Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-vbsjw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T05:01:44.221Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Valuing ecological and anthropocentric concepts of biodiversity: a choice experiments application

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 August 2009

By
Michael Christie ,
Nick Hanley ,
John Warren ,
Tony Hyde ,
Kevin Murphy  and
Robert Wright
Edited by
Andreas Kontoleon ,
Unai Pascual  and
Timothy Swanson
Michael Christie
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor, Institute of Rural Studies University of Wales Aberystwyth, UK
Nick Hanley
Affiliation:
Professor in Environmental Economics, Department of Economics University of Stirling, UK
John Warren
Affiliation:
Institute of Rural Studies University of Wales Aberystwyth, UK
Tony Hyde
Affiliation:
Institute of Rural Studies University of Wales Aberystwyth, UK
Kevin Murphy
Affiliation:
Institute of Rural Studies University of Wales Aberystwyth, UK
Robert Wright
Affiliation:
Professor in Economics Department of Economics and Vice-Dean, Faculty of Management, University of Stirling, UK
Andreas Kontoleon
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Unai Pascual
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Timothy Swanson
Affiliation:
University College London
Get access

Summary

Introduction – the challenge of valuing biodiversity

Society needs to make difficult decisions regarding its use of biological resources, for example in terms of habitat conservation, or changing how we manage farmland through agri-environmental policy (Hanley and Shogren 2002). Environmental valuation techniques can provide useful evidence to support such policies by quantifying the economic value associated with the protection of biological resources. Pearce (2001, p. 29) argues that the measurement of the economic value of biodiversity is a fundamental step towards its conservation since ‘the pressures to reduce biodiversity are so large that the chances that we will introduce incentives [for the protection of biodiversity] without demonstrating the economic value of biodiversity are much less than if we do engage in valuation’. Assigning monetary values to biodiversity is thus important since it allows the benefits associated with biodiversity to be directly compared with the economic value of alternative resource use options (Nunes and van den Bergh 2001). OECD (2001) also recognises the importance of measuring the economic value of biodiversity and identifies a wide range of uses for such values, including demonstrating the value of biodiversity, in targeting biodiversity protection within scarce budgets, and in determining damages for loss of biodiversity in liability regimes.

More generally, the role of environmental valuation methodologies in policy formulation is increasingly being recognised by policy-makers.

