IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpot/0410001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Adopt a hypothetical pup’: A count data approach to the valuation of wildlife

Author

Listed:
  • Roberto Martinez-Espineira

    (St Francis Xavier University)

Abstract

The willingness to pay for a coyote conservation program is estimated using a novel payment-vehicle, based on how many oyotes respondents would be willing to sponsor. This hypothetical scenario mimics an increasingly popular type of actual market. Data from a phone survey conducted in Prince Edward Island are analyzed using count data models that consider different processes explaining zero responses and the level of positive responses. This is particularly important in the case of coyotes, often regarded as a bad. Estimates of willingness to pay per coyote around $18-$20 and annual consumer surplus per respondent of about $35-$42 are obtained.

Suggested Citation

  • Roberto Martinez-Espineira, 2004. "Adopt a hypothetical pup’: A count data approach to the valuation of wildlife," Others 0410001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpot:0410001
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/othr/papers/0410/0410001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey Englin & Klaus Moeltner, 2004. "The Value of Snowfall to Skiers and Boarders," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(1), pages 123-136, September.
    2. Michael D. Creel & John B. Loomis, 1990. "Theoretical and Empirical Advantages of Truncated Count Data Estimators for Analysis of Deer Hunting in California," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 72(2), pages 434-441.
    3. John W. Duffield & David A. Patterson, 1991. "Inference and Optimal Design for a Welfare Measure in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(2), pages 225-239.
    4. Göran Bostedt, 1999. "Threatened Species as Public Goods and Public Bads," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 59-73, January.
    5. Allen McDowell, 2003. "From the help desk: hurdle models," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 3(2), pages 178-184, June.
    6. Englin, Jeffrey & Shonkwiler, J S, 1995. "Estimating Social Welfare Using Count Data Models: An Application to Long-Run Recreation Demand under Conditions of Endogenous Stratification and Truncation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 77(1), pages 104-112, February.
    7. Andreas Kontoleon & Timothy Swanson, 2003. "The Willingness to Pay for Property Rights for the Giant Panda: Can a Charismatic Species Be an Instrument for Nature Conservation?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(4), pages 483-499.
    8. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    9. Cragg, John G, 1971. "Some Statistical Models for Limited Dependent Variables with Application to the Demand for Durable Goods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 39(5), pages 829-844, September.
    10. Badi H. Baltagi, 2011. "Econometrics," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, number 978-3-642-20059-5, August.
    11. Gurmu, Shiferaw & Trivedi, Pravin K, 1996. "Excess Zeros in Count Models for Recreational Trips," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 14(4), pages 469-477, October.
    12. Kristin Jakobsson & Andrew Dragun, 2001. "The Worth of a Possum: Valuing Species with the Contingent Valuation Method," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(3), pages 211-227, July.
    13. Garcia, Jaume & Labeaga, Jose M, 1996. "Alternative Approaches to Modelling Zero Expenditure: An Application to Spanish Demand for Tobacco," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 58(3), pages 489-506, August.
    14. Robert Mitchell, 2002. "On Designing Constructed Markets in Valuation Surveys," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 297-321, June.
    15. 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.
    16. Mullahy, John, 1986. "Specification and testing of some modified count data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 341-365, December.
    17. David S. Brookshire & Larry S. Eubanks & Alan Randall, 1983. "Estimating Option Prices and Existence Values for Wildlife Resources," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 59(1), pages 1-15.
    18. Daniel Hellerstein & Robert Mendelsohn, 1993. "A Theoretical Foundation for Count Data Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 604-611.
    19. Jeffrey Englin & Trudy Cameron, 1996. "Augmenting travel cost models with contingent behavior data," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(2), pages 133-147, March.
    20. Laura Nahuelhual-Muñoz & Maria Loureiro & John Loomis, 2004. "Addressing Heterogeneous Preferences Using Parametric Extended Spike Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(3), pages 297-311, March.
    21. Roberto G. Gutierrez & Shana Carter & David M. Drukker, 2001. "On boundary-value likelihood-ratio tests," Stata Technical Bulletin, StataCorp LP, vol. 10(60).
    22. Richard G. Walsh & John B. Loomis & Richard A. Gillman, 1984. "Valuing Option, Existence, and Bequest Demands for Wilderness," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 60(1), pages 14-29.
    23. Gourieroux, Christian & Monfort, Alain & Trognon, Alain, 1984. "Pseudo Maximum Likelihood Methods: Applications to Poisson Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(3), pages 701-720, May.
    24. Thomas H. Stevens & Jaime Echeverria & Ronald J. Glass & Tim Hager & Thomas A. More, 1991. "Measuring the Existence Value of Wildlife: What Do CVM Estimates Really Show?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(4), pages 390-400.
    25. Shonkwiler, John Scott & Shaw, W. Douglass, 1996. "Hurdle Count-Data Models In Recreation Demand Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 21(2), pages 1-10, December.
    26. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427.
    27. Nancy E. Bockstael & Ivar E. Strand, Jr., 1987. "The Effect of Common Sources of Regression Error on Benefit Estimates," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 63(1), pages 11-20.
