IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/eenhrr/0913.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Choice Modelling Survey of Community Attitudes to Improvements in Environmental Quality in NSW Catchments

Author

Listed:
  • Kasia Mazur

    () (Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University, Australia)

  • Jeff Bennett

    () (Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University, Australia)

Abstract

The survey was designed to estimate environmental values suitable for integration into MOSAIC, a bio-economic model for catchment and farm level planning. Local residents, as well as distant rural and distant urban communities, were surveyed in three NSW catchments (Lachlan, Namoi and Hawkesbury-Nepean) using choice modelling (CM). The survey aimed to find out respondents’ attitudes about, and preferences for, potential natural resource management (NRM) improvements. In total, 3,997 responses were collected from seven different locations in NSW. Fourteen split samples were established to allow for testing of incentive compatibility in CM, the impact of respondent location on values held, and scale effects. This research report describes the development of the CM questionnaires, the survey design and the data collection process.

Suggested Citation

  • Kasia Mazur & Jeff Bennett, 2009. "A Choice Modelling Survey of Community Attitudes to Improvements in Environmental Quality in NSW Catchments," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0913, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  • Handle: RePEc:een:eenhrr:0913
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/pdf/EERH-RR13-1v3%2009.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adamowicz, Wiktor & Swait, Joffre & Boxall, Peter & Louviere, Jordan & Williams, Michael, 1997. "Perceptions versus Objective Measures of Environmental Quality in Combined Revealed and Stated Preference Models of Environmental Valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 65-84, January.
    2. Hill, Christine M. & Farquharson, Robert J. & Ferrier, Simon & Grieve, Alastair, 2007. "Issues of scale and scope in bio-physical modelling for natural resource management decision making in New South Wales," 2007 Conference (51st), February 13-16, 2007, Queenstown, New Zealand 10427, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    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. Tertius Greyling & Jeff Bennett, 2010. "Revegetation of Regent Honeyeater habitat in the Capertee Valley: a Cost-Benefit Analysis," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1081, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    2. Greyling, Tertius & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2011. "Protecting the Booroolong Frog in the Namoi Catchment: A Cost-Benefit Analysis," Research Reports 107851, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    3. Tertius Greyling & Jeff Bennett, 2011. "Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Protection of Malleefowl in the Lachlan Catchment," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1099, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    4. Farquharson, Robert J. & Kelly, Jason A. & Welsh, Pam & Mazur, Kasia & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2009. "Policy responses to invasive native species: issues of social and private benefits and costs," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 48157, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Leroux, Anke D. & Whitten, Stuart M., 2014. "Optimal investment in ecological rehabilitation under climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, pages 133-144.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Nonmarket valuation; choice modelling; survey; questionnaire design;

    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:een:eenhrr:0913. 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: (CAP Web Team). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/asanuau.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.