Environmental valuation, ecosystem services and aquatic species

The thesis consists of an introduction and four articles that can be read independently of each other. The common topic is environmental valuation and cost-benefit analysis. The applications relates to the growing concern of invasive species, and to waterpower externalities. In broad terms, all of the articles relates to water management. Article 1: "A Cost-Benefit analysis of introducing a non-native species: the case of signal crayfish in Sweden", assesses the economic impact of introducing the signal crayfish into a Swedish lake. Two scenarios are set up and compared. The first one assumes that there is no introduction of signal crayfish, so that the noble crayfish is preserved. In the second scenario, the signal crayfish is introduced, which immediately wipes out the entire stock of noble crayfish. The values of noble- and signal crayfish populations are measured as present values of their net future revenues. The values are than compared and net benefit of an introduction is calculated. The result indicate that net benefit of an introduction is positive if the intrinsic growth rate or the carrying capacity of the noble crayfish is below 40 % that of the signal crayfish. Article 2: "Assessing management options for weed control with demanders and non-demanders in a choice experiment", estimates the benefits of having a weed management program for a lake in Sweden, and then compares them with corresponding costs. The policy recommendation from a simple cost-benefit rule is to control the weed at some specific sites of the lake. This paper also suggest how to distinguish those that have a positive WTP for at least one of the attributes (demanders) from those that have zero WTP for all attributes (non-demanders). The advantage of the suggested approach is that it facilitates to more clearly distinguish between conditional and unconditional willingness to pay. The suggested approach could also overcome some of the problems in the literature with negative welfare measures. Article 3: "Assessing transfer errors in the benefit transfer method: An application of invasive weed management using choice experiment", tests the accuracy of transferring benefits of a weed management program from one lake to another using choice experiment. The transfer errors are assessed and the convergent validity hypothesis is tested. Estimating the accuracy of benefit transfer for weed management is policy relevant as there are a number of lakes in Sweden infested with the water weed. The convergent validity was rejected for three out of five welfare estimates with a ten per cent significance level. Article 4: "Willingness to pay for environmental improvements in hydropower regulated rivers", assesses the benefits of environmental improvements along hydropower regulated rivers using choice experiments. Remedial measures that improve the conditions for fish, benthic invertebrates and river-margin vegetation were found to have a significant welfare increasing impact. The results can be of value for the implementation of the Water Framework Directives in Sweden, which aims to reform the use of all surface water and ground water in the member states

The Role of Preferences in Disagreements over Scientific Hypothesis: An Empirical Inquiry into Environmental and Economic Decision Making

The Porter hypothesis suggests that environmental regulations, such as restricting firms to reduce pollution, stimulates innovations and create a win-win situation for the environment and for firms. It has received a great deal of attention from academics as well as bureaucrats who disagree about the applicability of the Porter hypothesis. This study tests if part of such disagreement can be explained by a preference-expectation relationship and if people are more likely to believe in a scientific hypothesis that appeals to their preferences. The results show that individuals' who care more about the environment are more likely to believe in the Porter hypothesis. We also discuss the capacity of economic methodology to mitigate a preference-expectation bias and how it relates to the current practice in environmental economics.Porter Hypothesis, Subjective Beliefs, Economic Methodology

A note on the relationship between television viewing and individual happiness

In a recently published article, Bruni and Stanca (2008) suggest that television viewing has a negative impact on life satisfaction. In this note we argue that the empirical approach they use (an approach that omits the main effect of TV viewing in life satisfaction) is problematic. We estimate a microeconomic life satisfaction function and find mixed support for the claim that television viewing in general has a negative impact on individual happiness. Using a large cross-country comparison we find that there is a substantial heterogeneity across countries, which needs to be taken into account when concluding about television's effect on life satisfaction.Relational goods, Subjective well-being, TV consumption, Happiness

Incomplete Preferences in Choice Experiments: A note on avoidable noise and bias in welfare estimates

How does a choice experiment (CE) model derived under standard preference axioms perform for respondents with incomplete preferences? Using simulated data, we show how such miss-specification results in unnecessary noise and bias in welfare estimates, and can be avoided.Choice experiment, Ordered Logit, Bias, Preference Axioms

Dealing with ignored attributes in choice experiments on valuation of Sweden's environmental quality objectives

