Modeling Spatial Patchiness and Hot Spots in Stated Preference Willingness to Pay

Environmental and Resource Economics

Volumn 59, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 363-387

  Johnston, Robert J ^a   Ramachandran, Mahesh ^b  

^a CLARK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Yale School of the Environment   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice modeling; Cost benefit analysis; Distance decay; Ecosystem service; Local indicators of spatial association; Spatial autocorrelation; Valuation

Indexed keywords

COST EFFECTIVENESS; ECOSYSTEMS; RESOURCE VALUATION;

CHOICE MODEL; DISTANCE DECAY; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; SPATIAL ASSOCIATIONS; SPATIAL AUTOCORRELATIONS;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; HOMOGENEITY; PREFERENCE BEHAVIOR; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; WELFARE ECONOMICS; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

EID: 84911961839     PISSN: 09246460     EISSN: 15731502     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10640-013-9731-2     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Abildtrup J, Garcia S, Olsen SB, Stenger A (2013) Spatial preference heterogeneity in forest recreation. Ecol Econ 92(1):67–77
2. Adamowicz W, Boxall P, Williams M, Louviere J (1998) Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. Am J Agric Econ 80(1):64–75
3. Anselin L (1988) Spatial econometrics: methods and models. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA
4. Azzalini A, Torelli N (2007) Clustering via nonparametric density estimation. Stat Comput 17:71–80
5. Bateman IJ, Langford IH (1997) Non-users’ willingness to pay for a National Park: an application and critique of the contingent valuation method. Reg Stud 31(6):571–582
6. Bateman IJ, Langford IH, Nishikawa N, Lake I (2000) The Axford debate revisited: a case study illustrating different approaches to the aggregation of benefits data. J Environ Plan Manag 43(2):291–302
7. Bateman IJ, Day BH, Georgiou S, Lake I (2006) The aggregation of environmental benefit values: welfare measures, distance decay and total WTP. Ecol Econ 60(2):450–460
8. Bateman IJ, Brouwer R, Ferrini S, Schaafsma M, Barton DN, Dubgaard A, Haslet B, Hime S, Liekens I, Navrud S (2011) Making benefit transfers work: deriving and testing principles for value transfers for similar and dissimilar sites using a case study of the non-market benefits of water quality improvements across Europe. Environ Resour Econ 50(3):365–387
9. Besag J, Newell J (1991) The detection of clusters in rare diseases. J R Stat Soc A 154:143–155
10. Boots B (2002) Local measures of spatial association. Ecoscience 9(2):168–176
11. Brouwer R, Martín-Ortega J, Berbel J (2010) Spatial preference heterogeneity: a choice experiment. Land Econ 86(3):552–568
12. Campbell D, Scarpa R, Hutchinson WG (2008) Assessing the spatial dependence of welfare estimates obtained from discrete choice experiments. Lett Spat Resour Sci 1:117–126
13. Campbell D, Hutchinson WG, Scarpa R (2009) Using choice experiments to explore the spatial distribution of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements. Environ Plan A 41(1):97–111
14. Cincotta RP, Wisnewski J, Engelman R (2000) Human population in the biodiversity hotspots. Nature 404:990–992
15. Dillman DA (2000) Mail and internet surveys: the tailored design method. Wiley, New York, NY
16. Erkan DE (2002) Strategic plan for the restoration of anadromous fishes to Rhode Island coastal streams. Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, Division of Fish and Wildlife, Wakefield, RI
17. Feser E, Sweeney S, Renski H (2005) A descriptive analysis of discrete U.S. industrial complexes. J Reg Sci 45(2):395–419
18. Georgiou S, Bateman I, Cole M, Hadley D (2000) Contingent ranking and valuation of river water quality improvements: testing for scope sensitivity, ordering and distance decay effects. 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
19. Getis A, Ord K (1992) The analysis of spatial association by use of distance statistics. Geogr Anal 24:189–206
