Ecosystem benefits from coastal habitats-A three-country choice experiment

Marine Policy

Volumn 58, Issue , 2015, Pages 15-27

  Kosenius, Anna Kaisa ^a   Markku, Ollikainen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

Adjusted value transfer; Choice experiment; Coastal ecosystem; Economic valuation; Value transfer; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

ACTION PLAN; COASTAL ZONE; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; MARINE ECOSYSTEM; VALUATION; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ATLANTIC OCEAN; BALTIC SEA; FINLAND; LITHUANIA; SWEDEN;

EID: 84928693914     PISSN: 0308597X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.03.032     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Ahtiainen H., Artell J., Czajkowski M., Hasler B., Hasselström L., Hyytiäinen K., Meyerhoff J., Smart J., Söderqvist T., Zimmer K., Khaleeva J., Rastrigina O., Tuhkanen H. Public preferences regarding use and condition of the Baltic Sea-an international comparison informing marine policy. Mar Policy 2013, 42:20-30.
2. Ahtiainen H., Artell J., Czajkowski M., Hasler B., Hasselstrom L., Meyerhoff J., Smart J.J., Soderqvist T., Alemu M., Angeli D., Dahlbo K, Fleming-Lehtinen V., Hyytiainen K., Karloseva A, Khaleeva Y., Maar M., Martinsen L., Nommann T., Pakalniete K., Oskolokaite I., Semeniene D. Benefits of meeting nutrient reduction taqrgets for the Baltic Sea-a contingent valuation study in the nine coastal states. J Environ Econ Policy 2014, 3(3):278-305. 10.1080/21606544.2014.901923.
3. Atkins J.P., Burdon D., Elliott M., Gregory A.J. Management of the marine environment: integrating ecosystem services and societal benefits with the DPSIR framework in a systems approach. Mar Pollut Bull 2011, 62:215-226.
4. Bateman I.J., Brouwer R., Ferrini S., Schaafsma M., Barton D.N., Dubgaard A., Hasler B., Hime S., Liekens I., Navrud S., De Nocker L., Sceponaviciute R., Semeniene D. 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 Resource Econ 2011, 50:365-387.
5. Beaumont N.J., Austen M.C., Atkins J.P., Burdon D., Degraer S., Dentinho T.P., Derous S., Holm P., Horton T., Van Ierland E., Marboe A.H., Starkey D.J., Townsend M., Zarzycki T. Identification, definition and quantification of goods and services provided by marine biodiversity: implications for the ecosystem approach. Mar Pollut Bull 2007, 54:253-265.
6. Beaumont N.J., Austen M.C., Mangi S.C., Townsend.M. Economic valuation for the conservation of marine biodiversity. Mar Pollut Bull 2008, 56:386-396.
7. The choice modelling approach to environmental valuation 2001, Edward Elgar Publishing, Massachusetts. J. Bennett, R. Blamey (Eds.).
8. Bergström U, Sundblad G, Downie A-L, Snickars M, Boström C, Lindegarth M. Evaluating eutrophication management scenarios in the Baltic Sea using species distribution modelling. J Appl Ecol 2013, 50(3):680-690.
9. Blamey R.K., Bennett J.W., Louviere J.J., Morrison M.D., Rolfe J.C. Attribute causality in environmental choice modelling. Environ Resource Econ 2002, 23(2):167-186.
10. Brazell J.D., Diener C.G., Karniouchina E., Moore W.L., Severin V., Uldry P-F. The no-choice option and dual response choice designs. Marketing Lett 2006, 17:255-268.
11. Brouwer R. Environmental value transfer: state of the art and future prospects. Ecol Econ 2000, 32:137-152.
12. Brouwer, R, Martin-Ortega, J, Dekker, T, Raggi, M. Improving value transfer through socio-economic adjustments in a multi-country choice experiment of water conservation alternatives. In: Paper presented in 19th annual conference of European association for environmental and resource economists, Prague, Czech Republic; 2012.
