Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:25:17.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Demand-side Value for Ecosystem Services and Implications for Innovative Markets: Experimental Perspectives on the Possibility of Private Markets for Public Goods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 September 2016

Stephen K. Swallow
Stephen K. Swallow*
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Center for Environmental Sciences and Engineering at the University of Connecticut
*
Correspondence: Stephen K. Swallow ▪ Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics ▪ University of Connecticut ▪ 1376 Storrs Road, Young Building, Unit 4021 ▪ Storrs, CT 06269 ▪ Phone 860.486.1917 ▪ Email [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Environmental economists invest in measuring the value of the environment but put less effort toward integrating that value directly into the economy. Experimental economists evaluate the performance of mechanisms to fund public goods but in some cases offer limited insight into practical implications for developing markets. This discussion presents initial insights into applying mechanisms for private provision of public goods based on demand-side values rather than regulatory-based market incentives such as cap-and-trade policies. Consideration of mechanisms to generate revenue inspires field tests that could direct experiments using threshold public goods and Lindahl's framework toward applications that transform value into revenue.

Keywords

aesthetic valueauctioncultural ecosystem servicesLindahl pricingnonmarket valuationprovision pointrebatewildlife habitat
Type
Invited Papers
Information
Agricultural and Resource Economics Review , Volume 42 , Issue 1 , April 2013 , pp. 33 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © 2013 Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association 

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.)

