Public willingness to pay for alternative management regimes of remote marine protected areas in the North Sea

Marine Policy

Volumn 68, Issue , 2016, Pages 195-204

  Brouwer, R ^a,b   Brouwer, S ^c   Eleveld, M A ^d,e   Verbraak, M ^d,f   Wagtendonk, A J ^d   van der Woerd, H J ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF AQUATIC SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Switzerland)

^c KWR WATERCYCLE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

^d INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES   (Netherlands)

^e DELTARES   (Netherlands)

^f PBL NETHERLANDS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AGENCY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation; Marine biodiversity; Marine protected areas; Marine Strategy Framework Directive; Non use value; Public willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONTINGENT VALUATION; CORAL REEF; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; MARINE PARK; STRATEGIC APPROACH; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ATLANTIC OCEAN; NORTH SEA;

ANTHOZOA;

EID: 84960326153     PISSN: 0308597X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2016.03.001     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Alberini A. Efficiency vs bias of willingness-to-pay estimates: bivariate and interval-data models. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 1995, 29:169-180.
2. Al-Abdulrazzak D., Trombulak S.C. Classifying levels of protection in Marine Protected Areas. Mar. Policy 2012, 36:576-582.
3. Angulo-Valdés J.A., Hatcher B.G. A new typology of benefits derived from marine protected areas. Mar. Policy 2010, 34:635-644.
4. Bateman I.J., Langford I.H., Turner R.K., Willis K.G., Garrod G.D. Elicitation and truncation effects in contingent valuation studies. Ecol. Econ. 1995, 12(2):161-179.
5. Bertram C., Rehdanz K. On the environmental effectiveness of the EU marine strategy framework directive. Mar. Policy 2013, 38:25-40.
6. Bertram C., Dworak T., Görlitz S., Interwies E., Rehdanz K. Cost-benefit analysis in the context of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive: the case of Germany. Mar. Policy 2014, 43:307-312.
7. Börger T., Beaumont N.J., Pendleton L., Boyle K.J., Cooper P., Fletcher S., Haab T., Hanemann M., Hooper T.L., Hussain S.S., Portela R., Stithou M., Stockill J., Taylor T., Austen M.C. Incorporating ecosystem services in marine planning: the role of valuation. Mar. Policy 2014, 46:161-170.
8. Brander L.M., van Beukering P., Cesar H.S.J. The recreational value of coral reefs: a meta-analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 30:209-218.
9. Brouwer R. The role of stated preference methods in the Water Framework Directive to assess disproportionate costs. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2008, 51(5):597-614.
10. Carson R.T., Flores N.E., Meade N.F. Contingent valuation: controversies and evidence. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2001, 19:173-210.
11. Carson R.T., Mitchell R.C., Hanemann M., Kopp R.J., Presser S., Ruud P.A. Contingent valuation and lost passive use: damages from the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2003, 25:257-286.
12. CBS, Household budget research Statistics Netherlands, 2016. http://www.budgetonderzoek.nl/Pagina/Achtergrond.
13. D.A. Dillman, Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method, 1978, Wiley, New York.
14. Dziegielewska D.A., Mendelsohn R. Does "No" mean "No"? A protest methodology. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2007, 38:71-87.
15. Gaines S.D., White C., Carr M.H., Palumbi S.R. Designing marine reserve networks for both conservation and fisheries management. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107:18286-18293.
16. Gilbert A., McQuatters-Gollop A., Langmead O., Mee L., Vermaat J. Visions for the North Sea: the societal dilemma behind specifying Good Environmental Status. Ambio 2015, 44:142-153.
17. Glenn H., Wattage P., Mardle S., van Rensburg T., Grehan A., Foley N. Marine protected areas - substantiating their worth. Mar. Policy 2010, 34:421-430.
18. M.W. Hanemann and B. Kanninen, The statistical analysis of discrete-response CV data, In I.J. Bateman and K.G. Willis (eds), Valuing Environmental Preferences: Theory and Practice of the Contingent Valuation Method in the US, EU, and Developing Countries, Oxford University Press, 1999, 302-441.
