IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Hunting value of wild boar in Sweden: A choice experiment


  • Engelmann, Marc

    () (Department of Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)

  • Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan

    () (Department of Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)

  • Gren, Ing-Marie

    () (Department of Economics, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences)


The purpose of this study is to estimate hunters’ valuation of wild boar in Sweden. However, hunters have access to hunt, not only wild boar, but also other game such as moose and roe deer. Therefore, wild boar is regarded as an attribute of hunting together with other game, which includes moose, roe deer, and small game. A discrete choice experiment framework is used to elicit hunters’ trade-offs between wild boar, moose, roe deer and small game. Estimates with a mixed logit model showed that the average annual willingness to pay (WTP) for a wild boar is approximately SEK 330/animal, which corresponds to 1/8 of the average WTP for a moose and ¼ of that for a roe deer. The range in WTP is determined by the activity of the hunters, as measured by number of hunting days per year, the least active gives the lowest WTP (SEK 113) and the most active the highest WTP (SEK 529). This can be a result of the specific challenges when hunting the wild boars, which are active in night time and equipped with excellent hearing and smell. Hunters that are farmers also give a relatively low WTP (SEK 134), which can be explained by the damages on crops created by the animal.

Suggested Citation

  • Engelmann, Marc & Lagerkvist, Carl-Johan & Gren, Ing-Marie, 2016. "Hunting value of wild boar in Sweden: A choice experiment," Working Paper Series 2016:1, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:slueko:2016_001

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Bushnell, James B & Oren, Shmuel S, 1994. "Bidder Cost Revelation in Electric Power Auctions," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 5-26, February.
    2. Jaeyoung Sung, 2005. "Optimal Contracts Under Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard: A Continuous-Time Approach," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 18(3), pages 1021-1073.
    3. Yeon-Koo Che, 1993. "Design Competition through Multidimensional Auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(4), pages 668-680, Winter.
    4. Gulati, Sumeet & Vercammen, James, 2006. "Time inconsistent resource conservation contracts," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 454-468, July.
    5. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2008. "Properties of scoring auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 69-85.
    6. John Asker & Estelle Cantillon, 2010. "Procurement when price and quality matter," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(1), pages 1-34.
    7. Krishna, Vijay, 2009. "Auction Theory," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 2, number 9780123745071.
    8. Peter M. DeMarzo & Ilan Kremer & Andrzej Skrzypacz, 2005. "Bidding with Securities: Auctions and Security Design," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 936-959, September.
    9. Spagnolo, Giancarlo, 2012. "Reputation, competition, and entry in procurement," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 291-296.
    10. Cox, John C. & Ross, Stephen A., 1976. "The valuation of options for alternative stochastic processes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(1-2), pages 145-166.
    11. Michael Garvin & Charles Cheah, 2004. "Valuation techniques for infrastructure investment decisions," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 373-383.
    12. S. Ping Ho & Liang Liu, 2002. "An option pricing-based model for evaluating the financial viability of privatized infrastructure projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(2), pages 143-156.
    13. Ferraro, Paul J., 2008. "Asymmetric information and contract design for payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 810-821, May.
    14. Chiara D’Alpaos & Michele Moretto & Paola Valbonesi & Sergio Vergalli, 2013. "Time overruns as opportunistic behavior in public procurement," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 25-43, September.
    15. Rob Hart, 2005. "Combating moral hazard in agri-environmental schemes: a multiple-agent approach," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Foundation for the European Review of Agricultural Economics, vol. 32(1), pages 75-91, March.
    16. Paul Milgrom & Ilya Segal, 2002. "Envelope Theorems for Arbitrary Choice Sets," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(2), pages 583-601, March.
    17. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721, March.
    18. Drew Fudenberg & Jean Tirole, 1991. "Game Theory," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262061414, July.
    19. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    20. Palmer, Charles, 2011. "Property rights and liability for deforestation under REDD+: Implications for 'permanence' in policy design," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 571-576, February.
    21. PETER M. DeMARZO & YULIY SANNIKOV, 2006. "Optimal Security Design and Dynamic Capital Structure in a Continuous-Time Agency Model," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(6), pages 2681-2724, December.
    22. Steven Shavell, 1980. "Damage Measures for Breach of Contract," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(2), pages 466-490, Autumn.
    23. Kenneth Hendricks & Joris Pinkse & Robert H. Porter, 2003. "Empirical Implications of Equilibrium Bidding in First-Price, Symmetric, Common Value Auctions," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 115-145.
    24. Stefanie Engel & Charles Palmer & Luca Taschini & Simon Urech, 2015. "Conservation Payments under Uncertainty," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(1), pages 36-56.
    25. Board, Simon, 2007. "Selling options," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 324-340, September.
    26. Shimon Kogan & John Morgan, 2010. "Securities Auctions under Moral Hazard: An Experimental Study," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 14(3), pages 477-520.
    27. Vukina, Tomislav & Zheng, Xiaoyong & Marra, Michele & Levy, Armando, 2008. "Do farmers value the environment? Evidence from a conservation reserve program auction," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 1323-1332, November.
    28. Guesnerie, Roger & Laffont, Jean-Jacques, 1984. "A complete solution to a class of principal-agent problems with an application to the control of a self-managed firm," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 329-369, December.
    29. Paula Cordero Salas & Brian E. Roe, 2012. "The Role of Cooperation and Reciprocity in Structuring Carbon Sequestration Contracts in Developing Countries," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(2), pages 411-418.
    30. Konstantinos Giannakas & Jonathan D. Kaplan, 2005. "Policy Design and Conservation Compliance on Highly Erodible Lands," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(1).
    31. Skrzypacz, Andrzej, 2013. "Auctions with contingent payments — An overview," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 666-675.
    32. Spulber, Daniel F, 1990. "Auctions and Contract Enforcement," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 325-344, Fall.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    wild boar; hunting value; Sweden; game as attributes; choice experiment;

    JEL classification:

    • Q29 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Other
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:hhs:slueko:2016_001. 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: (Elizabeth Hillerius). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.