IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v137y2017icp70-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing Impacts From Climate Change on Local Social-ecological Systems in Contexts Where Information is Lacking: An Expert Elicitation in the Bolivian Altiplano

Author

Listed:
  • Martínez-Cruz, Adán L.
  • Juárez-Torres, Miriam
  • Guerrero, Santiago

Abstract

Assessment of the expected impacts from climate change is an essential input for agencies engaged in fostering adaptation of local social-ecological systems. However, data is seldom available at the required scale. This study overcomes this hurdle by gathering data via an expert elicitation protocol. We report experts' judgements about two topics: i) the impacts from climate change on crop yields in three communities located in the Bolivian Altiplano; and ii) the effectiveness of specific irrigation techniques in mitigating the impacts from climate change in the communities under study. Our gathered data allow us to document heterogeneity of expected impacts across communities –with one community expected to experience an increase in yields under wet climate change scenarios. Experts judge irrigation as an effective mitigation tool under most of the dry climate change scenarios presented to them. We believe that our data collection strategy represents a promising decision support tool for a wide range of public policy issues. Particularly, when monetary and time constraints converge with the lack of scientific information. In addition, the information gathered with this methodology can be incorporated into participatory methodologies gathering information from local social-ecological systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Martínez-Cruz, Adán L. & Juárez-Torres, Miriam & Guerrero, Santiago, 2017. "Assessing Impacts From Climate Change on Local Social-ecological Systems in Contexts Where Information is Lacking: An Expert Elicitation in the Bolivian Altiplano," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 70-82.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:137:y:2017:i:c:p:70-82
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.03.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800915306534
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.03.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Verdolini, Elena & Anadon, Laura Diaz & Lu, Jiaqi & Nemet, Gregory F., 2015. "The effects of expert selection, elicitation design, and R&D assumptions on experts' estimates of the future costs of photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 233-243.
    2. Shafiqah Al-Awadhi & Paul Garthwaite, 2006. "Quantifying expert opinion for modelling fauna habitat distributions," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 121-140, March.
    3. Joseph Cooper & Giovanni Signorello, 2008. "Farmer Premiums for the Voluntary Adoption of Conservation Plans," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(1), pages 1-14.
    4. Baker, Erin & Bosetti, Valentina & Jenni, Karen E. & Ricci, Elena Claire, 2014. "Facing the Experts: Survey Mode and Expert Elicitation," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 163585, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    5. Van Houtven, George & Mansfield, Carol & Phaneuf, Daniel J. & von Haefen, Roger & Milstead, Bryan & Kenney, Melissa A. & Reckhow, Kenneth H., 2014. "Combining expert elicitation and stated preference methods to value ecosystem services from improved lake water quality," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 40-52.
    6. Xu, Feng & Mittelhammer, Ronald C. & Torell, L. Allen, 1994. "Modeling Nonnegativity Via Truncated Logistic And Normal Distributions: An Application To Ranch Land Price Analysis," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 19(1), pages 1-13, July.
    7. Anna Alberini & Aline Chiabai & Lucija Muehlenbachs, 2005. "Using Expert Judgment to Assess Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change: Evidence From a Conjoint Choice Survey," Working Papers 2005.106, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    8. Lybbert, Travis J. & Sumner, Daniel A., 2012. "Agricultural technologies for climate change in developing countries: Policy options for innovation and technology diffusion," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 114-123.
    9. Carmelo León & Francisco Vázquez-Polo & Roberto González, 2003. "Elicitation of Expert Opinion in Benefit Transfer of Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 199-210, October.
    10. Stephane Hess & John Rose, 2009. "Should Reference Alternatives in Pivot Design SC Surveys be Treated Differently?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(3), pages 297-317, March.
    11. 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 715-719, November.
    12. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    13. Strand, Jon & Carson, Richard T. & Navrud, Stale & Ortiz-Bobea, Ariel & Vincent, Jeffrey R., 2017. "Using the Delphi method to value protection of the Amazon rainforest," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 475-484.
    14. Anna Alberini & Aline Chiabai & Lucija Muehlenbachs, 2005. "Using Expert Judgment to Assess Adaptive Capacity to Climate Change: Evidence From a Conjoint Choice Survey," Working Papers 2005.106, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    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. Jonathan E. Suk & Kristie L. Ebi & David Vose & Willy Wint & Neil Alexander & Koen Mintiens & Jan C. Semenza, 2014. "Indicators for Tracking European Vulnerabilities to the Risks of Infectious Disease Transmission due to Climate Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, February.
