IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i3p819-d312065.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting a Water Conflict in Southeastern Oklahoma 6 Years Later: A New Valuation of the Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services

Author

Listed:
  • Claire Burch

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
    Co-contribution authors: Claire Burch, Michelle Busch, Edward Higgins, Steven Bittner, Kevin Neal, Nuwanthika Perera.)

  • Michelle Busch

    (Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
    Co-contribution authors: Claire Burch, Michelle Busch, Edward Higgins, Steven Bittner, Kevin Neal, Nuwanthika Perera.)

  • Edward Higgins

    (Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
    Oklahoma Biological Survey, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
    Co-contribution authors: Claire Burch, Michelle Busch, Edward Higgins, Steven Bittner, Kevin Neal, Nuwanthika Perera.)

  • Steven Bittner

    (Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
    Co-contribution authors: Claire Burch, Michelle Busch, Edward Higgins, Steven Bittner, Kevin Neal, Nuwanthika Perera.)

  • Nuwanthika Perera

    (Department of Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
    Oklahoma Biological Survey, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
    Co-contribution authors: Claire Burch, Michelle Busch, Edward Higgins, Steven Bittner, Kevin Neal, Nuwanthika Perera.)

  • Kevin Neal

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA
    Co-contribution authors: Claire Burch, Michelle Busch, Edward Higgins, Steven Bittner, Kevin Neal, Nuwanthika Perera.)

  • Lawrence Burkett

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Sustainability, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA)

  • Antonio J. Castro

    (Centro Andaluz para La Evaluación y Seguimiento Del Cambio Global (CAESCG), 04120 Almería, Spain
    Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID 83209, USA)

  • Christopher Anderson

    (Department of Communication, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK 73019, USA)

Abstract

In recent years, researchers have begun to adopt a perspective evaluating “winners and losers” regarding the consumption and value of ecosystem services. “Winners” tend to benefit from the ecosystem service and “losers” absorb most associated costs. Our study focuses on water use in Oklahoma (USA) and a plan to divert water from the Kiamichi River in southeastern Oklahoma for consumption at residences in the Oklahoma City metropolitan area. Our study is, in part, a follow-up from an initial 2013 survey of Oklahoma City residents and residents of the Kiamichi. For this paper, a survey was distributed within the state of Oklahoma to evaluate changes to ecosystem service willingness to pay and valuation. This survey also included an experimental element assessing if exposure to additional information about ecosystem services influenced respondents on ecosystem service valuation, or willingness to pay. Our results generally aligned with those found in the 2013 survey. Oklahoma City residents are not aware of where their water is coming from and are not willing to pay to protect ecosystem services, despite an overall increase in activism. Our results indicate that a smaller number of significant factors determining willingness to pay for ecosystem service maintenance were identified than the study in 2013. Exposure to additional information had no effect on peoples’ preferences. We found that public opinion surrounding environmental support is context-specific, political conservatism may not always impede valuation of environmental protections. We conclude that cultural, moral, and political values interact in their influence on expressions of valuation and willingness to pay for ecosystem services.

