IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v46y2014icp14-18.html

A test of the use of computer generated visualizations in support of ecosystem-based management

Author

Listed:
  • Rehr, Amanda P.
  • Williams, Gregory D.
  • Levin, Phillip S.

Abstract

Systematic scenario analysis is increasingly being used as an approach to evaluate ecosystem-based management options, often using “storylines” communicated through computer-generated (CG) images or visualizations. To explore potential issues associated with using CG imagery for conveying scenarios of habitat restoration we performed experiments in the Puget Sound, Washington region in which we asked whether respondents could differentiate among images of varying seagrass density and spatial extent, and if the presence of humans in the images affected these assessments and their perceptions of ecosystem health. Respondents were able to grossly determine relative seagrass density in the images, but only about 50% of them were able to determine this perfectly. Most errors occurred when the difference in density was small: approximately 20shootm−2. The ability to correctly distinguish among images was inversely correlated with educational level. The presence or absence of people in the imagery did not influence the ability of respondents to correctly sort images, nor did it affect perceptions of ecosystem “health”. Taken together, the results suggest that such imagery can be useful as basis for communicating large differences in ecological conditions, but may be less informative as means to convey marginal changes in ecological structure. This work begins to highlight some of the pitfalls, but also the promise, of the use of CG visualization in marine resource management.

Suggested Citation

  • Rehr, Amanda P. & Williams, Gregory D. & Levin, Phillip S., 2014. "A test of the use of computer generated visualizations in support of ecosystem-based management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 14-18.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:46:y:2014:i:c:p:14-18
    DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2013.12.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X13002959
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.12.012?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. Fiore, Stephen M. & Harrison, Glenn W. & Hughes, Charles E. & Rutstrm, E. Elisabet, 2009. "Virtual experiments and environmental policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 65-86, January.
    2. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Jude, Simon, 2009. "Reducing gain-loss asymmetry: A virtual reality choice experiment valuing land use change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 106-118, July.
    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. Heenan, Adel & Pomeroy, Robert & Bell, Johann & Munday, Philip L. & Cheung, William & Logan, Cheryl & Brainard, Russell & Yang Amri, Affendi & Aliño, Porfirio & Armada, Nygiel & David, Laura & Rivera-, 2015. "A climate-informed, ecosystem approach to fisheries management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 182-192.
    2. van Zanten, Boris T. & Verburg, Peter H. & Scholte, S.S.K. & Tieskens, K.F., 2016. "Using choice modeling to map aesthetic values at a landscape scale: Lessons from a Dutch case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 221-231.
    3. Ryffel, Andrea Nathalie & Rid, Wolfgang & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne, 2014. "Land use trade-offs for flood protection: A choice experiment with visualizations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 111-123.

    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. Fredrik Carlsson, 2010. "Design of Stated Preference Surveys: Is There More to Learn from Behavioral Economics?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(2), pages 167-177, June.
    2. Eppink, Florian V. & Hanley, Nick & Tucker, Steven, 2019. "How Best to Present Complex Ecosystem Information in Stated Preference Studies?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 20-25.
    3. Innocenti, Alessandro, 2017. "Virtual reality experiments in economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 71-77.
    4. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.
    5. Di Fang & Rodolfo M. Nayga & Grant H. West & Claudia Bazzani & Wei Yang & Benjamin C. Lok & Charles E. Levy & Heather A. Snell, 2021. "On the Use of Virtual Reality in Mitigating Hypothetical Bias in Choice Experiments," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(1), pages 142-161, January.
    6. Mol, Jantsje M., 2019. "Goggles in the lab: Economic experiments in immersive virtual environments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 155-164.
    7. Giuseppe Attanasi & Barbara Buljat Raymond & Agnès Festré & Andrea Guido, 2023. "Augmented Reality Technology as a Tool for Promoting Pro-environmental Behavior and Attitudes," GREDEG Working Papers 2023-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    8. Sousa, Yannick Ferreira De & Munro, Alistair, 2012. "Truck, barter and exchange versus the endowment effect: Virtual field experiments in an online game environment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 482-493.
    9. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Using virtual environments to improve the realism of choice experiments: A case study about coastal erosion management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 193-208.
    10. Attanasi, Giuseppe & Buljat Raymond, Barbara & Festré, Agnès & Guido, Andrea, 2025. "Raising environmental awareness with augmented reality," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    11. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.
    12. Simone Cerroni & Sandra Notaro & W. Douglass Shaw, 2011. "Do Monetary Incentives and Chained Questions Affect the Validity of Risk Estimates Elicited via the Exchangeability Method? An Experimental Investigation," Department of Economics Working Papers 1110, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    13. Kim, Junghun & Seung, Hyunchan & Lee, Jongsu & Ahn, Joongha, 2020. "Asymmetric preference and loss aversion for electric vehicles: The reference-dependent choice model capturing different preference directions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    14. Michael Getzner & Barbara Färber & Claudia Yamu, 2016. "2D Versus 3D: The Relevance of the Mode of Presentation for the Economic Valuation of an Alpine Landscape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-16, June.
    15. Xhakollari, Vilma & Asioli, Daniele & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2025. "Mitigating hypothetical bias in choice Experiments: An in-depth review on the use of cheap talk," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    16. Slavec, Ana & Burnard, Michael, 2023. "Innovations in Business Process Digitalisation in the Forest-Wood Sector In Slovenia," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2023), Hybrid Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Hybrid Conference, Dubrovnik, Croatia, 4-6 September, 2023, pages 266-278, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    17. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2015. "Using discrete choice experiments to regulate the provision of water services: do status quo choices reflect preferences?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 300-324, June.
    18. Day, Brett & Bateman, Ian J. & Carson, Richard T. & Dupont, Diane & Louviere, Jordan J. & Morimoto, Sanae & Scarpa, Riccardo & Wang, Paul, 2012. "Ordering effects and choice set awareness in repeat-response stated preference studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 73-91.
    19. Sheng-Chieh Lee & Ching-Yuan Lin & Ying-Ji Chuang, 2022. "The Study of Alternative Fire Commanders’ Training Program during the COVID-19 Pandemic Situation in New Taipei City, Taiwan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-22, May.
    20. Landry, Craig E. & Allen, Tom & Cherry, Todd & Whitehead, John C., 2012. "Wind turbines and coastal recreation demand," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 93-111.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:marpol:v:46:y:2014:i:c:p:14-18. 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/marpol .

    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.