    2. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    3. Newbold, Stephen C. & Johnston, Robert J., 2020. "Valuing non-market valuation studies using meta-analysis: A demonstration using estimates of willingness-to-pay for water quality improvements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    4. J. Paul Combs & Rickey C. Kirkpatrick & Jason F. Shogren & Joseph A. Herriges, 1993. "Matching Grants and Public Goods: a Closed-Ended Contingent Valuation Experiment," Public Finance Review, , vol. 21(2), pages 178-195, April.
    5. Seung-Hoon Yoo & Chul-Oh Shin & Seung-Jun Kwak, 2006. "Inconvenience cost of spam mail: a contingent valuation study," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(14), pages 933-936.
    6. Carmelo Javier León, 1995. "El método dicotómico de valoración contingente: una aplicación a los espacios naturales en Gran Canaria," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 19(1), pages 83-106, January.
    7. Corsi, Alessandro, 2012. "Willingness-to-pay in terms of price: an application to organic beef during and after the “mad cow” crisis," Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, Editions NecPlus, vol. 92(01), pages 25-46, October.
    8. W. George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa & Susan M. Chilton & T. McCallion, 2001. "Parametric and Non‐Parametric Estimates of Willingness to Pay for Forest Recreation in Northern Ireland: A Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Study with Follow‐Ups," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 104-122, January.
    9. Granado-Díaz, Rubén & Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Gómez-Limón, José A., 2022. "Willingness to accept for rewilding farmland in environmentally sensitive areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    10. Koo, A Mi & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2022. "Household willingness to pay for a smart water metering and monitoring system: The case of South Korea," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    11. Elena Verdolini & Laura Díaz Anadón & Erin Baker & Valentina Bosetti & Lara Aleluia Reis, 2018. "Future Prospects for Energy Technologies: Insights from Expert Elicitations," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(1), pages 133-153.
    12. Kwideok Han & Jeffrey Vitale & Yong-Geon Lee & Inbae Ji, 2022. "Measuring the Economic Value of the Negative Externality of Livestock Malodor in South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-13, August.
    13. Kim, Hyo-Jin & Lee, Hye-Jeong & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2018. "Are South Korean people willing to pay for official development assistance for building renewable power plants in developing countries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 626-632.
    14. Dahal, Ram P. & Grala, Robert K. & Gordon, Jason S. & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Munn, Ian A., 2018. "Estimating the willingness to pay to preserve waterfront open spaces using contingent valuation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 614-626.
    15. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2001. "Logit Models For Pooled Contingent Valuation And Contingent Rating And Ranking Data: Valuing Benefits From Forest Biodiversity Conservation," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20616, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    16. Steven M. Ramsey & Jason S. Bergtold, 2021. "Examining Inferences from Neural Network Estimators of Binary Choice Processes: Marginal Effects, and Willingness-to-Pay," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 58(4), pages 1137-1165, December.
    17. Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2020. "South Koreans’ perspective on assisting the power supply to North Korea: Evidence from a contingent valuation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    18. Bateman, Ian J. & Langford, Ian H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Kerr, Geoffrey N., 2001. "Bound and path effects in double and triple bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 191-213, July.
    19. Jose-Luis Pinto-Prades & Veronica Farreras & Jaime de Bobadilla, 2008. "Willingness to pay for a reduction in mortality risk after a myocardial infarction: an application of the contingent valuation method to the case of eplerenone," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(1), pages 69-78, February.
    20. Massimo Filippini & Adán L. Martínez-Cruz, 2016. "Impact of environmental and social attitudes, and family concerns on willingness to pay for improved air quality: a contingent valuation application in Mexico City," Latin American Economic Review, Springer;Centro de Investigaciòn y Docencia Económica (CIDE), vol. 25(1), pages 1-18, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Expert elicitation; Expected impact; Climate change; Irrigation; Local social-ecological systems; Double-bounded dichotomous question; Bolivia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C80 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - General
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    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:eee:ecolec:v:137:y:2017:i:c:p:70-82. 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.