13. Carlsson F., Kataria M., Lampi E. Dealing with ignored attributes in choice experiments on valuation of Sweden's environmental quality objectives. Environ Resource Econ 2010, 47:65-89.
14. A primer on nonmarket valuation 2003, Kluwer, Dordrecht. P. Champ, K. Boyle, T. Brown (Eds.).
15. Cognetti G., Maltagliati F. Ecosystem service provision: an operational way for marine biodiversity conservation and management. Mar Pollut Bull 2010, 60(11):1916-1923.
16. Colombo S., Calatrava-Requena J., Hanley N. Testing choice experiment for benefit transfer with preference heterogeneity. Am J Agric Econ 2007, 89(1):135-151.
17. Colombo S, Hanley N. How can we reduce the errors from benefits transfer? an investigation using the choice experiment method. Land Econ 2008, 84(1):128-147.
18. 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. Ecol Econ 2002, 41:393-408.
19. Dillman D.A. Mail and internet surveys. The tailored design method. Update with new internet, visual, and mixed-mode guide 2007, Wiley, New York. 2nd ed.
20. Eggert H., Olsson B. Valuing multi-attribute marine water quality. Mar Policy 2009, 33:201-209.
21. Eurostat. Metadata in Euro SDMX Metadata Structure (ESMS). Purchasing power parities (PPPs), price level indices and real expenditures for ESA95 aggregates. Available: ; 2011. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do.
22. Fiebig D.G., Keane M.P., Louviere J., Wasi N. The generalized multinomial logit model. Marketing Sci 2010, 29(3):393-421.
23. Fisher B., Turner R.K., Morling P. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecol Econ 2009, 68:643-653.
24. Garpe, K. editor. Ecosystem services provided by the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, report 5873, Stockholm, Sweden; 2008. 193 pp.
25. Greene WH., Hensher DA. Does scale heterogeneity across individuals matter? An empirical assessment of alternative logit models. Transportation 2010, 37:413-428.
26. Gren I.M., Söderqvist T., Wulff F. Nutrient reductions to the Baltic Sea: ecology, costs and benefits. J Environ Manage 1997, 51:123-143.
27. Hanley N., Mourato S., Wright RE. Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation?. J Econ Surv 2001, 15(3):435-462.
28. Hanley N., Bell D., Alvarez-Farizo B. Valuing benefits of coastal water quality improvements using contingent and real behaviour. Environ Resource Econ 2003, 24:273-285.
29. Hanley N., Colombo S., Tinch D., Black A., Aftab A. Estimating the benefits of water quality improvements under the water framework directive: are benefits transferable?. Eur Rev Agric Econ 2006, 33(3):391-413.
30. HELCOM. Baltic Sea action plan. ; 2007 [accessed 9 March, 2009]. http://www.helcom.fi/stc/files/BSAP/BSAP_Final.pdf.
31. HELCOM. Eutrophication in the Baltic Sea-an integrated thematic assessment of the effects of nutrient enrichment in the Baltic Sea region. In: Helsinki Commission, Baltic Sea environment proceedings no. 115B, Helsinki, Finland; 2009a. 148 pp.
32. HELCOM. Biodiversity in the Baltic Sea-an integrated thematic assessment on biodiversity and nature conservation in the Baltic Sea. In: Helsinki Commission, Baltic Sea environment proceedings no. 116B, Helsinki, Finland; 2009b. 192 pp.
33. HELCOM. The fifth Baltic Sea pollution load compilation (PLC-5). In: Helsinki Commission, Baltic Sea environment proceedings no. 128, Helsinki, Finland; 2011. 220 pp.
34. Hensher D.A., Greene W.H. The mixed logit model: the state of practice. Transportation 2003, 30:133-176.
35. Hensher D.A., Rose J., Greene W.H. Applied choice analysis. a primer 2005, Cambridge University press, Cambridge.
