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

2. 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

3. 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%

4. INVERTEBRATES

5. FISH

6. BIRDS

7. SEA MAMMALS

8. MACROALGAE

9. 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

10. 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% - 135 – Scenario 10% - 133 – Scenario 25% - 125 – Scenario 10% - 125 After removal of ‘protest bids’ there is 351 answers left.

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

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

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

14. 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

24. 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. 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

26. 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 -

27. 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 -

28. 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 -

29. –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 -

30. 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 -

31. Statistics (a) invertebratesfishmammalsbirdsalgaemar bio U Mann- Whitney 6980,0006319,5001173,5006395,5006535,5007046,500 W Wilcoxon 16025,00015364,5003318,50015440,50015580,50016091,500 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 -

32. 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 -

33. 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?