypothetical bias in contingent valuation. South Econ J 65(1): 169-177.
9. Blumenschein K, Blomquist GC, Johannesson M, Horn N, Freeman P (2008) Eliciting willingness to pay without bias: evidence from a field experiment. Econ J 118(525): 114-137.
10. Boxall PC, Adamowicz WL (2002) Understanding heterogeneous preferences in random utility models: a latent class approach. Environ Resource Econ 23(4): 421-446.
11. Brander L, Raymond J, Vermaat J (2006) The empirics of wetland valuation: a comprehensive summary and a meta-analysis of the literature. Environ Resource Econ 33: 223-250.
12. Bromberg J (2011). Farmland prices in eastern Ontario on a significant rise in recent years. The Review (Sept. 12). Vankleek Hill, Ontario. Available at: http://www. thereview. ca/story/farmland-prices-eastern-ontario-significant-rise-recent-years. Accessed 1 June 2012.
13. Brouwer R, Langford I, Bateman I, Crowards T, Turner R (1999) A meta-analysis of wetland contingent valuation studies. Reg Environ Change 1: 47-57.
14. Carson RT (1997) Contingent valuation surveys and tests of insensitivity to scope. In: Kopp RJ, Pommerehne WW, Schwarz N (eds) Determining the value of non-market goods: economic, psychological and policy relevant aspects of contingent valuation methods. Kluwer Academic Publishers, London, pp 127-164.
15. Carson RT (2000) Contingent valuation: a user's guide. Environ Sci Technol 34: 1413-1418.
16. Carson RT, Hanemann WM (2005) Contingent valuation. In: Maler KG, Vincent JR (eds) Handbook of environmental economics. Elsevier B. V. 2, pp 821-936.
17. Carson R, Mitchell R (1993) The issue of scope in contingent valuation studies. Am J Agric Econ 75: 1263-1267.
18. Caudill SB, Groothuis PA, Whitehead JC (2011) The development and estimation of a latent choice multinomial logit model with application to contingent valuation. Am J Agric Econ 93(4): 983-992.
19. Champ PA, Bishop RC, Brown TC, McCollum DW (1997) Using donation mechanisms to value nonuse benefits of public goods. J Environ Econ Manag 33: 151-162.
20. Costanza R, d'Arge R, de Groot R et al (1997) The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253-259.
21. Cowardin LM, Shaffer TL, Arnold PM (1995) Evaluation of duck habitat and estimation of duck population sizes with a remote-sensing-based system. Biological Science Report 2. National Biological Service, Washington, D. C., p 26.
22. Cox K (1993) Wetlands: a celebration of life. Final report of the Canadian wetlands conservation task force. Sustaining Wetlands Issue Paper, No. 1993-1. North American Wetlands Conservation Council (Canada). Ottawa, Ontario.
23. Credit Valley Conservation Authority (2009) Wetland restoration strategy. Report prepared by Dougan & Associates with Snell & Ceecile Environmental Research and AMEC/Philips Engineering LTD. Credit Valley Conservation Authority, Mississauga, ON.
24. Cummings R, Taylor L (1999) Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: a cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method. Am Econ Rev 89(3): 649-665.
25. Cummings RG, Brookshire DS, Schulze WD (1986) Valuing environmental goods: a state of the arts assessment of the contingent valuation method. Roweman and Allanheld, Totowa, NJ.
26. Diamond PA, Hausman JA (1994) Contingent valuation: is some number than no number? J Econ Perspect 8: 45-64.
27. Dillman DA (1999) Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, NY.
28. Ducks Unlimited Canada (2010) Southern Ontario wetland conservation analysis. Report prepared by Ducks Unlimited Canada. Available at: http://www. ducks. ca/aboutduc/news/archives/prov2010/pdf/duc_ontariowca. pdf. Accessed 1 June 2012.
29. Greene WM (2007) LIMDEP Version 9. 0. Econometric Software, Inc., Plainview, NY.
30. Haab T, McConnell K (2002) Valuing environmental and natural resources: the econometrics of non-market valuation. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham.
31. Holmes T, Boyle K (2005) Dynamic learning and context-dependence in sequential, attribute-based, stated-preference valuation questions. Land Econ 81(1): 114-126.
32. Huddart-Kennedy EM, Beckley T, McFarlane BL, Nadeau S (2009) Rural-urban differences in environmental concern in Canada. Rural Social 74(3): 309-329.
