IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v68y2008i1-2p517-524.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating cost functions for the four large carnivores in Sweden

Author

Listed:
  • Bostedt, Göran
  • Grahn, Pontus

Abstract

The Swedish carnivore policy goal for the four large carnivores - wolverine (Gulo gulo), wolf (Canis lupus), brown bear (Ursus arctos) and lynx (Lynx lynx) - is to ensure a minimum viable population on a long-term basis. To reach this goal the policy restricts population regulation activities, like hunting (prohibited for wolverine and wolf and restricted for brown bear and lynx) in Sweden. For owners of semi-domesticated (i.e. reindeer), and domesticated (livestock) animals this policy and the existence of individuals of these four species results in externalities associated with predation. This paper presents econometric estimates of the predation and the social costs for these four species, based on ecological models of functional response. The data on costs is based on compensation provided to livestock owners by the Swedish government. The paper also applies these econometric estimates to predict the social cost per species when the population goals of the Swedish carnivore policy are reached. Based on out our model the wolverine and the lynx will impose the highest marginal, as well as total costs on society, given the current policy goals. The wolf is an efficient predator, but due to its geographical distribution in Sweden, its social costs are less than anticipated. The brown bear is largely omnivorous, thus resulting in relatively low social costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Bostedt, Göran & Grahn, Pontus, 2008. "Estimating cost functions for the four large carnivores in Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 517-524, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:68:y:2008:i:1-2:p:517-524
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(08)00216-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2002. "Rural and Urban Attitudes to the Conservation of Asian Elephants in Sri Lanka: Empirical Evidence," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48736, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    2. Göran Bostedt & Göran Ericsson & Jonas Kindberg, 2008. "Contingent values as implicit contracts: estimating minimum legal willingness to pay for conservation of large carnivores in Sweden," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(2), pages 189-198, February.
    3. Bostedt, Goran, 2001. "Reindeer husbandry, the Swedish market for reindeer meat, and the Chernobyl effects," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 217-226, December.
    4. Montgomery Claire A. & Brown Jr. , Gardner M. & Adams Darius M., 1994. "The Marginal Cost of Species Preservation: The Northern Spotted Owl," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 111-128, March.
    5. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.
    6. Skonhoft, Anders, 2006. "The costs and benefits of animal predation: An analysis of Scandinavian wolf re-colonization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 830-841, July.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Muhly, Tyler B. & Musiani, Marco, 2009. "Livestock depredation by wolves and the ranching economy in the Northwestern U.S," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2439-2450, June.
    2. Widman, Marit & Elofsson, Katarina, 2018. "Costs of Livestock Depredation by Large Carnivores in Sweden 2001 to 2013," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 188-198.
    3. Julian E. Lozano & Katarina Elofsson & Yves Surry & George Marbuah, 2023. "Spatio-Temporal Analysis of Game Harvests in Sweden," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(2), pages 385-408, June.
    4. Juliette Claire Young & Justine Shanti Alexander & Ajay Bijoor & Deepshikha Sharma & Abhijit Dutta & Bayarjargal Agvaantseren & Tserennadmid Nadia Mijiddorj & Kubanych Jumabay & Venera Amankul & Benaz, 2021. "Community-Based Conservation for the Sustainable Management of Conservation Conflicts: Learning from Practitioners," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.
    5. Mensah, Justice Tei & Persson, Jens & Kjellander, Petter & Elofsson, Katarina, 2019. "Effects of carnivore presence on hunting lease pricing in South Sweden," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Lozano, Julian E. & Elofsson, Katarina & Surry, Yves, 2021. "Heterogeneous impacts of large carnivores on hunting lease prices," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L., 2011. "Identifying the scope effect on a meta-analysis of biodiversity valuation studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 706-724, September.
    2. Mailu, Stephen & Kuloba, Bernard & Ruto, Eric & Nyangena, Wilfred, 2010. "Effect of cropping policy on landowner reactions towards wildlife: a case of Naivasha area, Kenya," MPRA Paper 21308, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Widman, Marit & Elofsson, Katarina, 2018. "Costs of Livestock Depredation by Large Carnivores in Sweden 2001 to 2013," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 188-198.
    4. Kornsorn Srikulnath & Nattakan Ariyaraphong & Worapong Singchat & Thitipong Panthum & Artem Lisachov & Syed Farhan Ahmad & Kyudong Han & Narongrit Muangmai & Prateep Duengkae, 2022. "Asian Elephant Evolutionary Relationships: New Perspectives from Mitochondrial D-Loop Haplotype Diversity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Göran Bostedt & Peter J. Parks & Mattias Boman, 2003. "Integrated Natural Resource Management in Northern Sweden: An Application to Forestry and Reindeer Husbandry," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(2), pages 149-159.
    6. Barraquand, F. & Martinet, V., 2011. "Biological conservation in dynamic agricultural landscapes: Effectiveness of public policies and trade-offs with agricultural production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 910-920, March.
    7. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    8. R. M. Wasantha Rathnayake, "undated". "Estimating Demand for Turtle Conservation at the Rekawa Sanctuary in Sri Lanka," Working papers 92, The South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics.
    9. N. Wear, David & Murray, Brian C., 2004. "Federal timber restrictions, interregional spillovers, and the impact on US softwood markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 307-330, March.
    10. J. A. Giesecke & W. J. Burns & A. Barrett & E. Bayrak & A. Rose & P. Slovic & M. Suher, 2012. "Assessment of the Regional Economic Impacts of Catastrophic Events: CGE Analysis of Resource Loss and Behavioral Effects of an RDD Attack Scenario," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 583-600, April.
    11. Ropars-Collet, Carole, 2012. "Nuisible ou gibier? Une analyse économique de la chasse des grands animaux en France," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 92(02), pages 161-181, October.
    12. Wakamatsu, Mihoko & Shin, Kong Joo & Wilson, Clevo & Managi, Shunsuke, 2018. "Exploring a Gap between Australia and Japan in the Economic Valuation of Whale Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 397-407.
    13. Hussain, A.M. Tanvir & Tschirhart, John, 2013. "Economic/ecological tradeoffs among ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 116-127.
    14. Swallow, Stephen K., 1996. "Economic Issues in Ecosystem Management: An Introduction and Overview," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 83-100, October.
    15. Edwards, Eric C. & Cristi, Oscar & Edwards, Gonzalo & Libecap, Gary D., 2018. "An illiquid market in the desert: estimating the cost of water trade restrictions in northern Chile," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(6), pages 615-634, December.
    16. Rucker, Randal R. & Thurman, Walter N. & Yoder, Jonathan K., 1999. "An Economic Analysis Of The Determinants Of Lumber Futures Price Movements," 1999 Annual meeting, August 8-11, Nashville, TN 21706, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    17. Boya Wang & Zhicheng Liu & Yuting Mei & Wenjie Li, 2019. "Assessment of Ecosystem Service Quality and Its Correlation with Landscape Patterns in Haidian District, Beijing," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-34, April.
    18. Catherine M. Chambers & Paul E. Chambers & John R. Crooker & John C. Whitehead, 2008. "Stochastic Dominance, Entropy and Biodiversity Management," Working Papers 08-08, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    19. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    20. Garrod, G. D. & Willis, K. G., 1997. "The non-use benefits of enhancing forest biodiversity: A contingent ranking study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 45-61, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:68:y:2008:i:1-2:p:517-524. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.