Suggested Citation

  • Claire Burch & Michelle Busch & Edward Higgins & Steven Bittner & Nuwanthika Perera & Kevin Neal & Lawrence Burkett & Antonio J. Castro & Christopher Anderson, 2020. "Revisiting a Water Conflict in Southeastern Oklahoma 6 Years Later: A New Valuation of the Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-30, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:819-:d:312065
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/819/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/3/819/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dupont, Diane P. & Bateman, Ian J., 2012. "Political affiliation and willingness to pay: An examination of the nature of benefits and means of provision," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 43-51.
    2. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    3. Asquith, Nigel M. & Vargas, Maria Teresa & Wunder, Sven, 2008. "Selling two environmental services: In-kind payments for bird habitat and watershed protection in Los Negros, Bolivia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 675-684, May.
    4. Stålhammar, Sanna & Pedersen, Eja, 2017. "Recreational cultural ecosystem services: How do people describe the value?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 1-9.
    5. Toomet, Ott & Henningsen, Arne, 2008. "Sample Selection Models in R: Package sampleSelection," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 27(i07).
    6. Nielsen, Jytte Seested, 2011. "Use of the Internet for willingness-to-pay surveys: A comparison of face-to-face and web-based interviews," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 119-129, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Mocior, Ewelina & Hibner, Joanna & Tokarczyk, Natalia, 2020. "Human perceptions of cultural ecosystem services of semi-natural grasslands: The influence of plant communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    2. Nowak-Olejnik, Agnieszka & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "A systematic review on subjective well-being benefits associated with cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    3. Sy, Mariam Maki & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Figuières, Charles & Simier, Monique & De Wit, Rutger, 2021. "The impact of academic information supply and familiarity on preferences for ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    4. Breyne, Johanna & Dufrêne, Marc & Maréchal, Kevin, 2021. "How integrating 'socio-cultural values' into ecosystem services evaluations can give meaning to value indicators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    5. Ľuboš Slovák & Jan Daněk & Tomáš Daněk, 2023. "The use of focus groups in cultural ecosystem services research: a systematic review," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Gugulica, Madalina & Burghardt, Dirk, 2023. "Mapping indicators of cultural ecosystem services use in urban green spaces based on text classification of geosocial media data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    7. Kong, Inhye & Sarmiento, Fausto O., 2022. "Utilizing a crowdsourced phrasal lexicon to identify cultural ecosystem services in El Cajas National Park, Ecuador," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    8. Setten, Gunhild & Brown, Katrina Myrvang, 2018. "Ecosystem services as an integrative framework: What is the potential?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 549-556.
    9. Zawojska, Ewa & Czajkowski, Mikotaj, 2017. "Are preferences stated in web vs. personal interviews different? A comparison of willingness to pay results for a large multi-country study of the Baltic Sea eutrophication reduction," Annual Meeting, 2017, June 18-21, Montreal, Canada 258604, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society.
    10. McGrath, F.L. & Carrasco, L.R. & Leimona, B., 2017. "How auctions to allocate payments for ecosystem services contracts impact social equity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 44-55.
    11. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    12. Nicolai Fink Simonsen & Anne Sophie Oxholm & Søren Rud Kristensen & Luigi Siciliani, 2020. "What explains differences in waiting times for health care across socioeconomic status?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(12), pages 1764-1785, December.
    13. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chr, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    14. Rode, Julian & Le Menestrel, Marc & Cornelissen, Gert, 2017. "Ecosystem Service Arguments Enhance Public Support for Environmental Protection - But Beware of the Numbers!," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 213-221.
    15. Tandarić, Neven & Ives, Christopher D. & Watkins, Charles, 2022. "From city in the park to “greenery in plant pots”: The influence of socialist and post-socialist planning on opportunities for cultural ecosystem services," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    16. Meyer, Maximilian & Hulke, Carolin & Kamwi, Jonathan & Kolem, Hannah & Börner, Jan, 2022. "Spatially heterogeneous effects of collective action on environmental dependence in Namibia’s Zambezi region," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    17. Alain‐Désiré Nimubona & Jean‐Christophe Pereau, 2022. "Negotiating over payments for wetland ecosystem services," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(3), pages 1507-1538, August.
    18. Briguglio, Marie & Formosa, Glenn, 2017. "When households go solar: Determinants of uptake of a Photovoltaic Scheme and policy insights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 154-162.
    19. Kahmann, Birte & Stumpf, Klara Helene & Baumgärtner, Stefan, 2015. "Notions of justice held by stakeholders of the Newfoundland fishery," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 37-50.
    20. Beata Fornal-Pieniak & Agnieszka Mandziuk & Dagmara Stangierska & Stanisław Parzych & Pedro Miguel Ramos Arsénio, 2023. "Preferences of Young Adult Visitors to Manor Parks in South Poland: A Study on Ecosystem Services and Scenic Quality," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-12, January.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:3:p:819-:d:312065. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.