Costs of Lost opportunities: Applying Non-Market Valuation Techniques to Potential REDD+ Participants in Cameroon

Thompson, Dara Y.; Swallow, Brent; Luckert, Martin K.

doi:10.3390/f8030069

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As far as we know, no study to date has explored how individual subsistence needs impact WTP for non-market goods. Yet economists have long applied the concept of subsistence requirements, in ecological economics for natural resources (Shyamsundar and Kramer, 1996;Thompson et al, 2017;Shrestha et al, 2006) or ecosystem services (Baumgärtner et al, 2017b;Drupp, 2018). In non-market valuation, subsistence requirements have been applied to lexicographic preferences between market and non-market goods (Stevens et al, 1991;Veisten et al, 2006;Rekola, 2003) or used to discuss the limits to substitution between them (cf.…”

Section: Subsistence Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for subsistence needs in non-market valuation: a simple proposal

Champonnois

Chanel

2022

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Revealed and stated preference techniques are widely used to assess willingness to pay (WTP) for non-market goods as input to public and private decision-making. However, individuals first have to satisfy subsistence needs through market good consumption, which affects their ability to pay. We provide a methodological framework and derive a simple ex post adjustment factor to account for this effect. We quantify its impacts on the WTP for non-market goods and the ranking of projects theoretically, numerically and empirically. This confirms that non-adjusted WTP tends to be plutocratic: the views of the richest -whatever they are -are more likely to impact decision-making, potentially leading to ranking reversal between projects. We also suggest that the subsistence needs-based adjustment factor we propose has a role to play in value transfer procedures.The overall goal is a better representation of the entire population's preferences with regard to non-market goods.

show abstract

Section: Subsistence Needsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for subsistence needs in non-market valuation: a simple proposal

Champonnois

Chanel

2022

Journal of Environmental Planning and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One-way variance analysis (one-way ANOVA) was used to test the differences between socio-economic variables and WTA values, and the least significant difference test was conducted when significant differences were detected through ANOVA. Multivariate linear regression was used to analyze the effects of socio-economic variables on respondent WTA [18,55], as this approach has been determined to be suitable for analyzing the correlation between dependent and independent variables in similar contexts [56]. A p < 0.05 was used as the critical significance threshold to determine differences in the variables.…”

Section: Data Processing Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmers’ Willingness to Accept Compensation to Maintain the Benefits of Urban Forests

Wang

Adamowski

Wang

et al. 2019

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Returning Farmland to Forest Program (RFFP) was implemented in China in 1999 with the goal of supporting environmental restoration by returning significant areas of cultivated land to forest. While afforestation supports long-term ecosystem services like carbon sequestration and the reduction of soil and water loss, it also reduces the amount of available arable land, putting financial pressure on those who depend on it for their livelihoods. In an effort to balance both ecological and economic benefits, regional governments offer financial compensation to farmers to offset these pressures in the form of a dollar amount per hectare of reforested land. The current study explores participants’ willingness to accept pay (WTA), along with the difference between the offered per hectare compensation and the amount deemed acceptable by RFFP participants in the region. To this end, 92 households from the representative afforestation area were surveyed in Huining County, Gansu Province, China - an area of strategic ecological importance in the Loess Plateau. The results showed 12.0% of the surveyed respondents to be satisfied with the current compensation policy, while 88.0% of respondents were not. The respondents’ lower and upper WTA limits were $221/ha/year and $1331/ha/year, respectively, with an average WTA of $777/ha/year. The compensation that respondents would be most willing to accept was distributed in the $444–888/ha/year and the $889–1331/ha/year ranges, accounting for 37.0% and 31.5% of the total responses, respectively. Gender, age, and education were found to be the main factors influencing a respondents’ WTA. Results of the survey suggest that the actual compensation amount ($355/ha/year) is much lower than respondents’ WTA, and that compensation measures and policies should be improved to guarantee a basic income.

show abstract

“…If these data are not available, the information on prices must be obtained from parallel markets indirectly related to the good or service being valued (Limaei et al, 2017). If none of these information sources are available, hypothetical markets are created in order to estimate these values (Thompson et al, 2017).…”

Section: Economic Valuation Of Ecosystem Services (Eves)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The economic valuation of ecosystem services: bibliometric analysis

Velasco-Muñoz

Aznar-Sánchez²,

Schoenemann³

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research background: The services provided by ecosystems are the main support for human populations and for the development of any type of activity. Today, the provision of these services is under threat. The economic valuation of ecosystem services is vital to design appropriate policies, define strategies and manage ecosystems. Purpose of the article: The objective of this study is to analyse the evolution of research on the economic valuation of ecosystem services over the last two decades. More specifically, it aims firstly to identify the main agents driving research and, secondly, it seeks to synthesize in a single document the relevant information on the main economic valuation methods, relating them to the categories of services, ecosystems and regions where they have been employed. Methods: A quantitative review was first carried out through a bibliometric analysis to identify the main drivers of this line of research and its development trends. Secondly, a qualitative review was conducted through a systematic review focusing on the most commonly used valuation techniques in relation to the characteristics of the service, the geographical scope and the ecosystem analysed. Findings & value added: The main novelty of this work, compared to previous literature, is that the relationship between the study area, the type of ecosystem, the category of service and the economic valuation methodology are analysed for the first time. The results highlight the need to continue expanding knowledge in relation to the temporal and spatial scale in the economic value of ecosystem services, the subjective nature of the estimates and the heterogeneity between the different social sectors with respect to the benefit obtained.

show abstract

Costs of Lost opportunities: Applying Non-Market Valuation Techniques to Potential REDD+ Participants in Cameroon

Cited by 10 publications

References 34 publications

Accounting for subsistence needs in non-market valuation: a simple proposal

Accounting for subsistence needs in non-market valuation: a simple proposal

Farmers’ Willingness to Accept Compensation to Maintain the Benefits of Urban Forests

The economic valuation of ecosystem services: bibliometric analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About