Table of Contents
ISRN Forestry
Volume 2013, Article ID 359584, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/359584
Research Article

Using the Contingent Grouping Method to Value Forest Attributes

1Department of Applied Economics, Autonomous University of Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Spain
2Department of Economics, Rovira i Virgili University, Avinguda Universitat 1, 43204 Reus, Spain
3Department of Economics, Pablo de Olavide University, Ctrretera de Utrera km 1, 41013 Sevilla, Spain

Received 29 November 2012; Accepted 4 February 2013

Academic Editors: P. Newton and M. Pensa

Copyright © 2013 Pere Riera et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. N. Hanley, S. Mourato, and R. E. Wright, “Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation?” Journal of Economic Surveys, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 435–462, 2001. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. J. J. Louviere, D. A. Hensher, and J. D. Swait, Stated Choice Method. Analysis and Application, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000.
  3. R. G. Chapman and R. Staelin, “Exploiting rank ordered choice set data within the stochastic utility model,” Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 288–301, 1982. View at Google Scholar
  4. R. Brey, O. Bergland, and P. Riera, “A contingent grouping approach for stated preferences,” Resource and Energy Economics, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 745–755, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. D. A. Hensher and W. H. Greene, “The mixed logit model: the state of practice,” Transportation, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 133–176, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. D. A. Hensher, J. M. Rose, and W. H. Greene, Applied Choice Analysis. A Primer, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2005.
  7. R. C. Mitchell and R. T. Carson, Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method, Resource for the Future, Washington, DC, USA, 1989.
  8. R. C. Bishop and T. A. Heberlein, “Measuring values of extramarket goods: are indirect measures biased?” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 926–930, 1979. View at Google Scholar
  9. W. M. Hanemann, “Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 332–341, 1984. View at Google Scholar
  10. R. A. Kramer and D. E. Mercer, “Valuing a global environmental good: U.S. residents willingness to pay to protect tropical rain forests,” Land Economics, vol. 73, no. 2, pp. 196–210, 1997. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. E. Lehtonen, J. Kuuluvainen, E. Pouta, M. Rekola, and C. Z. Li, “Non-market benefits of forest conservation in southern Finland,” Environmental Science and Policy, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 195–204, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. M. Lockwood, J. Loomis, and T. DeLacy, “A contingent valuation survey and benefit-cost analysis of forest preservation in East Gippsland, Australia,” Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 233–243, 1993. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. M. Lockwood, J. Loomis, and T. DeLacy, “The relative unimportance of a nonmarket willingness to pay for timber harvesting,” Ecological Economics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 145–152, 1994. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. J. B. Loomis and A. Gonzalez-Caban, “A willingness-to-pay function for protecting acres of spotted owl habitat from fire,” Ecological Economics, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 315–322, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. M. Rekola and E. Pouta, “Public preferences for uncertain regeneration cuttings: a contingent valuation experiment involving Finnish private forests,” Forest Policy and Economics, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 635–649, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. R. Scarpa, S. M. Chilton, W. G. Hutchinson, and J. Buongiorno, “Valuing the recreational benefits from the creation of nature reserves in Irish forests,” Ecological Economics, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 237–250, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. M. Ben-Akiva, T. Morikawa, and F. Shiroishi, “Analysis of the reliability of preference ranking data,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 149–164, 1991. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. V. Foster and S. Mourato, “Testing for consistency in contingent ranking experiments,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 309–328, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. J. A. Hausman and P. A. Ruud, “Specifying and testing econometric models for rank-ordered data,” Journal of Econometrics, vol. 34, no. 1-2, pp. 83–104, 1987. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. W. Adamowicz, J. Swait, P. Boxall, J. Louviere, and M. Williams, “Perceptions versus objective measures of environmental quality in combined revealed and stated preference models of environmental valuation,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 65–84, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. P. C. Boxall and B. MacNab, “Exploring the preferences of wildlife recreationists for features of boreal forest management: a choice experiment approach,” Canadian Journal of Forest Research, vol. 30, no. 12, pp. 1931–1941, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. P. Horne, P. C. Boxall, and W. L. Adamowicz, “Multiple-use management of forest recreation sites: a spatially explicit choice experiment,” Forest Ecology and Management, vol. 207, no. 1-2, pp. 189–199, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. J. Rolfe, J. Bennett, and J. Louviere, “Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation,” Ecological Economics, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 289–302, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. G. D. Garrod and K. G. Willis, “The non-use benefits of enhancing forest biodiversity: a contingent ranking study,” Ecological Economics, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 45–61, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. J. Siikamaki and D. Layton, “Pooled models for contingent valuation and contingent raking data: valuing benefits from biodiversity conservation,” Working Paper, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Davis, Calif, USA, 2001. View at Google Scholar
  26. P. Riera, M. Giergiczny, J. Peñuelas, and P. A. Mahieu, “A choice modelling case study on climate change involving two-way interactions,” Journal of Forest Economics, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 345–354, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  27. R. D. Luce and P. Suppes, “Preference, utility and subjective probabiblity,” in Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, R. D. Luce, R. R. Bush, and E. Galanter, Eds., J. Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1965. View at Google Scholar
  28. Departament d’Agricultura, RamaderIa I Pesca, DARP, Pla General de Política Forestal. Generalitat de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain, 1994.
  29. C. García, Estimació de les macromaginituds agràries de les comarques de Catalunya, 1993, Serveis de Publicacions, Universitat de Lleida, Lleida, Spain, 1997.
  30. M. Merlo and E. Rojas, “Policy instruments for promoting positive externalities of Mediterranean forests,” in Proceedings of the European Forest Institute, Annual Conference, Chartreuse Ittingen, Switzerland, 1999.
  31. Council Regulation (EC) No 2080/92 Community aid scheme for forestry measures in agriculture, 30 June 1992.
  32. Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 Support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations, 17 May 1999.
  33. K. Train, Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2003.
  34. W. H. Greene, NLogit Version 3. 0 Reference Guide, Econometric Software, Plainview, NY, USA, 2002.
  35. D. McFadden and K. Train, “Mixed MNL models for discrete response,” Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 447–470, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. M. Evans, N. Hastings, and B. Peacock, Statistical Distributions, John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY, USA, 3rd edition, 2000.
  37. I. Krinsky and A. L. Robb, “On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol. 68, no. 4, pp. 715–719, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  38. B. W. Silverman, Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis, Chapman and Hall, New York, NY, USA, 1986.
  39. Departament de Medi Ambient, Les emissions a l’atmosfera a Catalunya. Una aproximació quantitativa. Quaderns de Medi Ambient, 5. Generalitat de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain, 1996.