    28. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    29. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    30. William H. Greene, 1994. "Accounting for Excess Zeros and Sample Selection in Poisson and Negative Binomial Regression Models," Working Papers 94-10, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    31. Joseph Hilbe, 1999. "Zero-truncated Poisson and negative binomial regression," Stata Technical Bulletin, StataCorp LP, vol. 8(47).
    32. Lin, Tsai-Fen & Schmidt, Peter, 1984. "A Test of the Tobit Specification against an Alternative Suggested by Cragg," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 66(1), pages 174-177, February.
    33. Carter Betz & John Bergstrom & J. M. Bowker, 2003. "A Contingent Trip Model for Estimating Rail-trail Demand," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(1), pages 79-96.
    34. Clem Tisdell & Clevo Wilson, 2006. "Information, Wildlife Valuation, Conservation: Experiments And Policy," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 24(1), pages 144-159, January.
    35. Halvorsen, Robert & Palmquist, Raymond, 1980. "The Interpretation of Dummy Variables in Semilogarithmic Equations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 474-475, June.
    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. Isabel Mendes & Isabel Proença, 2009. "Measuring the Social Recreation Per-Day Net Benefit of Wildlife Amenities of a National Park: A Count-Data Travel Cost Approach," Working Papers Department of Economics 2009/35, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, Department of Economics, Universidade de Lisboa.
    2. Hoyos, David & Riera, Pere, 2013. "Convergent validity between revealed and stated recreation demand data: Some empirical evidence from the Basque Country, Spain," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 234-248.
    3. Martinez-Espineira, Roberto, 2006. "A Box-Cox Double-Hurdle model of wildlife valuation: The citizen's perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 192-208, June.
    4. Roberto Martinez-Espineira & Joe Amoako-Tuffour, 2005. "Recreation Demand Analysis under Truncation, Overdispersion, and Endogenous Stratification: An Application to Gros Morne National Park," Econometrics 0511007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. 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.
    6. Serge Garcia & Julien Jacob, 2010. "La valeur récréative de la forêt en France : une approche par les coûts de déplacement," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 91(1), pages 43-71.
    7. Amoako-Tuffour, Joe & Martınez-Espineira, Roberto, 2008. "Leisure and the Opportunity Cost of Travel Time in Recreation Demand Analysis: A Re-Examination," MPRA Paper 8573, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Meisner, Craig & Wang, Hua & Laplante, Benoit, 2006. "Welfare measurement bias in household and on-site surveying of water-based recreation : an application to Lake Sevan, Armenia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3932, The World Bank.
    9. Bilgic, Abdulbaki & Florkowski, Wojciech J., 2003. "Application Of Hurdle Negative Binomial Count Data Model To Demand For Black Bass Fishing In The Southeastern United States," 2003 Annual Meeting, February 1-5, 2003, Mobile, Alabama 35079, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    10. Prayaga, Prabha, 2017. "Estimating the value of beach recreation for locals in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, Australia," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 9-18.
    11. Isabel Proenca & Isabel Menes, 2000. "Measuring the Average Per Day Net Benefit of Non-consumptive Wildlife - Associated Recreation For a National Park: a Count-Data Travel Cost Approach," Regional and Urban Modeling 283600078, EcoMod.
    12. Ndebele, Tom & Forgie, Vicky, 2017. "Estimating the economic benefits of a wetland restoration programme in New Zealand: A contingent valuation approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 75-89.
    13. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    14. Simões, Paula & Barata, Eduardo & Cruz, Luís, 2013. "Joint estimation using revealed and stated preference data: An application using a national forest," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 249-266.
    15. Mahadev Bhat & Ramachandra Bhatta & Mohamed Shumais, 2014. "Sustainable funding policies for environmental protection: the case of Maldivian atolls," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 16(1), pages 45-67, January.
    16. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Liu, Xuemin, 2008. "Valuing black-faced spoonbill conservation in Macao: A policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 328-335, December.
    17. Chin†Huang Huang, 2017. "Estimating the environmental effects and recreational benefits of cultivated flower land for environmental quality improvement in Taiwan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 29-39, January.
    18. Bowker, James Michael & English, Donald B.K. & Bergstrom, John C. & Starbuck, C. Meghan, 2005. "Valuing National Forest Recreation Access: Using a Stratified On-Site Sample to Generate Values Across Activities for a Nationally Pooled Sample," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19506, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    19. Chin-Huang Huang & Chiung-Hsia Wang, 2015. "Estimating the Total Economic Value of Cultivated Flower Land in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Stephen Hynes & William Greene, 2013. "A Panel Travel Cost Model Accounting for Endogenous Stratification and Truncation: A Latent Class Approach," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(1), pages 177-192.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    coyotes; wildlife; contingent valuation; count data; zero- inflation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wpa:wuwpot:0410001. 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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.