This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Using Choice Experiments to value River and Estuary Health in Tasmania with Individual Preference Heterogeneity

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Marit E Kragt () (Crawford School of Economics and Government, the Australian National University, Australia)
Jeff Bennett () (Crawford School of Economics and Government, the Australian National University, Australia)

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Choice experiments (CE – otherwise known as Choice Modelling) have become widespread as an approach to environmental valuation in Australia. There are, however, limited applications that have focused on the estimation of estuary values. Furthermore, none of the existing valuation studies have addressed catchment management changes in Tasmania. The CE study described in this report aims to elicit community preferences for natural resource management options in the George catchment in north-eastern Tasmania. The survey was administered in different sub-sample locations in Tasmania to assess the trade-offs respondents are willing to make between environmental attributes and costs. Catchment health attributes were the length of native riverside vegetation and the number of rare animal and plant species in the George catchment. The area of healthy seagrass beds in the Georges Bay was used as a measure of estuary condition. Results from mixed logit models show that respondents are, on average, willing to pay between $3.47 and $5.11 for a km increase in native riverside vegetation and between $7.10 and $12.42 per species for the protection of rare native plants and animals, ceteris paribus. The results are ambiguous about respondents’ preferences for estuary seagrass area. This study further shows significant differences between logit models when accounting for unobserved preference heterogeneity and repeated choices made by the same individual. Key words: Choice experiments, Preference heterogeneity, Mixed Logit models, River health, Estuary health, Tasmania, Environmental valuation

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.

File URL: http://www.crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/pdf/EERH_RR16.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School, Australian National University in its series Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports with number 0916.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation:
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:een:eenhrr:0916

Contact details of provider:
Postal: JG Crawford Building #13, Australian National University ACT 0200
Web page: http://www.crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Meredith Bacon).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: 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.:
  1. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Liljenstolpe, Carolina, 2003. "Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 95-103, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Ladenburg, Jacob & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2008. "Gender-specific starting point bias in choice experiments: Evidence from an empirical study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 275-285, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A. & Rose, John, 2006. "Accounting for heterogeneity in the variance of unobserved effects in mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 75-92, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294. [Downloadable!]
  7. Danny Campbell & W. Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2008. "Incorporating Discontinuous Preferences into the Analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(3), pages 401-417, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Danny Campbell, 2007. "Willingness to Pay for Rural Landscape Improvements: Combining Mixed Logit and Random-Effects Models," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 58(3), pages 467-483, 09. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Mark Morrison & Jeff Bennett, 2004. "Valuing New South Wales rivers for use in benefit transfer," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society and Blackwell Publishing Asia Pty Ltd., vol. 48(4), pages 591-611, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Marit Kragt & Jeff Bennett, 2008. "Designing Choice Experiments to Test for Anchoring and Framing Effects," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0810, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School, Australian National University. [Downloadable!]
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)

  1. Kragt, Marit E. & Bennett, Jeff W., 2009. "Integrating economic values and catchment modelling," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 48057, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Marit E Kragt & Jeff Bennett, 2009. "Integrated Hydro-Economic Modelling: Challenges and Experiences in an Australian Catchment," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0915, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School, Australian National University. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You can include your works in the database easily by uploading them on the Munich Personal RePEc Archive (MPRA) if you do not have access to an institutional RePEc archive.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-8.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.