IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-01971681.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Economic Value of Ecosystem Conservation: A Discrete Choice Experiment at the Taravo River Basin in Corsica

Author

Listed:
  • Pascal da Costa

    (LGI - Laboratoire Génie Industriel - EA 2606 - CentraleSupélec)

  • Daniel Hernandez

    (CEREMA - CEREMA: Center for Risks, Environment, Mobility and Planning, Direction Territoriale Méditerranée, FRANCE.)

Abstract

An economic valuation of some of the ecosystem services provided at the Taravo river basin was conducted, using a stated preferences approach. On average, respondents were willing to pay up to 128 Euros per year for the enhancement of the ecosystem services selected for this choice experiment. This result is in line with those obtained in other studies applying the same approach. This Choice Experiment is part of more comprehensive assessment, which will be published later, and expands the analysis to other ecosystem services and takes into account their biophysical aspect as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Pascal da Costa & Daniel Hernandez, 2019. "The Economic Value of Ecosystem Conservation: A Discrete Choice Experiment at the Taravo River Basin in Corsica," Working Papers hal-01971681, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-01971681
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01971681
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01971681/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lynne Y. Lewis & Curtis Bohlen & Sarah Wilson, 2008. "Dams, Dam Removal, And River Restoration: A Hedonic Property Value Analysis," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(2), pages 175-186, April.
    2. Bill Provencher & Helen Sarakinos & Tanya Meyer, 2008. "Does Small Dam Removal Affect Local Property Values? An Empirical Analysis," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(2), pages 187-197, April.
    3. Aizaki, Hideo, 2012. "Basic Functions for Supporting an Implementation of Choice Experiments in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 50(c02).
    4. Boyd, James & Ringold, Paul & Krupnick, Alan & Johnston, Robert J. & Weber, Matthew A. & Hall, Kim, 2016. "Ecosystem Services Indicators: Improving the Linkage between Biophysical and Economic Analyses," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 8(3-4), pages 359-443, June.
    5. Minjuan Zhao & Robert Johnston & Eric Schultz, 2013. "What to Value and How? Ecological Indicator Choices in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 56(1), pages 3-25, September.
    6. Reynaud, Arnaud & Lanzanova, Denis & Liquete, Camino & Grizzetti, Bruna, 2017. "Going green? Ex-post valuation of a multipurpose water infrastructure in Northern Italy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PA), pages 70-81.
    7. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    8. Anna Créti & Federico Pontoni, 2014. "Cheaper electricity or a better river? Estimating fluvial ecosystem value in Southern France," Working Papers hal-00998614, HAL.
    9. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
    10. Fanus Asefaw Aregay & Liuyang Yao & Minjuan Zhao, 2016. "Spatial Preference Heterogeneity for Integrated River Basin Management: The Case of the Shiyang River Basin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-17, September.
    11. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L., 1992. "Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 57-70, January.
    12. Hengtong Shi & Minjuan Zhao & Fanus Asefaw Aregay & Kai Zhao & Zhide Jiang, 2016. "Residential Environment Induced Preference Heterogeneity for River Ecosystem Service Improvements: A Comparison between Urban and Rural Households in the Wei River Basin, China," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2016, pages 1-9, January.
    13. Botelho, Anabela & Ferreira, Paula & Lima, Fátima & Pinto, Lígia M. Costa & Sousa, Sara, 2017. "Assessment of the environmental impacts associated with hydropower," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 896-904.
    14. Bagstad, Kenneth J. & Semmens, Darius J. & Winthrop, Robert, 2013. "Comparing approaches to spatially explicit ecosystem service modeling: A case study from the San Pedro River, Arizona," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 40-50.
    15. Louviere, Jordan J & Hensher, David A, 1983. "Using Discrete Choice Models with Experimental Design Data to Forecast Consumer Demand for a Unique Cultural Event," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(3), pages 348-361, December.
    16. Ruckelshaus, Mary & McKenzie, Emily & Tallis, Heather & Guerry, Anne & Daily, Gretchen & Kareiva, Peter & Polasky, Stephen & Ricketts, Taylor & Bhagabati, Nirmal & Wood, Spencer A. & Bernhardt, Joanna, 2015. "Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 11-21.
    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. Amani Al-Assaf & Maher J. Tadros & Salsabeel Al-Shishany & Stephanie Stewart & Mohammad Majdalawi & Mohammad Tabieh & Yahia A. Othman, 2020. "Economic Assessment and Community Management of Prosopis juliflora Invasion in Sweimeh Village, Jordan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-18, October.

