IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v70y2011i5p971-977.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When the public good conflicts with an apparent preference for unsustainable behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Bullock, Craig H.
  • Collier, Marcus

Abstract

The example of peatlands is used to demonstrate the challenges facing the sustainable management of natural resources in situations where the fragility of an environment is not appreciated by all stakeholders. We reveal, through the use of a survey applying both contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments, that many local people and others within the wider population, value peatlands as an example of a cultural landscape. However, there is a reluctance to stop extracting peat for domestic fuel even though the activity is undermining the ecological sustainability of this same landscape. This resistance is shown to arise because the cutting of peat is a well-established land use and a cessation of peat cutting is perceived to require the abandonment of traditional rights. In addition, the activity is widely regarded as more benign than industrial scale cutting for energy. The value attached to the landscape is an opportunity for conservation policy, but for this to succeed there must be an acknowledgement of local interests.

Suggested Citation

  • Bullock, Craig H. & Collier, Marcus, 2011. "When the public good conflicts with an apparent preference for unsustainable behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 971-977, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:70:y:2011:i:5:p:971-977
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(10)00510-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Luke Brander & Raymond Florax & Jan Vermaat, 2006. "The Empirics of Wetland Valuation: A Comprehensive Summary and a Meta-Analysis of the Literature," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 33(2), pages 223-250, February.
    2. Pretty, Jules N., 1995. "Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(8), pages 1247-1263, August.
    3. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    4. Gerber, Jean-David & Knoepfel, Peter & Nahrath, Stéphane & Varone, Frédéric, 2009. "Institutional Resource Regimes: Towards sustainability through the combination of property-rights theory and policy analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 798-809, January.
    5. Spash, Clive L., 2000. "Ecosystems, contingent valuation and ethics: the case of wetland re-creation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 195-215, August.
    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. McGrath, Luke & Hynes, Stephen & McHale, John, 2019. "Augmenting the World Bank's estimates: Ireland's genuine savings through boom and bust," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Juutinen, Artti & Tolvanen, Anne & Saarimaa, Miia & Ojanen, Paavo & Sarkkola, Sakari & Ahtikoski, Anssi & Haikarainen, Soili & Karhu, Jouni & Haara, Arto & Nieminen, Mika & Penttilä, Timo & Nousiainen, 2020. "Cost-effective land-use options of drained peatlands– integrated biophysical-economic modeling approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    3. Curtis, John & Devitt, Niamh & di Cosmo, Valeria & Farrell, Niall & FitzGerald, John & Hyland, Marie & Lynch, Muireann & Lyons, Sean & McCoy, Daire & Malaguzzi Valeri, Laura & Walsh, Darragh, 2014. "Irish Energy Policy: An Analysis of Current Issues," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number rs37 edited by FitzGerald, John & Malaguzzi Valeri, Laura, June.
    4. McGrath, Luke & Hynes , Stephen, 2020. "Approaches to accounting for our natural capital: Applications across Ireland," Working Papers 309501, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    5. Hoberg, Nikolai & Strunz, Sebastian, 2018. "When Individual Preferences Defy Sustainability — Can Merit Good Arguments Close the Gap?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 286-293.

    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. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    2. Trine Kjær & Mickael Bech & Dorte Gyrd‐Hansen & Kristian Hart‐Hansen, 2006. "Ordering effect and price sensitivity in discrete choice experiments: need we worry?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(11), pages 1217-1228, November.
    3. Newell, Laurie W. & Swallow, Stephen K., 2013. "Real-payment choice experiments: Valuing forested wetlands and spatial attributes within a landscape context," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 37-47.
    4. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2017. "Environmental attitude, motivations and values for marine biodiversity protection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 61-70.
    5. Prathivadi Bhayankaram Anand, 2001. "Consumer Preferences for Water Supply?: an Application of Choice Models to Urban India," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2001-145, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    6. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2009. "Understanding the use of non-compensatory decision rules in discrete choice experiments: The role of emotions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(8-9), pages 2316-2326, June.
    7. Elena Ojea & Maria L. Loureiro, 2009. "Valuation Of Wildlife: Revising Some Additional Considerations For Scope Tests," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 27(2), pages 236-250, April.
    8. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2017. "Estimating recreational values of coastal zones," MPRA Paper 80911, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    10. David Aubin & Frédéric Varone, 2013. "Getting Access to Water: Property Rights or Public Policy Strategies?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(1), pages 154-167, February.
    11. Franz Hackl & Gerald J. Pruckner, 2005. "Warm glow, free‐riding and vehicle neutrality in a health‐related contingent valuation study," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 293-306, March.
    12. Nayga, Rodolfo M., Jr. & Aiew, Wipon & Woodward, Richard T., 2004. "Willingness to Pay for Irradiated Food: A Non Hypothetical Market Experiment," 84th Seminar, February 8-11, 2004, Zeist, The Netherlands 24995, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    13. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    14. Clarke, Philip M., 1998. "Cost-benefit analysis and mammographic screening: a travel cost approach," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(6), pages 767-787, December.
    15. repec:ipg:wpaper:13 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Kazadi, Kande & Lievens, Annouk & Mahr, Dominik, 2016. "Stakeholder co-creation during the innovation process: Identifying capabilities for knowledge creation among multiple stakeholders," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 525-540.
    17. 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.
    18. Van Houtven, George L. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Yang, Jui-Chen, 2017. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 126-135.
    19. Adam Finn & Stuart McFadyen & Colin Hoskins, 2003. "Valuing the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 27(3), pages 177-192, November.
    20. Christman, Laine & Kimberly, Rollins & Micheal, Taylor & Sohan, Agbonlahor, 2014. "Willingness to Pay to Reduce Wild Fire Risk in Wild land-Urban Interface: A Comparative Analysis of Public Programs and Private Actions," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170703, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    21. Kwak, So-Yoon & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2015. "The public’s value for developing ocean energy technology in the Republic of Korea: A contingent valuation study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 432-439.

    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:70:y:2011:i:5:p:971-977. 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.