Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Contingent Valuation Method - Tomasz Zarzycki & Ilona Kaminska.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
TEEB Training Session 4: Criticisms of valuation.
Advertisements

A Few Basic Principles of Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services John Loomis Dept. of Ag & Resource Economics Colorado State University’ Fort Collins,
INWEPF 4th Steering Meeting and Symposium (5-7 July 2007)
We thank the University of Waikato Summer Research Scholarship programme for partially funding this project. We would also like to thank the Waikato Management.
Luis E. Santiago University of Puerto Rico John Loomis Colorado State University Society for Conservation Biology 2008 Annual Meeting July 16, 2008 Chattanooga,
Willingness to pay for private voluntary health insurance in southeast Nigeria Obinna Onwujekwe a and Edit V. Velényi b a Health policy Research Group/Department.
Introduction to Nonparametric Statistics
1) Introduction Prior to the Exxon Valdez oil spill, the estimation of passive use value, was an area of economic research not well known. However, based.
Scale and Scope issues in Great Barrier Reef John Rolfe Jill Windle Jeff Bennett.
Research Problem: Father involvement plays important role in development of a child; for fathers who are incarcerated; presents challenges that seem insurmountable.
1 האם נוכל לתת ערך כלכלי למגרש משחקים בעיר ? יכולים לעזור ? CVM, TCM האם מירה ברון, אנסטסיה טקץ ', אירינה ליבשיץ שטח כלכלה, הפקולטה להנדסת תעשייה וניהול.
 Homework #2 due Thursday  Exam #1 on Thursday  Writing Assignment due Oct. 27th.
Chapter 12 Chi-Square Tests and Nonparametric Tests
Evaluating the environment Gauri-Shankar Guha. Dr. Gauri-Shankar Guha ASU - Econ Evaluating the Environment For the individual, economic values.
7. BCA - Benefits Benefits = willingness to pay! Benefit from an environmental program Sometimes WTP for amenities = damages avoided Damage functions Cost.
On the Value of Valuing Recreational Fishing B. Kriström Department of Forest Economics SLU-Umeå, Sweden.
Mean for sample of n=10 n = 10: t = 1.361df = 9Critical value = Conclusion: accept the null hypothesis; no difference between this sample.
Response – variable of interest; variable you collect - #Fish, %Coral cover, temperature, salinity, etc Factor – variable by which response is divided;
Analysis of variance (2) Lecture 10. Normality Check Frequency histogram (Skewness & Kurtosis) Probability plot, K-S test Normality Check Frequency histogram.
Valuation Methods focus on conventional market approaches Session Objectives: Identify key steps in valuing the environment Use selected methods to analyze.
 Homework #8 due Next Thursday  Group Outline due Nov. 11 (next Thurs.)
Knowledge is Power Marketing Information System (MIS) determines what information managers need and then gathers, sorts, analyzes, stores, and distributes.
Non-parametric statistics
Week 9: QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH (3)
Valuation of improvements in coastal environments.
Is it worth decontaminating groundwater ? Lessons from a cost benefit analysis in a French case study Stéphanie Aulong and Jean-Daniel Rinaudo Economic.
1 WORLD TOURISM ORGANIZATION (UNWTO) MEASURING TOURISM EXPENDITURE: A UNWTO PROPOSAL SESRIC-UNWTO WORKSHOP ON TOURISM STATISTICS AND THE ELABORATION OF.
Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft Excel, 5e © 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc.Chap 12-1 Statistics for Managers Using Microsoft® Excel 5th Edition Chapter.
LEARNING BY DOING: Doing Research in Undergraduate Classes? Catherine Boulatoff Dalhousie University, Economics Department INTRODUCTION The benefits associated.
THE OFFSHORE SITUATION IN GREECE Municipality of Corfu.
1 These courseware materials are to be used in conjunction with Software Engineering: A Practitioner’s Approach, 5/e and are provided with permission by.
Ecotourism & Nature Tourism Diane Kuehn Assistant Professor Forest & Natural Resources Management 310A Bray Hall
Valuing Health Effects of Air Pollution in DevelopingCountries: The Case of Taiwan* JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT 34, 107 ]
The Economic Value of Ecosystem Conservation in Japan: Reduction of elicitation effect by Bid Effect Function Mitsuyasu YABE Kyushu University.
Economic Benefits of Rare and Endangered Species Loomis, J.B., White, D.S. "Economic Benefits of Rare and Endangered Species: Summary and Meta-Analysis."
Economic Valuation and Protected Areas. Venetia Hargreaves-Allen Imperial College London Conservation Strategy Fund.
Examining Attitude Toward Statistics Among Graduate Nursing Students MyoungJin Kim, PhD, Illinois State University INTRODUCTION While the integration of.
Bird Conservation on Private Lands Proactive Conservation.
Multi-Metric Indicator Use in Social Preference Elicitation and Valuation Patrick Fogarty UW-Whitewater Economics Student.
A STUDY USING PHOTO METHOD TO EVALUATE RECREATIONAL CARRYING CAPACITY IN PENGHU ISLANDS, TAIWAN Shyi-Liang Yu Shyi-Liang Yu Department of Leisure Management,
Applying Contingent Valuation in China Xu Zhongmin, Cheng Guodong, Zhang Zhiqiang, Su Zhiyong Vs Anglers’ WTP For Information About Chemical Residues in.
Nonparametric Statistical Methods: Overview and Examples ETM 568 ISE 468 Spring 2015 Dr. Joan Burtner.
Luis E. Santiago, University of Puerto Rico John Loomis, Colorado State University Hydrology Days 2008 Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado.
Statistical analysis Prepared and gathered by Alireza Yousefy(Ph.D)
Explaining effective factors on consumers’ willingness to pay more for buying green products based on the Value-Belief-Norm theory Alireza Ziaei-Bideh.
Estimating non-market values across scale and scope John Rolfe.
Disparity between hypothetical and actual willingness to pay in a biodiversity conservation context. Dr. Michael Christie Institute of Rural Sciences University.
Contingent Valuation Methods See Boardman et al., Chapter 14 Interview individuals to elicit their preferences for different states of the world. Based.
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS. BIODIVERSITY Selemonas Paltanavičius Ministry of Environment of the Republic of Lithuania Vilnius, 2008.
OECD World Forum on Statistics, Knowledge and Policy Measuring and Fostering the Progress of Societies Istanbul, 29 June 2007 BIODIVERSITY.
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. Chapter 3 Valuing the Environment: Methods.
The Influence of Green Technology on Consumers’ Purchasing Choices Special Topics in Marketing Research NCTU Fall 2007 Professor Charles Trappey Mike McCool.
Scientific Method Note cards. 6 th grade study guides ► Know the 2 types of observations ► Know the difference between an observation & an inference ►
Innovations in the population census of the Republic of Belarus 2009: progress and challenges ___________________________________________________________________.
Chapters 6 & 7 Overview Created by Erin Hodgess, Houston, Texas.
Biostatistics Nonparametric Statistics Class 8 March 14, 2000.
Reducing acidification: the benefits of increased nature quality Investigating the possibilities of the Contingent Valuation Method Dr.ir. E.C.M. Ruijgrok,09/02.
Project Introduction and Overview Brock Bernstein OPC Meeting June 25, 2010.
GEO 5159 GIS Applications in Environmental Systems Seminar 3: Question, Models, Data, Download, Learning.
Preliminary ECLAIRE findings Budapest, 2 October 2014 Rob Maas, RIVM.
Real property valuation processes Jānis Gredzens
Public Benefits and Private Costs of Protected Natural Areas Van Lantz Faculty of Forestry and Environmental Management University of New Brunswick March.
Frank Lupi, Michael D. Kaplowitz, John P. Hoehn
Stephanie F. Stefanski Duke University
Introduction to Hypothesis Test – Part 2
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
MAKING SENSE OF THE ECONOMIC VALUATION OF TRANSPORT POLICIES
Sergio Bautista-Arredondo National Institute of Public Health Mexico
Frank Lupi, Michael D. Kaplowitz, John P. Hoehn
Chul-Oh Shin · Won-Keun Chang Korea Maritime Institute
Presentation transcript:

