IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i12p6793-d575738.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preliminary Assumptions for Identification of the Common Hamster ( Cricetus cricetus ) as a Service Provider in the Agricultural Ecosystem

Author

Listed:
  • Magdalena Joanna Hędrzak

    (Laboratory GreenPro, Maszyce 13, 32-300 Smardzowice, Foundation “Inny Świat”, Dobrynin 266, 39-322 Dobrynin, Poland)

  • Elżbieta Badach

    (Department of Statistics and Social Policy, Faculty of Agriculture and Economics, Al. Mickiewicza 21, 31-120 Kraków, Poland)

  • Sławomir Adam Kornaś

    (Department of Zoology and Animal Welfare, Faculty of Animal Science, University of Agriculture, Al. Mickiewicza 24/28, 31-059 Kraków, Poland)

Abstract

The common hamster is a critically endangered species, but it is also perceived as a pest. Searching for an economic reason for its protection can be an argument to prevent its extinction. The purpose of this paper is to reveal the identification services provided by hamsters in the agricultural ecosystem and the determination of their correlation with human welfare. We propose the methods that can be applied for this purpose, and we check if the knowledge of the species is sufficient in order to use available methods for estimating the value of the services. The common hamster is a provider of supporting, regulating, and cultural services. Estimating their value is difficult because (1) available knowledge on the species’ ecology requires an update, in many aspects, due to changes to agricultural practices that have taken place since the 1970s (e.g., assessment of actual losses to cereal, vegetable, or root crops), and also extending by context, enabling the economic valuation of services (e.g., determination of impact range on various habitat components); it is also necessary to identify the correlations between profits and losses caused by this species; (2) there is a low level of public knowledge on the presence of hamsters and their role in the ecosystem. Education, primarily for consumers, followed by the promotion of hamsters as an umbrella and key species for agricultural areas, may result in the development of cultural services, which will increase the economic value of the services provided by hamsters.

Suggested Citation

  • Magdalena Joanna Hędrzak & Elżbieta Badach & Sławomir Adam Kornaś, 2021. "Preliminary Assumptions for Identification of the Common Hamster ( Cricetus cricetus ) as a Service Provider in the Agricultural Ecosystem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-22, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6793-:d:575738
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6793/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6793/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leonard Shabman & Kurt Stephenson, 1996. "Searching for the Correct Benefit Estimate: Empirical Evidence for an Alternative Perspective," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(4), pages 433-449.
    2. Loomis, John B. & White, Douglas S., 1996. "Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 197-206, September.
    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. Mathilde Louise Tissier & Florian Kletty & Jean-Patrice Robin & Caroline Habold, 2021. "Sustainable Agriculture: Nutritional Benefits of Wheat–Soybean and Maize–Sunflower Associations for Hibernation and Reproduction of Endangered Common Hamsters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-18, December.

    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. Outeiro, Luis & Häussermann, Vreni & Viddi, Francisco & Hucke-Gaete, Rodrigo & Försterra, Günter & Oyarzo, Hugo & Kosiel, Klaus & Villasante, Sebastian, 2015. "Using ecosystem services mapping for marine spatial planning in southern Chile under scenario assessment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 341-353.
    2. Allan Beltrán & David Maddison & Robert J. R. Elliott, 2018. "Assessing the Economic Benefits of Flood Defenses: A Repeat‐Sales Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(11), pages 2340-2367, November.
    3. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    4. Burnett, Kimberly & Kaiser, Brooks & Pitafi, Basharat A. & Roumasset, James, 2006. "Prevention, Eradication, and Containment of Invasive Species: Illustrations from Hawaii," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 63-77, April.
    5. Cardoso de Mendonca, Mario Jorge & Sachsida, Adolfo & Loureiro, Paulo R. A., 2003. "A study on the valuing of biodiversity: the case of three endangered species in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 9-18, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Solomon, Barry D. & Corey-Luse, Cristi M. & Halvorsen, Kathleen E., 2004. "The Florida manatee and eco-tourism: toward a safe minimum standard," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1-2), pages 101-115, September.
    8. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2002. "Willingness to Pay for Conservation of the Asian Elephant in Sri Lanka: A Contingent Valuation Study," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48738, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    9. Catherine Chambers & John Whitehead, 2003. "A Contingent Valuation Estimate of the Benefits of Wolves in Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 249-267, October.
    10. Pintassilgo, Pedro & Laukkanen, Marita & Kronbak, Lone Grønbæk & Lindroos, Marko, 2015. "International Fisheries Agreements and Non-consumptive Values," Discussion Papers on Economics 8/2015, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Economics.
    11. Burnett, Kimberly M. & D'Evelyn, Sean & Kaiser, Brooks A. & Nantamanasikarn, Porntawee & Roumasset, James A., 2008. "Beyond the lamppost: Optimal prevention and control of the Brown Tree Snake in Hawaii," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 66-74, August.
    12. Crowards, Tom M., 1998. "Safe Minimum Standards: costs and opportunities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 303-314, June.
    13. Abbie A. Rogers & Fiona L. Dempster & Jacob I. Hawkins & Robert J. Johnston & Peter C. Boxall & John Rolfe & Marit E. Kragt & Michael P. Burton & David J. Pannell, 2019. "Valuing non-market economic impacts from natural hazards," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 99(2), pages 1131-1161, November.
    14. Erwin Bulte & Edward Barbier, 2005. "Trade and Renewable Resources in a Second Best World: An Overview," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(4), pages 423-463, April.
    15. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Loomis, John B. & Shrestha, Ram K., 1999. "Panel Stratification In Meta-Analysis Of Environmental And Natural Resource Economic Studies," 1999 Annual Meeting, July 11-14, 1999, Fargo, ND 35705, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    16. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.
    17. Zandersen, Marianne & Tol, Richard S.J., 2009. "A meta-analysis of forest recreation values in Europe," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 109-130, January.
    18. Nick Hanley & Carol A. Salt & Mike Wilson & Meara Culligan‐Dunsmore, 2001. "Evaluating alternative “countermeasures” against food contamination resulting from nuclear accidents," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 92-109, May.
    19. Sebri, Maamar, 2015. "Use renewables to be cleaner: Meta-analysis of the renewable energy consumption–economic growth nexus," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 657-665.
    20. Lakhani, Raksha & Doluweera, Ganesh & Bergerson, Joule, 2014. "Internalizing land use impacts for life cycle cost analysis of energy systems: A case of California’s photovoltaic implementation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 253-259.

    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:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6793-:d:575738. 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.