IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/eenhrr/1080.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing Scientist and Public Preferences for Conserving Environmental Systems: A Case of the Kimberley's Tropical Waterways and Wetlands

Author

Listed:
  • Abbie Rogers

    () (School of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Western Australia)

  • Jonelle Cleland

    () (School of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Western Australia)

Abstract

This study uses choice modelling to investigate public and expert preference divergence through a valuation of the Kimberley’s tropical waterways and wetlands in Western Australia. A sample of Australian tropical river scientists participated in an identical survey to the West Australian public. Within the public sample, a split survey design is utilised to examine the effects of information on preferences – a low information version provided sufficient information for respondents to participate in the survey, while a high information version provided a more thorough and detailed description of the attributes. Divergent preferences are apparent between the public and scientist samples. This is illustrated through two key results: first, an attempt to merge the data for each of the samples is rejected; and second, there are differences in conservation preferences. The scientists had stronger preferences to protect system based attributes and threatened species, and were generally not willing to pay to protect iconic attributes. The public, on the other hand, held positive and more evenly spread values for all attributes. Information had an impact on public preferences, particularly through the rejection of a combined low/high information model, but also with respect to the iconic species attribute, where there is a pattern of decreasing willingness to pay as information level increases.

Suggested Citation

  • Abbie Rogers & Jonelle Cleland, 2010. "Comparing Scientist and Public Preferences for Conserving Environmental Systems: A Case of the Kimberley's Tropical Waterways and Wetlands," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 1080, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  • Handle: RePEc:een:eenhrr:1080
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/pdf/EERH_RR80.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. McCartney, Abbie & Cleland, Jonelle & Burton, Michael P., 2010. "The Value of Tropical Waterways and Wetlands: does an increase in knowledge change community preferences," Research Reports 95065, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    2. Scarpa, Riccardo & Rose, John M., 2008. "Design efficiency for non-market valuation with choice modelling: how to measure it, what to report and why," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(3), September.
    3. DeShazo, J. R. & Fermo, German, 2002. "Designing Choice Sets for Stated Preference Methods: The Effects of Complexity on Choice Consistency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 123-143, July.
    4. Cleland, Jonelle & Rogers, Abbie A., 2010. "Putting the Spotlight on Attribute Definition: a knowledge base approach," Research Reports 107578, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    5. 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.
    6. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, March.
    7. McCartney, Abbie, 2009. "The Policy Relevance of Choice Modelling: An Application to the Ningaloo and Proposed Capes Marine Parks," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 48033, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    8. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, March.
    9. 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.
    10. repec:cup:apsrev:v:92:y:1998:i:03:p:513-531_21 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. McCartney, Abbie & Cleland, Jonelle, 2010. "Choice Experiment Framing and Incentive Compatibility: observations from public focus groups," Research Reports 107575, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    12. Søren Olsen, 2009. "Choosing Between Internet and Mail Survey Modes for Choice Experiment Surveys Considering Non-Market Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(4), pages 591-610, December.
    13. 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.
    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. Cleland, Jonelle & Rogers, Abbie A., 2010. "Putting the Spotlight on Attribute Definition: a knowledge base approach," Research Reports 107578, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.

    More about this item

    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:1080. 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.