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Contingent Valuation Method - Tomasz Zarzycki & Ilona Kaminska

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Structure of presentation - Materials and methods – Questionnaire adjustment – Database creation and data treatment Preliminary results – Population – Attitudes towards biodiversity – Ecological concern – Willingness To Pay Discussion – Hypothesis and assumptions verification – Implementation in DSS

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Questionnaire adjustments - scenario 10%scenario 20% invertebrates88invertebrates fish60fish ─────────4sea mammals macroalgae16macroalgae birds (waterfowl)125birds (waterfowl) marine biodiversity as a whole──────marine biodiversity as a whole Adjustments – Difficult translation but doable – Additional levels of education – Photomontage of species Scenario and attributes of biodiversity – value of change - decrease of number of species 10 and 25%

INVERTEBRATES

FISH

BIRDS

SEA MAMMALS

MACROALGAE

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - database creation and data treatment - Database – data were gathered in Excel format – all protest bids were excluded from database – data were exported to SPSS format Data treatment – SPSS software for presentation and statistical analysis was used

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - population - ResidentsVisitors – Examined residents are were randomly chosen from the closest administrational districts (powiat), Pomorskie Voivodeship (wojewodztwo). – From range of regions of Poland and other countries. – According to statistics on tourism in Pomorskie Region, 10% of all visitors are foreign (12 persons). – Number of respondents = 268– Number of respondents = 250 – Scenario 25% – Scenario 10% – Scenario 25% – Scenario 10% After removal of ‘protest bids’ there is 351 answers left.