19. IDON, The Integrated Management Plan for the North Sea 2015, Interdepartmental Directors' Consultative Committee North Sea (IDON), 2005.
20. Jobstvogt N., Hanley N., Hynes S., Kenter J., Witte U. Twenty thousand sterling under the sea: estimating the value of protecting deep-sea biodiversity. Ecol. Econ. 2014, 97:10-19.
21. Kahneman D., Knetsch J.L. Valuing public goods: the purchase of moral satisfaction. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 1992, 22:57-70.
22. Krutilla J.V. Conservation reconsidered. American Economic Review 1967, 57(4):777-786.
23. Lazo J.K., Schulze W.D., McClelland G.H., Doyle J.K. Can contingent valuation measure nonuse values?. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1992, 74(5):1126-1132.
24. Ledoux L., Turner R.K. Valuing ocean and coastal resources: a review of practical examples and issues for further action. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2002, 45(9-10):583-616.
25. Lester S.E., Halpern B.S., Grorud-Colvert K., Lubchenco J., Ruttenberg B.I., Gaines S.D., Airamé S., Warner R.R. Biological effects within no-take marine reserves: a global synthesis. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2009, 384(2):33-46.
26. H. Lindeboom, J.G. van Kessel, L. Berkenbosch, Areas with special ecological values on the Dutch Continental Shelf, RIKZ report 2005.008 and Alterra report 1109. RIKZ, The Hague, The Netherlands, 2005.
27. McConnell K.E., Strand I.E., Valdes S. Testing temporal reliability and carry-over effect: the role of correlated responses in test-retest reliability studies. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1998, 12:357-374.
28. McVittie A., Moran D. Valuing the non-use benefits of marine conservation zones: an application to the UK Marine Bill. Ecol. Econ. 2010, 70(2):413-424.
29. Norton D., Hynes S. Valuing the non-market benefits arising from the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework directive. Ecosyst. Serv. 2014, 10:84-96.
30. van Oostenbrugge H., Slijkerman D., Hamon K., Bos O., Machiels M., van de Valk O., Hintzen N., Bos E., Tjalling van der Wal J., Coolen J. Effects of Seabed Protection on the Frisian Front and Central Oyster Grounds. A cost-benefit analysis. LEI report 2015-145, LEI 2015, Wageningen University & Research centre, The Netherlands.
31. OSPAR, 2012 Status Report on the OSPAR Network of Marine Protected Areas, OSPAR Commission, Biodiversity Series, 2013, p. 64.
32. Pendleton L., Atiyah P., Moorthy A. Is the non-market literature adequate to support coastal and marine management?. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2007, 50:363-378.
33. Potts T., Burdon D., Jackson E., Atkins J., Saunders J., Hastings E., Langmead O. Do marine protected areas deliver flows of ecosystem services to support human welfare?. Mar. Policy 2014, 44:139-148.
34. Ressurreição A., Gibbons J., Dentinho T.P., Kaiser M., Santos R.S., Edward-Jones G. Economic valuation of species loss in the open sea. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 70(4):729-739.
35. Schaafsma M., Brouwer R., Gilbert A., van den Bergh J.C.J.M., Wagtendonk A. Estimation of distance-decay functions to account for substitution and spatial heterogeneity in stated preference research. Land Econ. 2013, 89(3):514-537.
36. Schkade D.A., Payne J.W. How people respond to contingent valuation questions: a verbal protocol analysis of willingness to pay for an environmental regulation. J. Environ. Econ. Manag. 1994, 26:88-109.
37. Shechter M., Freeman S. Nonuse value: reflections on the definition and measurement. Valuing the Environment: Methodological and Measurement Issues 1994, 171-194. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. R. Pethig (Ed.).
38. Togridou A., Hovardas T., Pantis J.D. Determinants of visitors' willingness to pay for the National Marine Park of Zakynthos, Greece. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 60:308-319.
39. Tsuge T., Washida T. Economic valuation of the Seto Inland Sea by using an internet CV survey. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2003, 47:230-236.
40. Wattage P., Glenn H., Mardle S., van Rensburg T., Grehan A., Foley N. Economic value of conserving deep-sea corals in Irish waters: a choice experiment study on marine protected areas. Fish. Res. 2011, 107(1). 69-67.