33. Kahneman D, Knetsch JL (1992) Valuing public goods: the purchase of moral satisfaction. J Environ Econ Manag 22: 7-70.
34. Kanninen B (1995) Bias in discrete response contingent valuation. J Environ Econ Manag 28: 114-125.
35. Krinsky I, Robb AL (1986) On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Rev Econ Stat 68: 715-719.
36. List JA (2001) Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auction for sportscards. Am Econ Rev 91(5): 1498-1507.
37. Lusk JL (2005) Effects of cheap talk on consumer willingness-to-pay for golden rice. Am J Agric Econ 85(4): 840-856.
38. Meyerhoff J, Liebe U (2005) Protest beliefs in contingent valuation: explaining their motivation. Ecol Econ 57(4): 583-594.
39. Milon JW, Scrogin D (2006) Latent preferences and valuation of wetland ecosystem restoration. Ecol Econ 56: 162-175.
40. Murphy JJ, Allen PG, Stevens TH, Weatherhead D (2005) A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation. Environ Resource Econ 30: 313-325.
41. Oglethorpe DR, Miliadou D (2000) Economic valuation of the non-use attributes of a wetland: a case-study for Lake Kerkani. Environ Plan Manag 43(6): 755-767.
42. Ontario Conservation Authorities Act (2011) Conservation Authorities Act. R. S. O. 1990, Chapter C. 27 (last amendment: 2011). Available at: http://www. e-laws. gov. on. ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c27_e. htm. Accessed 1 June 2012.
43. Othman J, Bennett J, Blamey R (2004) Environmental values and resource management options: a choice modeling experience in Malaysia. Environ Dev Econ 9: 803-824.
44. Pate J, Loomis J (1997) The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California. Ecol Econ 20: 199-207.
45. Pattison J, Boxall PC, Adamowicz WL (2011) The economic benefits of wetland retention and restoration in Manitoba. Can J Agric Econ 59: 223-244.
46. Ready RC, Whitehead J, Blomquist G (1995) Contingent valuation when respondents are ambivalent. J Environ Econ Manag 29: 181-196.
47. Schuyt K, Brander L (2004) Living waters conserving the source of life: the economic values of the world's wetlands. WWF International. Gland, Switzerland. Available at: http://assets. panda. org/downloads/wetlandsbrochurefinal. pdf. Accessed 30 Jan 2010.
48. Spash CL, Hanley N (1995) Preferences, information, and biodiversity preservation. Ecol Econ 12: 191-208.
49. Statistics Canada (2007) The daily: Canadian internet use survey, Statistics Canada. Available at: http://www. statcan. gc. ca/daily-quotidien/070625/dq070625f-eng. htm. Accessed 20 Dec 2012.
50. Stevens TH, Benin S, Larson JS (1995) Public attitudes and economic values for wetland preservation in New England. Wetlands 15: 181-194.
51. Swait JR (1994) A structural equation model of latent segmentation and product choice for cross-sectional revealed preference choice data. J Retail Consumer Serv 1: 77-89.
52. Thapa B, Graefe AR (2003) Forest recreationists and environmentalism. J Park Recreat Adm 21(1): 75-103.
53. Train K (1998) Recreation demand models with taste differences over people. Land Econ 74(2): 230-239.
54. Veisten K, Hoen HF, Navrud S, Strand J (2004) Scope insensitivity in contingent valuation of complex environmental amenities. J Environ Manage 73: 317-331.
55. Venkatachalam L (2004) The contingent valuation method: a review. Environ Impact Assess Rev 24: 89-124.
56. Wattage P, Mardle S (2008) Total economic value of wetland conservation in Sri Lanka: identifying use and non-use values. Wetlands Ecol Manage 16: 359-369.
57. Whitehead JC (1991) Environmental interest group behavior and self-selection bias in contingent valuation mail surveys. Growth Chang 22(1): 10-20.
58. Whitehead JC, Blomquist CG (2006) Contingent valuation and benefit-cost analysis. In: Alberini A, Kahn JR (eds) Handbook on contingent valuation. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK, pp 66-91.
59. Yang W, Wang X, Gabor TS, Boychuk L, Badiou P (2008) Water quantity and quality benefits from wetland conservation and restoration in the Broughton's creek watershed. Ducks Unlimited Canada Publication, Stonewall, Manitoba, p 48.
60. Zedler J (2003) Wetlands at your service: reducing impacts of agriculture at the watershed scale. Front Ecol Environ 1(2): 65-72.