Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Assessing Rainforest Conservation Demands

Contents:

Author Info

  • Rolfe, John

    (Central Queensland University)

  • Bennett, Jeff

    (National Centre for Development Studies, Australian National University)

Abstract

Choice modelling is a non-market valuation technique that can be used to assess peoples' preferences for environmental protection where such information is not readily available from markets. The technique has a number of modelling and analytical strengths, and provides researchers with insights into how conservation values may be structured within society. The series of Choice Modelling applications reported in this paper explored the values that a sample of Brisbane residents held for protecting rainforests in Queensland and New South Wales, as well as in a variety of overseas locations. The results indicate that environmental, social and recreational values are important in determining potential support between different forest protection proposals. The modelling of decision pathways (through the application of nested logit models) indicates that the Brisbane residents surveyed were parochial in apportioning their support for rainforest protection. There is evidence that rainforests in Queensland are viewed as the most important to support, followed by those in other Australian states, and then those in overseas locations.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.eap-journal.com/archive/v32_i2_3.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Queensland University of Technology (QUT), School of Economics and Finance in its journal Economic Analysis and Policy (EAP).

Volume (Year): 32 (2002)
Issue (Month): 2 (June Special Issue)
Pages: 51-67

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:eap:articl:v:32:y:2002:i:2:p:51-67

Contact details of provider:
Postal: GPO Box 2434, BRISBANE QLD 4001
Email:
Web page: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/economic-analysis-and-policy/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Conservation; Preference; Rainforest;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Blamey, Russell K. & Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeffrey W. & Morrison, Mark, 2000. "Valuing remnant vegetation in Central Queensland using choice modelling," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 44(3), September.
  2. Haab, Timothy C. & Hicks, Robert L., 1997. "Accounting for Choice Set Endogeneity in Random Utility Models of Recreation Demand," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 127-147, October.
  3. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-19, November.
  4. McFadden, Daniel L., 2000. "Economic Choices," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2000-6, Nobel Prize Committee.
  5. Catherine L. Kling & Cynthia J. Thomson, 1996. "The Implications of Model Specification for Welfare Estimation in Nested Logit Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 78(1), pages 103-114.
  6. Neill Helen R., 1995. "The Context for Substitutes in CVM Studies: Some Empirical Observations," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 393-397, November.
  7. Kevin J. Boyle & Thomas P. Holmes & Mario F. Teisl & Brian Roe, 2001. "A Comparison of Conjoint Analysis Response Formats," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 441-454.
  8. Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeff & Louviere, Jordan, 2000. "Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 289-302, November.
  9. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
  10. McConnell K. E., 1995. "Consumer Surplus from Discrete Choice Models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 263-270, November.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. John Rolfe & Jill Windle, 2012. "Distance Decay Functions for Iconic Assets: Assessing National Values to Protect the Health of the Great Barrier Reef in Australia," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(3), pages 347-365, November.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eap:articl:v:32:y:2002:i:2:p:51-67. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Manuela Torgler).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.