Social Benefits of Controlling Forest Insect Outbreaks: A Contingent Valuation Analysis in Two Canadian Provinces

Abstract

This study estimates the social benefits of controlling two very different forest insect outbreaks in New Brunswick (NB) and Saskatchewan (SK), namely spruce budworm (SBW) (Choristoneura fumiferana) and forest tent caterpillar (FTC) (Malacosoma disstria). Using dichotomous choice contingent valuation mail surveys, households in NB and SK were asked to indicate their willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) for controlling future SBW and FTC outbreaks. A majority of respondents (over 80% in each province) favored controlling outbreaks of these insects. In both provinces, respondents were on average willing to pay more for controlling SBW outbreaks compared to FTC outbreaks. Aggregate social benefits (measured via compensating surplus) associated with proposed insect control programs in NB resulted in annual social benefits of $14.3–20.8 million for SBW control, and $7.9–14.5 million for FTC control. Comparable net benefits in SK were $22.2–32.4 million for SBW control, and $11.7–22.0 million for FTC control. These results highlight the significance and uniqueness of social benefits generated from controlling outbreaks of these insects, and provide a foundation for incorporating them into a full benefit‐cost analysis used to help make more informed and efficient policy decisions. La présente étude a évalué les avantages collectifs de la lutte contre les invasions de deuxinsectes forestiers au Nouveau‐Brunswick (NB) et en Saskatchewan (SK), à savoir la tordeuse des bourgeons de l’épinette (SBW) (Choristoneura fumiferana) et la livrée des forêts (FTC) (Malacosoma disstria). Au moyen de sondages postaux élaborés selon la méthode d’évaluation contingente avec choix dichotomiques, nous avons demandéà des ménages au NB et en SK d’indiquer leur consentement à payer pour lutter contre des invasions futures de SBW et de FTC. Une majorité de répondants (soit plus de 80p.100 dans chaque province) a indiquéêtre en faveur de la lutte contre ces insectes. Dans les deuxprovinces, les répondants étaient en moyenne prêts à payer davantage pour la lutte contre la SBW que pour la lutte contre la FTC. Les avantages collectifs globaux (évalués d’après le surplus compensatoire) des programmes de lutte proposés au NB se sont soldés par des avantages collectifs annuels variant de 14,3 à 20,8millions de dollars (M$) dans le cas de la lutte contre la SBW et de 7,9 à 14,5M$ dans le cas de la lutte contre la FTC. En SK, les avantages collectifs nets ont été comparables, variant de 22,2à32,4M$ dans le cas de la lutte contre la SBW, et de 11,7à22,0M$ dans le cas de la lutte contre la FTC. Ces résultats font ressortir l’importance et la valeur unique des avantages collectifs générés par la lutte contre les invasions de ces insectes et fournissent un argument pour les intégrer dans une analyse avantages‐coûts afin de favoriser la prise de décisions stratégiques éclairées et efficaces.

Heterogeneous nonmarket benefits of managing white pine bluster rust in high-elevation pine forests

“…For example, Walsh et al's (1990) study finds substantial nonuse values for the protection of ponderosa pines in Colorado from native, mountain pine beetle outbreaks (with only $14 of the average annual total value of $52 for 150 trees per acre allocated to recreation-use), and Loomis et al (1996) find significant WTP ($90 per household per year) to reduce fire hazards to Pacific Northwestern old-growth forests, again with the CV method. Highlighting the importance of the context of management, Chang et al (2011) find substantially different WTP to control future outbreaks of two different native forest pests, spruce budworms and forest tent caterpillars, in the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick and Saskatchewan, with point estimates of mean WTP ranging between $33 and $104 per household per year.…”

Economics of Early Intervention to Suppress a Potential Spruce Budworm Outbreak on Crown Land in New Brunswick, Canada

“…Better estimates might change the cost-effectiveness and efficiency ranking of forest protection strategies. Further, the non-market benefit estimates in this study, from Chang et al [20], only included recreation and wildlife values. These values may have changed over time, and other non-market values such as carbon and water quality, which were not valued, may be important to the NB population.…”

“…Non-market benefits of each SBW control effort were adopted from the Chang et al [20] willingness to pay (WTP) estimation of the public's benefit from controlling future SBW outbreaks in NB. A contingent valuation method (CVM) analysis determined that average WTP was $86.19 (CAD 2007) per household per year for 5 years (2007-2011), including timber value, which was considered a market benefit, or $53.87 for the non-market benefit [20]. The associated value for a moderate SBW outbreak was estimated in proportion to the volume lost.…”

Economic analysis of forest insect pests in Canada

“…The results of their survey suggested that social benefits can be large, ranging between CAD$14.3–32.4 million per year for SBW and CAD$7.9–22.0 million for FTC. This study, along with an advanced SBW DSS model (Hennigar et al 2013), was then used by Chang et al (2012a) to conduct another CBA of controlling SBW in New Brunswick. The CBA evaluated six scenarios, which included three proposed protection levels and two unprotected outbreak severities.…”

“…In a unique non-market valuation study, Chang et al (2011) used contingent valuation to estimate the social benefits of SBW and FTC control also in Saskatchewan and New Brunswick. The results of their survey suggested that social benefits can be large, ranging between CAD$14.3-32.4 million per year for SBW and CAD$7.9-22.0 million for FTC.…”