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - preliminary results -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - preliminary results -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - preliminary results -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - preliminary results - Mean visit duration: 5,8 nights Median: 3 nights Dominant: 2 nights Minimum stay: 1 night Maximum stay: 30 nights

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - preliminary results -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - preliminary results -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - attitudes towards biodiversity - 7,1%

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - attitudes towards biodiversity -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - attitudes towards biodiversity -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay - Reasons for not WTP

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay - 25% 10%

Hypothesis 1 - attributes - Society attach value to marine biodiversity. Value is not the same for each attribute of biodiversity. Willingness To Pay (WTP) varies between different groups of species Tool: –H. Kruskal-Wallis test Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

25%invertebratesVs.fishP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%invertebratesVs.mammalsP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%invertebratesVs.algaeP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%invertebratesVs.birdsP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%invertebratesVs.mar. biodiv.P=0,008 – statistical significance 25%fishVs.mammalsP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%fishVs.algaeP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%fishVs.birdsP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%fishVs.mar. biodiv.P=0,000 – statistical significance 25%algaeVs.mammalsP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%algaeVs.birdsP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%algaeVs.mar. biodiv.P=0,048 – statistical significance 25%birdsVs.mammalsP=0,000 – statistical significance 25%birdsVs.mar. biodiv.P=0,000 – statistical significance 10%invertebratesVs.fishP=0,000 – statistical significance 10%invertebratesVs.algaeP=0,000 – statistical significance 10%invertebratesVs.birdsP=0,000 – statistical significance 10%invertebratesVs.mar. biodiv.P=0,000 – statistical significance 10%fishVs.algaeP=0,000 – statistical significance 10%fishVs.birdsP=0,000 – statistical significance 10%fishVs.mar. biodiv.P=0,000 – statistical significance 10%algaeVs.birdsP=0,000 – statistical significance 10%algaeVs.mar. biodiv.P=0,000 – statistical significance

Society attach value to marine biodiversity. Value is not the same for each attribute of biodiversity. Willingness To Pay (WTP) varies between different groups of species YES There are statistically significant differences between WTP for preservation of each examined components of biodiversity Hypothesis 1 verification Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

Hypothesis 2 - scenarios - Two scenarios were presented: avoiding 25% and 10% decrease of the number of species a)Are the differences between WTP declarations (in case of 10 or 25% scenario) statistically significant? b)If YES, what are the differences, what are the amounts? Tool for a): –U. Mann -Whitney (SPSS) Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

invertebrates10%Vs.25%P=0,061 – no statistical significance mammals10%Vs.25%P=0,100 – no statistical significance algae10%Vs.25%P=0,297 – no statistical significance birds10%Vs.25%P=0,123 – no statistical significance marine biodiversity10%Vs.25%P=0,864 – no statistical significance Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

–Are the differences between WTP declarations (in case of 10 or 25% scenario) statistically significant? NO There are no statistically significant differences between WTP for avoiding 10 either 25% decrease of number of species. Hypothesis 2 verification Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

Hypothesis 3 - residents vs. visitors - Willingness To Pay (WTP) that is declared by respondents is different for residents and visitors. It would be expected that residents would pay more for preservation of marine biodiversity in the area they live … or … visitors would pay more for preservation of biodiversity of the site they visiting and spending vacations. Tool: –U. Mann-Whitney test –According to the proof that there are no statistically significant differences between 10% and 25% scenario, WTP data for both scenarios were analyzed. Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

Statistics (a) invertebratesfishmammalsbirdsalgaemar bio U Mann- Whitney 6980, , , , , ,500 W Wilcoxon 16025, , , , , ,500 Z -1,797-2,955-4,176-2,888-2,653-1,624 Asymptotic significance 0,0720,0030,0000,0040,0080,104 (a) Variable: Are you a: Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

Willingness To Pay (WTP) that is declared by respondents is different for residents and visitors. Not a rule for each attribute of biodiversity YES for: fish sea mammals birds algae NO for: invertebrates marine biodiversity Hypothesis 3 verification Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Willingness To Pay -

Socioeconomic valuation of biodiversity of the Gulf of Gdansk - Implementation in DSS - ??? Local decision makers First such study for marine biodiversity in Poland Environmental education European scale through the case studies comparable analysis Benefit transfer?