Shark-diving tourism as a financing mechanism for shark conservation strategies in Malaysia

This study estimated the economic value of the shark-diving industry in Semporna, the most popular diving destination of Malaysia, by surveying the expenditures of diving tourists and dive operators through the region. A willingness-to-pay survey was also used to estimate the potential of the industry as a financing mechanism for enforcement and management of a hypothetical Marine Protected Area (MPA) to conserve shark populations. The study showed that in 2012, shark-diving tourism provided direct revenues in excess of USD 9.8 million to the Semporna region. These economic benefits had a flow-on effect, generating more than USD 2 million in direct taxes to the government and USD 1.4 million in salaries to the community. A contingent valuation analysis indicated that implementation of a fee paid by divers could generate over USD 2 million for management and enforcement of the MPA each year. These findings suggest that shark diving is an important contributor to the economy of the Semporna region that could be used as a mechanism to assist financial resourcing for management and conservation strategies

Deriving Australian Citizens’ Willingness to Pay for Carbon Farming Benefits: A Choice Experiment Study

The Australian Government is facing the considerable challenges to cut back greenhouse gas emissions to five percent under 2000 levels by the year 2020. One of the substantial emission sectors in Australia is agriculture and the Australian Government is pursuing policies to incentivise emission reductions by farmers. These incentives are driven by the Carbon Farming Initiative (CFI), which is a national programme that financially compensates farmers who take measures to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions or increase carbon storage in soils and vegetation. Next to mitigating greenhouse gas concentrations, carbon farming practices can be accompanied by so-called ‘co-benefits’ such as positive effects on biodiversity, increasing the value of landscape aesthetics and the reduction of soil erosion. These co-benefits will generate social and environmental values that are not only experienced by farmers but also by other citizens. A better understanding of the values that the public attaches to these co-benefits can play an important role to support farmers in their carbon farming practices. This is because if projects deliver more benefits next to carbon mitigation, buyers might be willing pay a higher price for the carbon credits. In this study, we measure the public’s willingness to pay (WTP) for the co-benefits of carbon farming. A choice experiment was conducted among Australian citizens that included three environmental attributes: carbon emission reductions, increase in native vegetation and a reduction in soil erosion. The results of multi-nominal logit models and mixed logit models show that Australians are likely to receive welfare benefits from carbon mitigation activities that also provide biodiversity benefits. This means that carbon farming policies could potentially be broadened to capture co-benefits and not be restricted to solely carbon sequestration. Public incentives that aim to change agricultural land management could therefore include higher payments for carbon credits that generate additional environmental co-benefits

What'’s Appropriate? Investigating the Effects of Attribute Level Framing and Changing Cost Levels in Choice Experiments

Choice Experiments w are increasingly used to estimate the values of non-market goods and services. A cost attribute is typically included in a CE questionnaire to enable the estimation of monetary values for changes in the non-market attributes presented. Notwithstanding the central importance of the cost attribute, limited research has been undertaken on the impacts of varying the levels of the cost attribute on respondents’ choices in CE surveys. Furthermore, the ways in which the levels of non-market attributes are described to respondents - the ‘attribute frame’ - may affect value estimates. The challenge for CE practitioners is to identify the ‘appropriate’ attribute frames and range in cost levels. In this report, the impacts of changing cost levels, the impacts of describing non-market attributes as absolute levels or in relative terms, and of using positive versus negative contextual descriptions of attribute levels are assessed. These tests were performed using data from a CE on catchment management in Tasmania, Australia. Contrary to a priori expectations, including explicit information cues about relative attribute levels in the choice sets is found not to affect stated preferences. The data reveal significant differences in value estimates when attribute levels are described as a ‘loss’, compared to a ‘presence’. Furthermore, comparisons between different split samples provide evidence that respondents’ preferences are impacted by changing the level of the cost attribute, with higher levels leading to significantly higher estimates of WTP for one of the three environmental attributes.Choice experiments, Mixed Logit models, Environmental valuation, Attribute framing, Cost bias

Using Choice Experiments to value River and Estuary Health in Tasmania with Individual Preference Heterogeneity.

