1 / 24

Eva Kougea and Dr. Prof. Phoebe Koundouri 1

ATHENS UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS Department of International and European Economic Studies. Developing a choice experiment to value the benefits generated from water management and improved scientific information on climate change. Eva Kougea and Dr. Prof. Phoebe Koundouri 1

ratana
Download Presentation

Eva Kougea and Dr. Prof. Phoebe Koundouri 1

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ATHENS UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS Department of International and European Economic Studies Developing a choice experiment to value the benefits generated from water management and improved scientific information on climate change. Eva Kougea and Dr. Prof. Phoebe Koundouri1 1Director of Research unit on Economic, Social, Environmental/Ecological Sustainability (RESEES), Web Page:http://www.aueb.gr/users/resees 1st International Conference on Sustainable Watershed Management, September 2011, Istanbul, Turkey

  2. Water as an economic good • Water resources can be seen as a multi-attribute environmental commodity • Public Good features • Missing properties rights and externalities • Prices are not the correct signals • We need to retrieve Total Economic Value • Economic valuation techniques

  3. Anthropocentric Values Structure & Processes Environmental Functions  Human Benefits Use Non-Use Values Values Environment Total Economic Value Components

  4. Choice Experiment Method (CEM) CEM is a survey-based technique which can estimate the total economic value of an environmental stock/flow or service and the value of its attributes, as well as the value of more complex changes in several attributes. Lancaster Theory of Value Random Utility Theory E.g. Each respondent is presented with a series of alternatives of the environmental good with varying levels of its price and non-price attributes and asked to choose their most preferred option in each set of alternatives.

  5. Construction of the Questionnaire • Site Description • Good to be valued • Attributes to be valued • Scenarios • Choice Cards • Debriefing and Attitudinal Questions • Socio – Economic Characteristics

  6. Rokua Case Study Valuing Ecosystem Services under Scientific Uncertainty and Conflict of Socio-Economic Values Groundwater Dependent Ecosystem Main Economic Sectors at Work: Forestry, Peat-Harvesting, Tourism, Recreation, Environment PROBLEMS:Water quantity problems for aquifer, lakes & springs; disturbing water dynamics DANGER: loosing ecosystem goods and services, e.g. recreation Uncertainty is an issue! Lake Ahveroinen at Rokua esker.

  7. YES Considering Uncertainty Rokua is an environment with great uncertainty with respect to both: • possible future environmental gains after implementing a revised water management • future environmental damage, if no action is taken Is a way to reduce uncertainty? Scientific uncertainty is not inherited to the system like other elements of uncertainty A gain in scientific understanding can reduce the level of uncertainty VALUE OF SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION

  8. Good to be valued Revision of management practices that: will achieve the targets of the WFD and GD and sustain ecosystem functions that support goods & services. • Restrict peat land drainage in the groundwater area • Expansion of the conservation area and compensation when legally required • Restoration (technical solutions) of peat lands, groundwater and lakes level Proposed measures were determined during discussions with experts

  9. Management Attributes • Water Quantity Increased, Same as Now, Restricted • Recreation Increased, Same as Now, Low • Total Land Income Same as Now, Restricted • Investment on Research High, Medium, Low • Price (one-off payment) 10, 20, 50, 100 €

  10. Sample Choice Card

  11. Additional Questions • Debriefing • Questions to explain why respondents • were or were not WTP • Attitudes, opinions, knowledge and uses • Environmental Behavior • Socio-economics characteristics • Age, education, job and income

  12. Please tell us what you think about the following statements? Debriefing Questions

  13. Attitudinal Questions How often does your household do the following?

  14. Population Pilot Sample Main Sample Rokua’s local people and visitors 37 individuals 171 individuals Population and Sample The pre-testing survey was carried out during April 2011. Face to face interviewing process.

  15. PRE-TESTING PILOT SAMPLE

  16. Profile of respondents [1]Sum of the percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding up.

  17. Profile of respondents (cont)

  18. Analysis of Pilot Survey Data Choice experiment data were coded continuously according to the levels of the attributes [0 - Restricted, 1 - Same as Now, 2 - Increased] Pilot survey data were analyzed using a multinomial logit model including all the experimental design variables in linear form. The model is specified so that the probability of selecting a particular scenario is a function of attributes of that scenario.

  19. Results – Multinomial Logit * 5% significance level with two tailed test; **Insignificant

  20. Marginal Willingness to Pay Marginal price is the marginal benefit from a discrete one level change in an attribute (or WTP for a one level improvement) all else being constant. For the linear utility function: MWTPi=-βi/βcost MWTP is 79,86 (s.e. 19,49) euro/respondent for an improvement in water quantity MWTP is 61,17 (s.e. 19,24) euro/respondent for an increase in recreation

  21. Valuation Results in Policy Design Economic estimates give information regarding the best use of available resources i.e. the option that has the lowest opportunity cost or the lowest valued to be sacrificed. Contribute to public debate and awareness concerning specific (environmental) problems. Monetary value assessment allows the ranking of alternative policy options allowing the implementation of cost-benefit analysis or comparison of costs and benefits in another way for policy guidance.

  22. CONCLUSIONS Pre-testing suggested that respondents would have no difficulties with the environmental changes caused by the revision of water management. The questionnaire logic is correct and is ensured that information given to the respondents is comprehensive and easy to understand BUT this is an ongoing project and no conclusion regarding the results can be made Analysis of the main survey sample is expected to reveal informative results that will help to shape future land use and ecosystem protection policies.

  23. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS GENESIS:Groundwater and dependent ecosystems: New Scientific basis on climate change and land-use impact for the update of the EU Groundwater Directive; 7th Framework Program, European Union WP6: Groundwater systems management: scenarios, risk assessment, cost-efficient measures & legal aspects Special Thanks to: Project Coordinator: Prof. Bjørn Kløve, (UOULU);Norwegian Institute for Agricultural and Environmental Research (Bioforsk) WP-6 Coordinator: Prof.Manuel Velazquez, UPVLC – Universidad politecnica de Valencia (Spain) University of OULU for the implementation of the questionnaires: Pertti Ala-aho, Pekka Rossi, Riku Eskelein, Timo P. Karjalainen

  24. Thank you !

More Related