Duthy, Stephen (University of Queensland and Southern Cross University)
Abstract
A contingent valuation study was undertaken to determine the level of community support for the dedication of Whian Whian State Forest in north-east NSW as a new national park. The study investigated the relative importance of a number of forest uses and the values held by the respondents that were important in determining their bid. Although this research was conducted during the final phase of the Comprehensive Regional Assessment of the forests of the Upper North East of New South Wales, there are a number of discrepancies between the findings reported here and the outcomes of the assessment. This suggests that the determination of the Regional Forest Agreements used criteria other than biophysical and socio-economic attributes. This study identified the ecosystem functions of water catchment protection and provision of habitat for endangered species as the two most important uses of Whian Whian State Forest. Training in sustainable forestry was rated extremely important in more cases (25.3%) than all other timber industry related uses presented. Respondents reflected a well-defined set of values relating to environmental and equity issues and placed less emphasis on issues relating to productive uses. Bequest, existence and non-consumptive use values were the strongest values relating to Whian Whian SF. The mean willingness to pay of respondents for the non-consumptive use and nonuse values of Whian Whian SF was $18.89 per annum for three years, whilst the median was $10.00 per annum.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher 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: 91-111 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
Find related papers by JEL classification: Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
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.:
Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2006.
"Contingent Valuation,"
Handbook of Environmental Economics,
in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 17, pages 821-936
Elsevier.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Kopp, Raymond & Smith, V. Kerry & Mitchell, Robert & Presser, Stanley & Ruud, Paul & Hanemann, W. Michael & Krosnick, Jon & Conaway, Michael & Martin, Kerry & Carson, Richard, 1996.
"Was the NOAA Panel Correct About Contingent Valuation?,"
Discussion Papers
dp-96-20, Resources For the Future.
[Downloadable!]
Other versions:
Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael & Kopp, Raymond J. & Krosnick, Jon A. & Mitchell, Robert C. & Presser, Stanley & Ruud, Paul A. & Smith, V. Kerry, 1996.
"Was the NOAA Panel Correct about Contingent Valuation?,"
Working Papers
96-21, Duke University, Department of Economics.
[Downloadable!]