IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aare11/100704.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is Choice Modelling Really Necessary? Public versus expert values for marine reserves in Western Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Rogers, Abbie A.

Abstract

One of the motivations for choice modelling is to provide values that can be used to inform decisionmakers about the non-market costs and benefits of proposed projects or policies. However, the question must be asked as to whether decision-makers consider choice modelling to be a policy relevant tool. There may be more cost-effective and convenient means of providing comparable policy guidance than commissioning a choice modelling study. For example, advice on decision options may be sought from experts, such as scientists. However, expert advice may not accurately reflect the value judgements of the public. The aim of this study is to investigate whether public and expert preferences diverge, using the choice modelling technique. Two case studies are utilised – the Ningaloo Marine Park and the proposed Ngari Capes Marine Park in Western Australia. Evidence of both divergence and convergence between public and expert values is found in different instances, with public awareness factors playing a role in this divide. Where preference divergence appears likely, decision-makers should consider choice modelling as a useful tool to inform policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Rogers, Abbie A., 2011. "Is Choice Modelling Really Necessary? Public versus expert values for marine reserves in Western Australia," 2011 Conference (55th), February 8-11, 2011, Melbourne, Australia 100704, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aare11:100704
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/100704
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Colombo, S. & Angus, A. & Morris, J. & Parsons, D.J. & Brawn, M. & Stacey, K. & Hanley, N., 2009. "A comparison of citizen and "expert" preferences using an attribute-based approach to choice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2834-2841, September.
    2. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2011. "Do EPA Administrators Recommend Environmental Policies That Citizens Want?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(1), pages 60-74.
    3. Robert J. Johnston & Gisele Magnusson & Marisa J. Mazzotta & James J. Opaluch, 2002. "Combining Economic and Ecological Indicators to Prioritize Salt Marsh Restoration Actions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(5), pages 1362-1370.
    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. Helen Scarborough & Jeff Bennett, 2012. "Cost–Benefit Analysis and Distributional Preferences," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14376.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Choice modelling; valuation; experts; public; marine parks; Research Methods/ Statistical Methods;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aare11:100704. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.