References

Andreoni, J. 1988. “Why Free Ride? Strategies and Learning in Public Goods Experiments.” Journal of Public Economics 37(3): 291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J. 1995. “Cooperation in Public-Goods Experiments: Kindness or Confusion?” American Economic Review 85(4): 891–904.Google Scholar
Arnold, M., Duke, J., and Messer, K.D. Forthcoming. “Adverse Selection in Reverse Auctions for Environmental Services.” Land Economics.Google Scholar
Bollinger, E.K., Bollinger, P.B., and Gavin, T.A. 1990. “Effects of Hay-Cropping on Eastern Populations of the Bobolink.” Wildlife Society Bulletin 18(2): 142–150.Google Scholar
Brosig, J., Weimann, J., and Ockenfels, A. 2003. “The Effect of Communication Media on Cooperation.” German Economic Review 4(2): 217–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarke, E.H. 1971. “Multipart Pricing of Public Goods.” Public Choice 11(2): 17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, S.L., Carpenter, S.R., Swinton, S.M., Orenstein, D.E., Childers, D.L., Gragson, T.L., Grimm, N.B., Grove, J.M., Harlan, S.L., Kaye, J.P., Knapp, A.K., Kofinas, G.P., Magnuson, J.J., McDowell, W.H., Melack, J.M., Ogden, L.A., Robertson, G.P., Smith, M.D., and Whitmer, A.C. 2011. “An Integrated Conceptual Framework for Long-term Social-Ecological Research.” Frontiers of Ecology and the Environment 9(6): 351–357 (DOI:10.1890/100068).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cummings, R.G., Holt, C.A., and Laury, S.K. 2004. “Using Laboratory Experiments for Policymaking: An Example from the Georgia Irrigation Reduction Auction.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 23(2): 341–363.Google Scholar
Groves, T. 1973. “Incentives in Teams.” Econometrica 41(4): 617–631.Google Scholar
Groves, T., and Ledyard, J. 1977. “Optimal Allocation of Public Goods: A Solution to the ‘Free Rider’ Problem.” Econometrica 45(4): 783–809.Google Scholar
Hart, D., and Bell, K. 2013. “Sustainability Science: A Call to Collaborative Action.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 42(1): 75–89.Google Scholar
Hicks, J.R. 1943. “The Four Consumer's Surpluses.” Review of Economic Studies 11(1): 31–41.Google Scholar
Hill, M.R.J., McMaster, D.G., Harrison, T., Hershmiller, A., and Plews, T. 2011. “A Reverse Auction for Wetland Restoration in the Assiniboine River Watershed, Saskatchewan.” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics 59(2): 245–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isaac, M.R., McCue, K.F., and Plott, C.R. 1985. “Public Goods Provision in an Experimental Environment.” Journal of Public Economics 26(1): 51–74.Google Scholar
Isaac, M., Schmidtz, D., and Walker, J. 1989. “The Assurance Problem in a Laboratory Market.” Public Choice 62(3): 217–236.Google Scholar
Isaac, R.M., and Walker, J.M. 1988. “Communication and Free-Riding Behavior: The Voluntary Contribution Mechanism.” Economic Inquiry 26(4): 585–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, R.J., and Russell, M. 2011. “An Operational Structure for Clarity in Ecosystem Service Values.” Ecological Economics 70(12): 2243–2249.Google Scholar
Johnston, R.J., Schultz, E.T., Segerson, K., Besedin, E.Y., and Ramachandran, M. 2013. “Stated Preferences for Intermediate versus Final Ecosystem Services: Disentangling Willingness to Pay for Omitted Outcomes.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 42(1): 98–118.Google Scholar
Kawagoe, T., and Mori, T. 2001. “Can the Pivotal Mechanism Induce Truth-Telling? An Experimental Study.” Public Choice 108(3/4): 331–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kafle, A., Swallow, S., and Smith, E. 2011. “Effects of Public Funding on Local Tradeoffs and Willingness to Pay in a Choice Experiment: Blackstone River Watershed Management.” Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy Working Paper Series 6, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Kirwan, B., Lubowski, R.N., and Roberts, M.J. 2005. “How Cost-Effective Are Land Retirement Auctions? Estimating the Difference between Payments and Willingness to Accept in the Conservation Reserve Program.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(5): 1239–1247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotani, K., Messer, K.D., and Schulze, W.D. 2010. “Matching Grants and Charitable Giving: Why Some People Sometimes Provide a Helping Hand to Fund Environmental Goods.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 39(2): 324–343.Google Scholar
Krutilla, J.V. 1981. “Reflections of an Applied Welfare Economist: Presidential Address.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 8(1): 1–10.Google Scholar
Latacz-Lohmann, U., and Van der Hamsvoort, C. 1997. “Auctioning Conservation Contracts: A Theoretical Analysis and Application.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79(2): 407–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D.J., Plantinga, A.J., Nelson, E., and Polasky, S. 2011. “The Efficiency of Voluntary Incentive Policies for Preventing Biodiversity Loss.” Resource and Energy Economics 33(1): 192–211 (DOI:10.1016/j.reseneeco.2010.04.012).Google Scholar
Lewis, D.J., Plantinga, A.J., and Wu, J. 2009. “Targeting Incentives to Reduce Habitat Fragmentation.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 91(4): 1080–1096 (DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8276.2009.01310.x).Google Scholar
Li, Z., Anderson, C.M., and Swallow, S.K. 2012. “Uniform Price Mechanisms for the Provision of Threshold Public Goods: An Experimental Investigation.” Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy Working Paper Series 14, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Lindahl, E. 1919 (1958). Die Gerechtigkeit der Besteuring. Lund: Gleerup. [English translation: Just Taxation—A Positive Solution.] In Musgrave, R.A. and Peacock, A.T., eds., Classics in the Theory of Public Finance. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
Liu, P., Swallow, S., and Anderson, C. 2011. “Assessing a Provision Game for Two Units of a Public Good with Different Group Arrangements, Marginal Benefits, and Rebate Rules: Experimental Evidence.” Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy Working Paper Series 5, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Marks, M., and Croson, R. 1998. “Alternative Rebate Rules in the Provision of a Threshold Public Good: An Experimental Investigation.” Journal of Public Economics 67(2): 195–220.Google Scholar
Marwell, G., and Ames, R.E. 1979. “Experiments on the Provision of Public Goods: I. Resources, Interest, Group Size, and the Free-Rider Problem.” American Journal of Sociology 84(6): 1335–1360.Google Scholar