Using a choice experiment, this paper investigates how Swedish citizens value three environmental quality objectives. In addition, a follow-up question is used to investigate whether respondents ignored any attributes when responding. The resulting information is used in the model estimation by restricting the individual parameters for the ignored attributes to zero. When taking the shares of respondents who considered both the environmental and the cost attributes (52-69 percent of the respondents) into account, then the WTPs for each attribute change if the respondents who ignored the attributes have a zero WTP. At the same time, we find evidence that not all respondents who claimed to have ignored an attribute really did. However, the most commonly ignored non-monetary attributes always have the lowest rankings in terms of WTP across all three environmental objectives. Thus, our results show that instead of ignoring, respondents seem to put less weight on the attributes they claimed to have ignored.Choice experiment, environmental quality objectives, follow-up question,

Doing good with other people's money: A charitable giving experiment with students in environmental sciences and economics

We augment a standard dictator game to investigate how preferences for an environmental project relate to willingness to limit others' choices. We explore this issue by distinguishing three student groups: economists, environmental economists, and environmental social scientists. We find that people are generally disposed to grant freedom of choice, but only within certain limits. In addition, our results are in line with the widely held belief that economists are more selfish than other people. Yet, against the notion of consumer sovereignty, economists are not less likely to restrict others' choices and impose restrictions closer to their own preferences than the other student groups.dictator game, charitable giving, social preferences, paternalism

Is Fairness Blind? - The effect of framing on preferences for effort-sharing rules

By using a choice experiment, this paper focuses on citizens' preferences for effort-sharing rules of how carbon abatement should be shared among countries. We find that Swedes do not rank the rule favoring their own country highest. Instead, they prefer the rule where all countries are allowed to emit an equal amount per person, a rule that favors Africa at the expense of high emitters such as the U.S. The least preferred rule is reduction proportional to historical emissions. Using two different treatments, one where the respondents were informed about the country names and one where the country names were replaced with anonymous labels A-D, we also test whether people's preferences for effort-sharing rules depend on the framing of the problem. We find that while the ranking of the principles is the same in both treatments, the strength of the preferences is significantly increased when the actual names of the countries are used.climate change, fairness, framing, ethics, effort-sharing rules

The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth A Multiple Country Test of an Oath Script

Hypothetical bias is one of the main issues bedeviling the field of nonmarket valuation. The general criticism is that survey responses reflect how people would like to behave, rather than how they actually behave. In our study of climate change and emissions reductions, we took advantage of the increasing bulk of evidence from psychology and economics that addresses the effects of making promises, in order to investigate the effect of an oath script in a contingent valuation survey. The survey was conducted in Sweden and China, and its results indicate that an oath script has significant effects on respondent behavior in answering willingness-to-pay (WTP) questions, some of which vary by country. In both countries, the share of zero WTP responses and extremely high WTP responses decreases when an oath script is used, which also results in lower variance. In China, the oath script also reduces the average WTP, cutting it by half in certain instances. We also found that the oath script has different impacts on various respondent groups. For example, without the oath script, Communist party members in China are more likely than others to have a positive WTP for emissions reductions, but with the oath script, there is no longer any difference between the groups.Oath script, hypothetical bias, willingness to pay

A Fair Share - Burden-Sharing Preferences in the United States and China

Using a choice experiment, we investigated preferences for distributing the economic burden of decreasing CO2 emissions in the two largest CO2-emitting countries: the United States and China. We asked respondents about their preferences for four burden-sharing rules to reduce CO2 emissions according to their country's 1) historical emissions, 2) income level, 3) equal right to emit per person, and 4) current emissions. We found that U.S. respondents preferred the rule based on current emissions, while the equal right to emit rule was clearly least preferred. The Chinese respondents, on the other hand, preferred the historical rule, while the current emissions rule was the least preferred. Respondents overall favored the rule that was least costly for their country. These marked differences may explain the difficulties countries face in agreeing how to share costs, presenting a tough hurdle to overcome in future negotiations. We also found that the strength of the preferences was much stronger in China, suggesting that how mitigation costs are shared across countries is more important there.Climate, burden-sharing, fairness, China, United States

Paying for Mitigation: A Multiple Country Study

Unique survey data from a contingent valuation study conducted in three different countries (China, Sweden, and the United States) were used to investigate the ordinary citizen’s willingness to pay (WTP) for reducing CO2 emissions. We found that a large majority of the respondents in all three countries believe that the mean global temperature has increased over the last 100 years and that humans are responsible for the increase. A smaller share of Americans, however, believes these statements, when compared to the Chinese and Swedes. A larger share of Americans is also pessimistic and believes that nothing can be done to stop climate change. We also found that Sweden has the highest WTP for reductions of CO2, while China has the lowest. Thus, even though the Swedes and Chinese are similar to each other in their attitudes toward climate change, they differ considerably in their WTP. When WTP is measured as a share of household income, the willingness to pay is the same for Americans and Chinese, while again higher for the Swedes.climate change, willingness to pay, multi-country, China, United States, Sweden