Choice experiments (CE – otherwise known as Choice Modelling) have become widespread as an approach to environmental valuation in Australia. There are, however, limited applications that have focused on the estimation of estuary values. Furthermore, none of the existing valuation studies have addressed catchment management changes in Tasmania. The CE study described in this report aims to elicit community preferences for natural resource management options in the George catchment in north-eastern Tasmania. The survey was administered in different sub-sample locations in Tasmania to assess the trade-offs respondents are willing to make between environmental attributes and costs. Catchment health attributes were the length of native riverside vegetation and the number of rare animal and plant species in the George catchment. The area of healthy seagrass beds in the Georges Bay was used as a measure of estuary condition. Results from mixed logit models show that respondents are, on average, willing to pay between $3.47 and$5.11 for a km increase in native riverside vegetation and between $7.10 and$12.42 per species for the protection of rare native plants and animals, ceteris paribus. The results are ambiguous about respondents’ preferences for estuary seagrass area. This study further shows significant differences between logit models when accounting for unobserved preference heterogeneity and repeated choices made by the same individual. Key words: Choice experiments, Preference heterogeneity, Mixed Logit models, River health, Estuary health, Tasmania, Environmental valuation

Attribute framing in choice experiments: how do attribute level descriptions affect value estimates?

Choice Experiments present survey respondents with alternative options that are described by a number of attributes, in regards to farming. Respondents are assumed to evaluate each option based on the levels of the attributes, which vary across alternatives and choice sets. The way in which attributes are described to respondents is likely to affect their choices. In this study, the impacts of two attribute level descriptions are assessed: describing non-market attributes as absolute levels or in relative terms; and using positive versus negative contextual descriptions of attribute levels. These tests were performed using data from a choice experiment on catchment management in Tasmania, Australia. Contrary to a priori expectations, including explicit information cues about relative attribute levels in the choice sets is not found to affect stated preferences. The data do reveal significant differences in value estimates when attribute levels are described as a ‘loss’, compared to a ‘presence’

Discrete choice models: scale heterogeneity and why it matters

Models to analyse discrete choice data that account for heterogeneity in error variance (scale) across respondents are increasingly common, e.g. heteroscedastic conditional logit or scale adjusted latent class models. In this paper we do not question the need to allow for scale heterogeneity. Rather, we examine the interpretation of results from these models. We provide five empirical examples using discrete choice experiments, analysed using conditional logit, heteroscedastic conditional logit, or scale adjusted latent class models. We show that analysts may incorrectly conclude that preferences are consistent across respondents even if they are not, or that classes of respondents may have (in)significant preferences for some or all attributes of the experiment, when they do not. We recommend that future studies employing scale heterogeneity models explicitly state scale factors for all samples, choice contexts, and/or latent scale classes, and report rescaled preference parameters for each of these groups

Willingness to Pay for Revegetating the City of Subiaco’s Railway Reserve. A Choice Experiment to Determine Public Preferences

Residents of the City of Subiaco (Western Australia) demonstrate a willingness to pay for revegetating the Railway Reserve. The Railway Reserve is the area of land immediately along both sides of the Fremantle Railway Line. The City of Subiaco aims to revegetate all available land in the Reserve with native plants to create a green link between Kings Park, Bold Park and other parks in the area. This study used a choice experiment to determine public preferences and to estimate willingness to pay for different ways of managing the Railway Reserve. Conditional logit model results show that residents prefer to have a larger proportion of the area revegetated, to add shrubs and/or trees to the ground-covering plants, and to add management for wildlife habitat such as nest boxes for birds and bats. No significant preference was found for the inclusion of interpretative signs. The average respondent was willing to pay 0.27 Australian dollars per household per year for every extra percent of the Reserve to be revegetated. To add management for wildlife habitat, the average respondent was willing to pay 14.15 Australian dollars per household per year. A higher willingness to pay for a larger revegetated proportion and for the wildlife management was found among females and among frequent users of the walking and bicycle path along the railway line. Residents who live further away from the railway line and residents who feel less safe as a result of dense urban vegetation demonstrated a lower willingness to pay per percentage of area revegetated. Results from the survey also indicate that respondents valued urban greenery more for the habitat it provides for wildlife than for the recreational opportunities or as a buffer against noise. The results from the choice experiment reinforce the current management strategies by the City of Subiaco. The current management strategy represents a total willingness to pay among residents of 480,750 Australian dollars per year. This study could be replicated in other local council areas along the Fremantle Railway Line to determine the values that the Railway Reserve provides to residents of other areas in Perth