Marwell, G., and Ames, R.E. 1981. “Economists Free Ride, Does Anyone Else? Experiments on the Provision of Public Goods, IV.” Journal of Public Economics 15(3): 295–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messer, K.D., Kaiser, H.M., and Poe, G.L. 2007. “Voluntary Funding for Generic Advertising Using a Provision Point Mechanism: An Experimental Analysis of Option Assurance.” Review of Agricultural Economics 29(3): 612–631.Google Scholar
Messer, K.D., Kaiser, H.M., and Schulze, W.D. 2008. “The Problem of Free Riding in Voluntary Generic Advertising: Parallelism and Possible Solutions from the Lab.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90(2): 540–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messer, K.D., Schmit, T.M., and Kaiser, H.M. 2005. “Optimal Institution Designs for Generic Advertising: An Experimental Analysis.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(4): 1046–1060.Google Scholar
Messer, K.D., Suter, J., and Yan, J. Forthcoming. “Context Effects in a Negatively Framed Social Dilemma Experiment.” Environmental and Resource Economics.Google Scholar
Messer, K.D., Zarghamee, H., Kaiser, H.M., and Schulze, W.D. 2007. “New Hope for the Voluntary Contribution Mechanism: The Effects of Context.” Journal of Public Economics 91(9): 1783–1799.Google Scholar
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
Newell, L.W. 2002. “Analyzing Public Preferences and Valuations for Forested Wetlands in RI: Comparisons of Real-Money and Hypothetical Survey Presentations.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, University of Rhode Island.Google Scholar
Newell, L.W., and Swallow, S.K. 2002. “Are Stated Preferences Invariant to the Prospect of Real Money Choice? Presentation to the Annual Meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association, July 28-31, Long Beach, CA. Available at http://purl.umn.edu/19623.Google Scholar
Newell, L.W., and Swallow, S.K. Forthcoming. “Real-Payment Choice Experiments: Valuing Forested Wetlands and Spatial Attributes within a Landscape Context.” Ecological Economics. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.008.Google Scholar
Nicholson, W. 2005. Microeconomic Theory: Basic Principles and Extensions (9th ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing. Google Scholar
Palfrey, T.R., and Prisbrey, J.E. 1996. “Altruism, Reputation, and Noise in Linear Public Goods Experiments.” Journal of Public Economics 61(3): 409–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perlut, N.G., Strong, A.M., Donovan, T.M., and Buckley, N.J. 2006. “Grassland Songbirds in a Dynamic Management Landscape: Behavioral Responses and Management Strategies.” Ecological Applications 16: 2235–2247.Google Scholar
Poe, G.L., Clark, J.E., Rondeau, D., and Schulze, W.D. 2002. “Provision Point Mechanisms and Field Validity Tests of Contingent Valuation.” Environmental and Resource Economics 23(1): 105–131.Google Scholar
Portney, P. 2004. “The Obligations of a Policy Economist.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 33(2): 159–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rondeau, D., Poe, G.L., and Schulze, W.D. 2005. “VCM or PPM? A Comparison of Two Voluntary Public Goods Mechanisms.” Journal of Public Economics 89(8): 1581–1592.Google Scholar
Rondeau, D., Schulze, W.D., and Poe, G.L. 1999. “Voluntary Revelation of the Demand for Public Goods Using a Provision Point Mechanism.” Journal of Public Economics 72(3): 455–470.Google Scholar
Rose, S.K., Clark, J., Poe, G.L., Rondeau, D., and Schulze, W.D. 2002. “The Private Provision of Public Goods: Tests of a Provision Point Mechanism for Funding Green Power Programs.” Resource and Energy Economics 24(1/2): 131–155.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P.A. 1954. “The Pure Theory of Public Expenditure.” Review of Economics and Statistics 36(4): 387–389.Google Scholar
Samuelson, P.A. 1955. “Diagramatic Exposition of a Theory of Public Expenditure.” Review of Economics and Statistics 37(4): 350–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedjo, R.A., and Swallow, S.K. 2002. “Voluntary Eco-labeling and the Price Premium.” Land Economics 7 8(2): 272–284.Google Scholar
Smith, E.C. 2012. “Incentive Mechanisms and the Provision of Public Goods: Testing Alternative Frameworks to Supply Ecosystem Services.” Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, University of Rhode Island.Google Scholar
Smith, E.C., and Swallow, S.K. Forthcoming. “Lindahl Pricing for Public Goods and Experimental Auctions for the Environment.” In Shogren, Jason, ed., Encyclopedia of Energy, Natural Resource, and Environmental Economics. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Spencer, M.A., Swallow, S.K., and Miller, C.J. 1998. “Valuing Water Quality Monitoring: A Contingent Valuation Experiment Involving Hypothetical and Real Payments.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 27(1): 28–42.Google Scholar
Spencer, M.A., Swallow, S.K., Shogren, J.F., and List, J.A. 2009. “Rebate Rules in Three Rules in Threshold Public Good Provision.” Journal of Public Economics 93(5/6): 798–806.Google Scholar
Swallow, S.K. 1996. “Economic Issues in Ecosystem Management: An Introduction and Overview.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 25(2): 83–100.Google Scholar
Swallow, S.K., Anderson, C.M., and Philo, L.D. 2003. “Convergence between Hypothetical and Real Willingness-to-Pay with Stated-Preferences for Land Conservation and Connectivity.” Presentation to the 2003 Annual Meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association, July 27-30, Montreal, Quebec.Google Scholar
Swallow, S.K., Anderson, C.M., and Uchida, E. 2012. “The Bobolink Project: Selling Public Goods from Ecosystem Services Using Provision Point Mechanisms.” Zwick Center for Food and Resource Policy Working Paper Series 16, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
Swallow, S.K., and Sedjo, R.A. 2000. “Eco-labeling Consequences in General Equilibrium: A Graphical Assessment.” Land Economics 76(1): 28–36.Google Scholar
Swallow, S.K., Smith, E.C., Uchida, E., and Anderson, C.M. 2008. “Ecosystem Services beyond Valuation, Regulation, and Philanthropy: Integrating Consumer Values into the Economy.” Choices 23(2): 47–52.Google Scholar
Taylor, L.O. 1998. “Incentive Compatible Referenda and the Valuation of Environmental Goods.” Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 27(2): 132–139.Google Scholar
Uchida, E., Anderson, C., and Swallow, S. 2007. “Marketing Ecosystem Services from Agricultural Land: Stated Preferences over Payment Mechanisms and Actual Sales of Farm-Wildlife Contracts.” Presentation to the Annual Meeting of the American Agricultural Economics Association, July 29-August 1, Portland Oregon. Available at http://purl.umn.edu/9955.Google Scholar