IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v239y2026ics0921800925002708.html

Economic valuation of landscaping for wildlife habitat

Author

Listed:
  • Nwanakwere, Justine
  • Brockmann, Stephanie
  • Giraud, Kelly
  • Huang, Ju-Chin

Abstract

We assess the value homeowners place on local wildlife by analyzing their willingness to invest time and money in landscaping their property to benefit local wildlife in New England, USA. Our approach quantifies time as a distinct measure of value and jointly estimates homeowners' willingness to spend (WTS) hours and willingness to pay (WTP) dollars for landscaping for wildlife habitat. We use a bivariate probit model to control the correlation between time and monetary decisions. Our findings reveal that homeowners are willing to spend an average of 101.8 h and $403.2 on landscaping their property to support wildlife habitats. Also, converting the WTS value into monetary terms and adding it to the WTP value reveals a total monetary valuation of $1517.7, reflecting a significant preference for wildlife conservation among homeowners in the region. Additionally, older homeowners (65+) are less willing to invest time or money, whereas urban residents are more willing, driven by limited access to natural spaces. Moreover, knowledge of local wildlife and care for their well-being significantly enhances participation in wildlife-friendly landscaping, while concerns about property damage by wildlife discourage participation.

Suggested Citation

  • Nwanakwere, Justine & Brockmann, Stephanie & Giraud, Kelly & Huang, Ju-Chin, 2026. "Economic valuation of landscaping for wildlife habitat," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 239(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:239:y:2026:i:c:s0921800925002708
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108787
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800925002708
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108787?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. W. Michael Hanemann, 1989. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Response Data: Reply," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 71(4), pages 1057-1061.
    2. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    3. Alan Hernández-Solano & Véronique Sophie Avila-Foucat & George A Dyer, 2023. "Estimating shadow prices in economies with multiple market failures," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(11), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Goddard, Mark A. & Dougill, Andrew J. & Benton, Tim G., 2013. "Why garden for wildlife? Social and ecological drivers, motivations and barriers for biodiversity management in residential landscapes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 258-273.
    5. Yiding Yue & Jinyou Zou, 2014. "The Role of Wealth and Health in Insurance Choice: Bivariate Probit Analysis in China," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-9, March.
    6. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Newman, David H. & Bowker, J.M., 2005. "Measuring rural homeowners' willingness to pay for land conservation easements," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(5), pages 757-770, August.
    7. Casola, William R. & Peterson, M. Nils & Pacifici, Krishna & Sills, Erin O. & Moorman, Christopher E., 2023. "Conservation motivations and willingness to pay for wildlife management areas among recreational user groups," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    8. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panel's No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(2), pages 335-338, May.
    9. Ignacio Schiappacasse Bofill, 2012. "Allowing time and money payments in contingent valuation," Working Papers 201243, Latin American and Caribbean Environmental Economics Program, revised 2012.
    10. Godwin Kofi Vondolia & Håkan Eggert & Ståle Navrud & Jesper Stage, 2014. "What do respondents bring to contingent valuation? A comparison of monetary and labour payment vehicles," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 253-267, November.
    11. Mark Bils & Peter J. Klenow & Benjamin A. Malin, 2018. "Resurrecting the Role of the Product Market Wedge in Recessions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(4-5), pages 1118-1146, April.
    12. Kevin A. Decker & Philip Watson, 2017. "Estimating willingness to pay for a threatened species within a threatened ecosystem," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 60(8), pages 1347-1365, August.
    13. Frank J. Cesario, 1976. "Value of Time in Recreation Benefit Studies," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 52(1), pages 32-41.
    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. Sharma, Sadikshya & Kreye, Melissa M., 2022. "Social value of bird conservation on private forest lands in Pennsylvania, USA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    2. Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Nicholson, Charles F., 2020. "Revisiting money and labor for valuing environmental goods and services in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    3. Kocsis, Tamás & Marjainé, Szerényi Zsuzsanna, 2018. "Gazdag szegények. Időráfordítási hajlandóság a környezeti javak értékelésében [The wealthy poor - "willingness to spend time" in evaluating environmental benefits]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1154-1171.
    4. Malakhov, Sergey, 2012. "К Вопросу О Возможности Синтеза Концепции Удовлетворяющего Поиска И Неоклассической Доктрины [A note on the synthesis of the satisficing concept and the neoclassical theory]," MPRA Paper 49494, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. 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.
    6. J. M. Gibson & D. Rigby & D. A. Polya & N. Russell, 2016. "Discrete Choice Experiments in Developing Countries: Willingness to Pay Versus Willingness to Work," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 697-721, December.
    7. Hanemann, W. Michael & Kanninen, Barbara, 1996. "The Statistical Analysis Of Discrete-Response Cv Data," CUDARE Working Papers 25022, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    8. Robert W. Kling & Charles F. Revier & Karin Sable, 2004. "Estimating the Public Good Value of Preserving a Local Historic Landmark: The Role of Non-substitutability and Citizen Information," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(10), pages 2025-2041, September.
    9. LeVert, Michael & Stevens, Thomas & Kittredge, Dave, 2009. "Willingness-to-sell conservation easements: A case study," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 261-275, December.
    10. Shunda, Nicholas, 2009. "Auctions with a buy price: The case of reference-dependent preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 645-664, November.
    11. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    12. Shuli Liu & Xinwang Liu, 2016. "A Sample Survey Based Linguistic MADM Method with Prospect Theory for Online Shopping Problems," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(4), pages 749-774, July.
    13. Ivehammar, Pernilla, 2014. "Valuing environmental quality in actual travel time savings – The Haningeleden road project in Stockholm," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 349-356.
    14. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    15. repec:esx:essedp:762 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Ghosal, Sayantan & Dalton, Patricio, 2013. "Characterizing Behavioral Decisions with Choice Data," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 107, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    17. Grund, Christian & Sliwka, Dirk, 2001. "The Impact of Wage Increases on Job Satisfaction - Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Implications," IZA Discussion Papers 387, IZA Network @ LISER.
    18. Scott S. Wiltermuth & Timothy Gubler & Lamar Pierce, 2023. "Anchoring on Historical Round Number Reference Points: Evidence from Durable Goods Resale Prices," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 1839-1863, September.
    19. Hong, Yan-Zhen & Su, Yi-Ju & Chang, Hung-Hao, 2023. "Analyzing the relationship between income and life satisfaction of Forest farm households - a behavioral economics approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    20. Christian Lukas & Max-Frederik Neubert & Jens Robert Schöndube, 2025. "Exploring decision-making: experimental observations on project selection and the impact of justification pressure," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 29(3), pages 735-775, September.
    21. Keval Amin & Erica Harris, 2022. "The Effect of Investor Sentiment on Nonprofit Donations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(2), pages 427-450, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    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:239:y:2026:i:c:s0921800925002708. 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.