36. Kosenius AK. Heterogeneous preferences for water quality attributes: the case of eutrophication of the Gulf of Finland, the Baltic Sea. Ecol Econ 2010, 69:528-538.
37. Ledoux L., Turner R.K. Valuing ocean and coastal resources: a review of practical examples and issues for further action. Ocean Coast Manage 2002, 45:583-616.
38. Louviere J., Hensher D., Swait J. Stated choice methods-analysis and application 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
39. Luisetti T., Turner R.K., Bateman I.J., Morse-Jones S., Adams C., Fonseca L. Coastal and marine ecosystem services valuation for policy and management: managed realignment case studies in England. Ocean Coast Manage 2011, 54:212-224.
40. Markowska A., Zylicz T. Costing an international public good: the case of the Baltic Sea. Ecol Econ 1999, 30:301-316.
41. MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). Ecosystems and their services. In ecosystems and human well-being-a framework for assessment. ; 2003 (accessed 14 April, 2010). http://www.millenniumassessment.org/.
42. Morrison MJ., Bennett J., Blamey R, Louviere J. Choice modelling and tests of benefit transfer. Am J Agric Econ 2002, 84(1):161-170.
43. Morrison M., Bennett J. Valuing New South Wales rivers for use in benefit transfer. Aust J Agric Resour Econ 2004, 48(4):591-611.
44. Morrison M., Bergland O. Prospects of the use of choice modelling for benefit transfer. Ecol Econ 2006, 60(2):420-428.
45. Muthke T., Holm-Mueller K. National and international benefit transfer testing with a rigorous test procedure. Environ Resource Econ 2004, 29:323-336.
46. Ngene User manual and reference guide. The cutting edge in experimental design. ChoiceMetrics 2010, 230.
47. Nunes P.A., van den Bergh J.C. Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense?. Ecol Econ 2001, 39:203-222.
48. Ready R., Navrud S. International benefit transfer: methods and validity tests. Ecol Econ 2006, 60(2):429-434.
49. Ready R., Navrud S., Day B., Dubourg R., Machado F., Mourato S., Spanninks F., Rodrigues, M.Xose Vasquez Benefit transfer in Europe: how reliable are transfers between countries. Environ Resource Econ 2004, 29(1):67-82.
50. Remoundou K., Koundouri P., Kontogianni A., Nunes P.A.L.D., Skourtos M. Valuation of natural marine ecosystems: an economic perspective. Environ Sci Policy 2009, 12(7):1040-1051.
51. Rönnberg C., Bonsdorff E. Baltic Sea eutrophication: area-specific ecological consequences. Hydrobiology 2004, 514:227-241.
52. Rönnbäck P., Kautsky N., Pihl L., Troell M., Söderqvist T., Wennhage T. Ecosystem goods and services from Swedish coastal habitats: identification, valuation, and implications of ecosystem shifts. Ambio 2007, 36:534-544.
53. Statistics Finland.; 2011 (accessed 18 April, 2011). http://www.tilastokeskus.fi/tup/tilastotietokannat/%20index_en.html.
54. Statistics Lithuania. ; 2011 (accessed 19 April, 2011). http://www.stat.gov.lt/en/pages/view/?id=1350.
55. Statistics Sweden. ; 2011 (accessed 19 April, 2011). http://www.ssd.scb.se/databaser/makro/start.asp?lang=2.
56. Stithou M., Scarpa R. Collective versus voluntary payment in contingent valuation for the conservation of marine biodiversity: an explorative study from Zakynthos, Greece. Ocean Coast Manage 2012, 56:1-9.
57. Söderqvist, T., L. Hasselström. The economic value of ecosystem services provided by the Baltic Sea and Skagerrak. Existing information and gaps of knowledge. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, report 5874, Stockholm, Sweden; 2008. 238 pp.
58. Train K. Discrete choice methods with simulation 2009, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 2nd ed.