20. Hanley N, Schläpfer F, Spurgeon J (2003) Aggregating the benefits of environmental improvements: distance-decay functions for use and non-use values. J Environ Manag 68:297–304
21. Helsel JA, Kim HJ (2006) An evolutional model of U.S. manufacturing and services industries. In: Gatrell J, Reid N (eds) Enterprising worlds: a geographic perspective on economics, environments, and ethics. Springer, Dordrecht
22. Hensher DA, Greene WH (2003) The mixed logit model: the state of practice. Transportation 30(2):133–176
23. Hochberg Y (1988) A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance. Biometrika 75(4):800–802
24. Imber D, Stevenson G, Wilks L (1991) A Contingent valuation Survey of the Kakadu conservation zone. Research paper no. 3, Resource Assessment Commission, Canberra
25. Johnston RJ (2006) Is hypothetical bias universal? Validating contingent valuation responses using a binding public referendum. J Environ Econ Manag 52(1):469–481
26. Johnston RJ, Duke JM (2007) Willingness to pay for agricultural land preservation and policy process attributes: does the method matter? Am J Agric Econ 89(4):1098–1115
27. Johnston RJ, Duke JM (2009) Willingness to pay for land preservation across states and jurisdictional scale: implications for benefit transfer. Land Econ 85(2):217–237
28. Johnston RJ, Opaluch JJ, Mazzotta MJ, Magnusson G (2005) Who are resource nonusers and what can they tell us about nonuse values? Decomposing user and nonuser willingness to pay for coastal wetland restoration. Water Resour Res 41(7):W07017
29. Johnston RJ, Segerson K, Schultz ET, Besedin EY, Ramachandran M (2011a) Indices of biotic integrity in stated preference valuation of aquatic ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 70(11):1946–1956
30. Johnston RJ, Ramachandran M, Schultz ET, Segerson K, Besedin EY (2011b) Characterizing spatial pattern in ecosystem service values when distance decay doesn’t apply: choice experiments and local indicators of spatial association. Presented at the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association (AAEA) & Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association (NAREA) Joint Annual Meeting, Pittsburgh, USA, July 24–26
31. Johnston RJ, Schultz ET, Segerson K, Besedin EY, Ramachandran M (2012) Enhancing the content validity of stated preference valuation: the structure and function of ecological indicators. Land Econ 88(1):102–120
32. Jørgensen SL, Olsen SB, Ladenburg J, Martinsen L, Svenningsen SR, Hasler B (2013) Spatially induced disparities in users’ and non-users’ WTP for water quality improvements—testing the effect of multiple substitutes and distance decay. Ecol Econ 92(1):58–66
33. Kaplowitz MD, Lupi F, Hoehn JP (2004) Multiple methods for developing and evaluating a stated-choice questionnaire to value wetlands. In: Presser S, Rothget JM, Coupter MP, Lesser JT, Martin E, Martin J, Singer E (eds) Chapter 24 in methods for testing and evaluating survey questionnaires. Wiley, New York
34. Karr JR (1981) Assessment of biotic integrity using fish communities. Fisheries 6(6):21–27
35. Krinsky I, Robb AL (1986) On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Rev Econ Stat 68(4):715–719
36. Kuhfeld WF (2010) Marketing research methods in SAS: experimental design, choice, conjoint, and graphical techniques. SAS Institute, Cary, NC
37. Kuhfeld WF, Tobias RD (2005) Large factorial designs for product engineering and marketing research applications. Technometrics 47:132–141
38. Lee DC, Rieman BE (1997) Population viability assessment of salmonids by using probabilistic networks. N Am J Fish Manag 17(4):1144–1157
39. Le Gallo J, Ertur C (2003) Exploratory spatial data analysis of the distribution of regional per capita GDP in Europe, 1980–1995. Pap Reg Sci 82: 175–201
40. Loesch JG (1987) Overview of life history aspects of anadromous alewife and blueback herring in freshwater habitats. In: Dadswell MJ, Klauda RJ, Moffitt CM, Saunders RL, Rulifson RA, Cooper JE (eds) International symposium on common strategies of anadromous and catadromous fishes. American Fisheries Society, Boston, MA, pp 97–103
