IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/umnees/0671.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The value of preserving the four large predators in Sweden: Regional differences considered

Author

Listed:
  • Broberg, Thomas

    () (Department of Economics, Umeå University)

  • Brännlund, Runar

    () (Department of Economics, Umeå University)

Abstract

This paper contributes with an applied policy analysis of the predator preservation policy in Sweden. We estimate the social benefits from preserving the four large predators in Sweden by applying a contingent valuation approach. The vehicle we use to fulfil our objectives is data from a survey that were mailed out in the spring of 2004. We find that the Swedish population is divided in half concerning their support for the predator policy package and that the overall mean WTP for preserving the four large predators in Sweden is approximately SEK 290. We also find that the WTP differ substantially between different regions in Sweden. Respondents in Stockholm have the highest WTP whereas the lowest WTP is found for respondents living in Wolfterritories. Finally we find that our measure of the social value is sensitive with respect to response-uncertainty. When the respondents are allowed to be uncertain about their valuation they state a higher value. The main conclusion is that the social-value of preserving the four large predators in Sweden may be negative since the stated benefits seem to be rather small.

Suggested Citation

  • Broberg, Thomas & Brännlund, Runar, 2006. "The value of preserving the four large predators in Sweden: Regional differences considered," Umeå Economic Studies 671, Umeå University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:umnees:0671
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.umu.se/DownloadAsset.action?contentId=52415&languageId=3&assetKey=ues671
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberini, Anna & Boyle, Kevin & Welsh, Michael, 2003. "Analysis of contingent valuation data with multiple bids and response options allowing respondents to express uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 40-62, January.
    2. Welsh, Michael P. & Poe, Gregory L., 1998. "Elicitation Effects in Contingent Valuation: Comparisons to a Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 170-185, September.
    3. Laura Nahuelhual-Muñoz & Maria Loureiro & John Loomis, 2004. "Addressing Heterogeneous Preferences Using Parametric Extended Spike Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 27(3), pages 297-311, March.
    4. Catherine Chambers & John Whitehead, 2003. "A Contingent Valuation Estimate of the Benefits of Wolves in Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 249-267, October.
    5. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    6. Wang, Hua, 1997. "Treatment of "Don't-Know" Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys: A Random Valuation Model," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 219-232, February.
    7. Vossler, Christian A. & Poe, Gregory L., 2005. "Analysis of contingent valuation data with multiple bids and response options allowing respondents to express uncertainty: a comment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 197-200, January.
    8. Bengt Kriström, 1997. "Spike Models in Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(3), pages 1013-1023.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Contingent valuation; WTP; endangered species;

    JEL classification:

    • Q22 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Fishery
    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy

    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:hhs:umnees:0671. 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: (David Skog). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/inumuse.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.