Spatial and Scope Effects: Valuations of Coastal Management Practices

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

We explore how values for environmental management in the Kimberley region of Australia respond to changes in spatial scale and attribute scope. A discrete choice experiment was conducted that included the impacts of management on marine no-take areas, Aboriginal rangers, recreational facilities, and coastal development. A split sample single-site design was used to estimate values for the Kimberley region as a whole, and for two separate smaller sub-regions, allowing us to test for spatial preference heterogeneity. Management outcomes for different regions were displayed on a map to show respondents explicitly where outcomes would occur. We show that willingness to pay results are similar between the two smaller sub-regions, and that willingness to pay for the attributes increased when management occurred at the larger geographical scale. However, respondents were somewhat insensitive to changes in the scope of the two cardinal attributes: area of no-take and number of rangers. We discuss the implications of this spatial and scope insensitivity for choice experiment research.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)833-851
Number of pages19
JournalJournal of Agricultural Economics
Volume69
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2018

Fingerprint

Practice Management
willingness to pay
environmental management
Research
Surveys and Questionnaires
Management practices
Coastal management
Valuation effects
testing
sampling
Willingness-to-pay

Cite this

@article{fbf362819db34969b760ce76821ae617,
title = "Spatial and Scope Effects: Valuations of Coastal Management Practices",
abstract = "We explore how values for environmental management in the Kimberley region of Australia respond to changes in spatial scale and attribute scope. A discrete choice experiment was conducted that included the impacts of management on marine no-take areas, Aboriginal rangers, recreational facilities, and coastal development. A split sample single-site design was used to estimate values for the Kimberley region as a whole, and for two separate smaller sub-regions, allowing us to test for spatial preference heterogeneity. Management outcomes for different regions were displayed on a map to show respondents explicitly where outcomes would occur. We show that willingness to pay results are similar between the two smaller sub-regions, and that willingness to pay for the attributes increased when management occurred at the larger geographical scale. However, respondents were somewhat insensitive to changes in the scope of the two cardinal attributes: area of no-take and number of rangers. We discuss the implications of this spatial and scope insensitivity for choice experiment research.",
keywords = "Attribute scope effects, coastal management, discrete choice experiments, Kimberly Australia, mixed logit models, spatial preference heterogeneity",
author = "Alaya Spencer-Cotton and Kragt, {Marit E.} and Michael Burton",
year = "2018",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/1477-9552.12301",
language = "English",
volume = "69",
pages = "833--851",
journal = "Journal of Agricultural Economics",
issn = "0021-857X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Spatial and Scope Effects

T2 - Valuations of Coastal Management Practices

AU - Spencer-Cotton, Alaya

AU - Kragt, Marit E.

AU - Burton, Michael

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - We explore how values for environmental management in the Kimberley region of Australia respond to changes in spatial scale and attribute scope. A discrete choice experiment was conducted that included the impacts of management on marine no-take areas, Aboriginal rangers, recreational facilities, and coastal development. A split sample single-site design was used to estimate values for the Kimberley region as a whole, and for two separate smaller sub-regions, allowing us to test for spatial preference heterogeneity. Management outcomes for different regions were displayed on a map to show respondents explicitly where outcomes would occur. We show that willingness to pay results are similar between the two smaller sub-regions, and that willingness to pay for the attributes increased when management occurred at the larger geographical scale. However, respondents were somewhat insensitive to changes in the scope of the two cardinal attributes: area of no-take and number of rangers. We discuss the implications of this spatial and scope insensitivity for choice experiment research.

AB - We explore how values for environmental management in the Kimberley region of Australia respond to changes in spatial scale and attribute scope. A discrete choice experiment was conducted that included the impacts of management on marine no-take areas, Aboriginal rangers, recreational facilities, and coastal development. A split sample single-site design was used to estimate values for the Kimberley region as a whole, and for two separate smaller sub-regions, allowing us to test for spatial preference heterogeneity. Management outcomes for different regions were displayed on a map to show respondents explicitly where outcomes would occur. We show that willingness to pay results are similar between the two smaller sub-regions, and that willingness to pay for the attributes increased when management occurred at the larger geographical scale. However, respondents were somewhat insensitive to changes in the scope of the two cardinal attributes: area of no-take and number of rangers. We discuss the implications of this spatial and scope insensitivity for choice experiment research.

KW - Attribute scope effects

KW - coastal management

KW - discrete choice experiments

KW - Kimberly Australia

KW - mixed logit models

KW - spatial preference heterogeneity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053617488&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/1477-9552.12301

DO - 10.1111/1477-9552.12301

M3 - Article

VL - 69

SP - 833

EP - 851

JO - Journal of Agricultural Economics

JF - Journal of Agricultural Economics

SN - 0021-857X

IS - 3

ER -