Type
Chapter
Information
Biodiversity Economics
Principles, Methods and Applications
 , pp. 343 - 368
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ali, M. M., Dickinson, G. and Murphy, K. J. 2000. Predictors of plant diversity in a hyperarid desert wadi ecosystem. Journal of Arid Environments. 45. 215–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brotherton, I. 1996. Biodiversity, spatial extent and protectability. In Simpson, I. A. and Dennis, P.. (eds.). The Spatial Dynamics of Biodiversity: Proceedings 5th Annual IALE Conference. International Association for Landscape Ecology, Stirling, 149–160.Google Scholar
Christie, M. 2001. A comparison of alternative contingent valuation elicitation treatments for the evaluation of complex environmental policy. Journal of Environmental Management. 62. 255–269.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christie, M., Warren, J., Hanley, N., Murphy, K. and Wright, R. 2004. Developing Measures for Valuing Changes in Biodiversity. Report to DEFRA: London.Google Scholar
Christie, M., Hanley, N., Warren, J., Murphy, K., Wright, R. and Hyde, , R. 2006. Valuing the diversity of biodiversity. Ecological Economics. 58 (2), 304–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colwell, R. K. and Coddington, J. A. 1995. Estimating terrestrial biodiversity through extrapolation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society ofLondon. 345. 101–118.Google Scholar
DEFRA. 2002. Survey of Public Attitudes to Quality of Life and to the Environment – 2001. London:DEFRA.
Dony, J. G. and Denholm, I. 1985. Some quantitative methods of assessing the conservation value of ecologically similar sites. Journal of Applied Ecology. 22. 229–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franks, J. R. 1999. In situ conservation of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture: a UK perspective. Land Use Policy. 16 (2). 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, G. D. and Willis, N. D. 1994. Valuing biodiversity and nature conservation at a local level. Biodiversity and Conservation. 3. 555–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrod, G. D. and Willis, K. G. 1997. The non-use benefits of enhancing forest biodiversity: a contingent ranking study. Ecological Economics. 21. 45–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanley, N. and Craig, S. 1991. Wilderness development decisions and the Krutilla-Fisher model: the case of Scotland's ‘flow country’. Ecological Economics. 4. 145–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanley, N., Spash, S. and Walker, L. 1996. Problems in valuing the benefits of biodiversity conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics. 5. 249–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanley, N. and Shogren, J. 2002. Economics and nature conservation: awkward choices. In Daniel, W. Bromley and Paavola, Jouni (eds.). Economics, Ethics and Environmental Policy. Oxford: Blackwell. Contested Choices. 120–130.Google Scholar
Harper, J. L. and Hawksworth, D. L. 1995. Preface. In. Hawksworth, D. L. (ed.). Biodiversity: Measurement and Estimation. London: Chapman and Hall. 5–12.Google Scholar
Hawksworth, D. L. (ed.). 1995. Biodiversity: Measurement and Estimation. London: Chapman and Hall. 140.Google Scholar
Hensher, D. A., Rose, J. M. and Greene, W. H. 2005. Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurlbert, S. H. 1971. The nonconcept of species diversity: a critique and alternative parameters. Ecology. 52. 577–586.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Limburg, K. E., O'Neill, R. V., Costanza, R. and Farber, S. 2002. Complex systems and valuation. Ecological Economics. 41 (3). 409–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loomis, J. B. and White, D. S. 1996. Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis. Ecological Economics. 18. 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louviere, J. J., Hensher, D. A. and Swait, J. D. 2000. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovejoy, T. E. 1980a. Foreword. In Soulé, M. E. and Wilcox, B. A. (eds.). Conservation Biology: an Evolutionary-Ecological Perspective. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Assoc. v–ix.Google Scholar
Lovejoy, T. E. 1980b. Changes in biological diversity. In: Barney, G. O.. (ed.). The Global 2000 Report to the President, Vol. 2 (The Technical Report). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. 327–332.
Lovejoy, T. E. 1995. The quantification of biodiversity: an esoteric quest or a vital component of sustainable development? In Hawksworth, D. L. (ed.). Biodiversity: Measurement and Estimation.London: Chapman and Hall. 81–87.Google Scholar
MacMillan, D.C, Hanley, N. and Buckland, S. 1996. Contingent valuation of uncertain environmental gains. Scottish Journal of Political Economy. 43 (5). 519–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacMillan, D. C. and Duff, E. I. 1998. The non-market benefits and costs of native woodland restoration. Forestry. 71 (3). 247–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacMillan, D. C., Duff, E. I. and Elston, D. 2001. Modelling non-market environmental costs and benefits of biodiversity projects using contingent valuation data. Environmental and Resource Economics. 18 (4). 391–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacMillan, D., Philip, L., Hanley, N. and Alvarez-Farizo, B. 2003. Valuing non-market benefits of wild goose conservation: a comparison of interview and group-based approaches. Ecological Economics. 43. 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magurran, A. E. 1988. Ecological Diversity and its Measurement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
May, R. M. 1995. Conceptual aspects of the quantification of the extent of biological diversity. In Hawksworth, D. L.. (ed.). Biodiversity: Measurement and Estimation. London: Chapman and Hall. 13–20.Google Scholar
McIntyre, S. 1992. Risks associated with the setting of conservation priorities from rare plant species lists. Biological Conservation. 60. 31–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, M. G. and Perring, F. H. 1974. The British Oak: Its History and Natural History. Faringdon: E. W. Classey.Google Scholar
Norse, E. A. and McManus, R. E. 1980. Ecology and living resources biological diversity. In: Environmental Quality 1980: The 11th Annual Report of the Council on Environmental Quality. Council on Environmental Quality. Washington, DC. 31–80.
Norse, E. A., Rosenbaum, K. L., Wilcove, D. S., Wilcox, D. A., Romme, W. H., Johnston, D. W. and Stout, M. L. 1986. Conserving Biological Diversity in our National Forests.Washington, DC: The Wilderness Soc.Google Scholar
Noss, R. F. 1990. Can we maintain biological and ecological integrity. Conservation Biology. 4. 241–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunes, P. A. L. D. and Bergh, J. C. J. M. 2001. Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense?Ecological Economics. 39. 203–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OECD. 2001. Valuation of Biodiversity Benefits: Selected studies. Paris: OECD.
Pearce, D. 2001. Valuing biological diversity: issues and overview. In OECD. Valuation of Biodiversity Benefits: Selected Studies. Paris: OECD.Google Scholar
Peet, R. K. 1974. The measurement of species diversity. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics. 5. 285–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potter, C. 1988. Environmentally sensitive areas in England and Wales: an experiment in countryside management. Land Use Policy. 5. 301–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pouta, E., Rekola, M., Kuuluvainen, J., Tahvonen, O. and , Li C-Z. 2000. Contingent valuation of the Natura 2000 programme in Finland. Forestry. 73 (2). 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rekola, M. 2003. Lexicographic preferences in contingent valuation: A theoretical framework with illustrations. Land Economics. 79 (2). 277–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, G. M. 1994. The greening of agricultural policy: Scotland's environmentally sensitive areas (ESAs). Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 37. 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodwell, J. S. 1991–1995. British Plant Communities: Volumes 1–4.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Roy, K. and Foote, M. 1997. Morphological approaches to measuring biodiversity. Trends in Ecology and Evolation. 12. 277–281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simpson, I. A., Hanley, N., Parsisson, D. and Bullock, C. H. 1996. Indicative prediction of botanical diversity change in Environmentally Sensitive Areas. In: Simpson, I. A. and Dennis, P.. (eds.). The Spatial Dynamics of Biodiversity: Proceedings 5th Annual IALE Conference. International Association for Landscape Ecology. Stirling. 71–78.
Spash, C. L. and Hanley, N. 1995. Preferences, information and biodiversity preservation. Ecological Economics. 12. 191–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kate, ten and Laird, 1999. The Commercial Use of Biodiversity: Access to Genetic resources and Benefit-Sharing. London: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
White, P. C. L., Gregory, K. W., Lindley, P. J. and Richards, G. 1997. Economic values of threatened mammals in Britain: A case study of the otter Lutra lutra and the water vole Arvicola terrestris. Biological Conservation. 82 (3). 345–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, P. C. L., Bennett, A. C. and Hayes, E. J. V. 2001. The use of willingness-to-pay approaches in mammal conservation. Mammal Review. 31. 2, 151–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whittaker, R. H. 1977. Evolution of species diversity in land communities. Evolutionary Biology. 10. 1–67.Google Scholar
Willis, K., Garrod, G., Scarpa, R., Powe, N., Lovett, A., Bateman, I., Hanley, N. and MacMillan, D. 2003. The Social and Environmental Benefits of Forests in Great Britain. Edinburgh: Forestry Commission.Google Scholar
Wilson, E. O. 1988. Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Acad. Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×