41. Loomis JB (2000) Vertically summing public good demand curves: an empirical comparison of economic versus political jurisdictions. Land Econ 76(2):312–321
42. Meyerhoff J (2013) Do turbines in the vicinity of respondents’ residences influence choices among programmes for future wind power generation? J Choice Model 7(1):58–71
43. Mittermeier RA, Myers N, Thomsen JB, Da Fonseca GAB, Olivieri S (1998) Biodiversity hotspots and major tropical wilderness areas: approaches to setting conservation priorities. Conserv Biol 12(3):516–520
44. Moore R, Provencher B, Bishop RC (2011) Valuing a spatially variable environmental resource: reducing non-point-source pollution in Green Bay, Wisconsin. Land Econ 87(1):45–59
45. Morrison M, Bennett J (2004) Valuing new South Wales Rivers for use in benefit transfer. Aust J Agric Resour Econ 48(4):591–611
46. Myers N, Russell A, Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, da Fonseca GAB, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858
47. Nelson TA, Boots B (2008) Detecting spatially explicit hot spots in landscape-scale ecology. Ecography 31(5):556–566
48. Ord JK, Getis A (1995) Local spatial autocorrelation statistics: distributional issues and an application. Geogr Anal 27(4):286–306
49. Ord JK, Getis A (2001) Testing for local spatial autocorrelation in the presence of global autocorrelation. J Reg Sci 41(3):411–432
50. Patacchini E, Zenou Y (2007) Spatial dependence in local unemployment rates. J Econ Geogr 7(2):169–191
51. Pate J, Loomis JB (1997) The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California. Ecol Econ 20:199–207
52. Poe GL, Giraud KL, Loomis JB (2005) Computational methods for measuring the difference in empirical distributions. Am J Agric Econ 87(2):353–365
53. Ratcliffe JH, McCullagh MJ (1999) Hotbeds of crime and the search for spatial accuracy. J Geogr Syst 1:385–398
54. Reid N, Carroll MC, Smith BW, Frizado JP (2009) GIS and economic development. In: Gatrell JD, Jensen RR (eds) Planning and socioeconomic applications: volume 1 of Geotechnologies and the environment. Springer, Dordrecht
55. Rogerson PA (2001) A statistical method for the detection of geographic clustering. Geogr Anal 33(3):215–227
56. Rolfe J, Windle J (2012) Distance decay functions for iconic assets: assessing national values to protect the health of the great barrier reef in Australia. Environ Resour Econ 53(3):347–365
57. Schaafsma M, Brouwer R, Rose J (2012) Directional heterogeneity in WTP models for environmental valuation. Ecol Econ 79(1):21–31
58. Schilt CR (2007) Developing fish passage and protection at hydropower dams. Appl Anim Behav Sci 104:295–325
59. Schkade DA, Payne JW (1994) How people respond to contingent valuation questions: a verbal protocol analysis of willingness to pay for an environmental regulation. J Environ Econ Manag 26(1):88–109
60. Silverman BW (1986) Density estimation for statistics and data analysis, in monographs on statistics and applied probability. Chapman and Hall, London
61. Stohlgren TJ, Barnett D, Flather C, Fuller P, Peterjohn B, Kartesz J, Master LL (2006) Species richness and patterns of invasion in plants, birds, and fishes in the United States. Biol Invasions 8:427–447
62. Sutherland RJ, Walsh RG (1985) Effects of distance on the preservation value of water quality. Land Econ 61(3):281–291
63. Tiwari N, Adhikari CMS, Tewari A, Kandpal V (2006) Investigation of geo-spatial hotspots for the occurrence of tuberculosis in Almora District, India, using GIS and spatial scan statistic. Int J Health Geogr 5:33
64. Train KE (2009) Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
65. Van Bueren M, Bennett J (2004) Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes. Aust J Agric Resour Econ 48(1):1–32
66. Zhao M, Johnston RJ, Schultz ET (2013) What to value and how? Ecological indicator choices in stated preference valuation. Environ Resour Econ 56(1):3–25
67. Zhu X, Pfueller S, Whitelaw P, Winter C (2010) Spatial differentiation of landscape values in the Murray River Region of Victoria, Australia. Environ Manag 45(5):896–911