    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. Sara Sousa & Anabela Botelho & Lígia M. Costa Pinto & Marieta Valente, 2019. "How Relevant Are Non-Use Values and Perceptions in Economic Valuations? The Case of Hydropower Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    3. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    4. Rewitzer, Susanne & Huber, Robert & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne & Barkmann, Jan, 2017. "Economic valuation of cultural ecosystem service changes to a landscape in the Swiss Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 197-208.
    5. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Using Labels to Investigate Scope Effects in Stated Preference Methods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(4), pages 521-535, December.
    6. Ferrini, Silvia & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2007. "Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: A Monte Carlo study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 342-363, May.
    7. Manman Han & Min Song, 2020. "Quantifying Ecological Well-Being Loss under Rural–Urban Land Conversion: A Study from Choice Experiments in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-17, April.
    8. Julia Martin-Ortega & Giacomo Giannoccaro & Julio Berbel, 2011. "Environmental and Resource Costs Under Water Scarcity Conditions: An Estimation in the Context of the European Water Framework Directive," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(6), pages 1615-1633, April.
    9. Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark & Dubgaard, Alex, 8. "Sensitivity to scale in stated preference valuation methods. A comparison of methods based on valuation of heath in Denmark," Scandinavian Forest Economics: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, Scandinavian Society of Forest Economics, issue 41, May.
    10. Ekin Birol & Phoebe Koundouri & Yiannis Kountouris, 2008. "Using Economic Valuation Techniques to Inform Water Resources Management in the Southern European, Mediterranean and Developing Countries: A Survey and Critical Appraisal of Available Techniques," DEOS Working Papers 0806, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    11. Sclen, Håkon & Kallbekken, Steffen, 2011. "A choice experiment on fuel taxation and earmarking in Norway," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2181-2190, September.
    12. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    14. Elisa Giampietri & Dieter B. A. Koemle & Xiaohua Yu & Adele Finco, 2016. "Consumers’ Sense of Farmers’ Markets: Tasting Sustainability or Just Purchasing Food?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    15. Ulf Liebe & Veronika A. Andorfer & Patricia A. Gwartney & Jürgen Meyerhoff, 2014. "Ethical Consumption and Social Context: Experimental Evidence from Germany and the United States," University of Bern Social Sciences Working Papers 7, University of Bern, Department of Social Sciences.
    16. Francisco Guijarro & Prodromos Tsinaslanidis, 2020. "Analysis of Academic Literature on Environmental Valuation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-14, March.
    17. Anabela Botelho & Lina Lourenço-Gomes & Lígia M. Costa Pinto & Sara Sousa & Marieta Valente, 2018. "Discrete-choice experiments valuing local environmental impacts of renewables: two approaches to a case study in Portugal," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 145-162, December.
    18. Silvia Ferrini & Riccardo Scarpa, 2005. "Experimental Designs for Environmental Valuation with Choice-Experiments: A Monte-Carlo Investigation," Working Papers in Economics 05/08, University of Waikato.
    19. David Throsby & Anita Zednik & Jorge E. Araña, 2021. "Public preferences for heritage conservation strategies: a choice modelling approach," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 45(3), pages 333-358, September.
    20. Guilfoos, Todd & Walsh, Jason, 2023. "A hedonic study of New England dam removals," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ecosystem Services; Economic Valuation; Willingness to Pay; Stated Preferences Methods; Discrete Choice Experiment;
    All these keywords.

    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:hal:wpaper:hal-01971681. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.