Estimating the willingness-to-pay for Natura 2000 sites

R.E. Wright

Research output: Book/ReportOther report

Abstract

The significant non-use values, in the order of 48 per year per Scottish household for protecting all 300 Natura 2000 sites is not that unreasonable when compared to other valuation studies. For example, Hanley et al (1996) derived Scottish household WTP values of 97 per year and 62 per year to maintain Machair ESA and Breadalbane ESAs respectively, much of which was non-use value. The visitor to Scotland non-use value of 6 per adult visit to Scotland to protect all 300 N2K sites is also likely to be a reasonable value. However, it is not possible to compare this to any other similar type of valuation study due to the lack of similar valuation contexts. The top down valuation approach adopted for non-use values (i.e. asking a value for all 300 sites and splitting that value down) helped overcome potential aggregation problems. For example, if respondents were asked their value to protect a selection of individual sites, there would potentially have been serious income constraints when multiplying the benefits to a national level.
LanguageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 2004

Fingerprint

willingness to pay
Scotland
households
income

Keywords

  • natura 2000
  • environmental economics
  • willingness to pay

Cite this

@book{53726c36c2a940dd838384deeb759b00,
title = "Estimating the willingness-to-pay for Natura 2000 sites",
abstract = "The significant non-use values, in the order of 48 per year per Scottish household for protecting all 300 Natura 2000 sites is not that unreasonable when compared to other valuation studies. For example, Hanley et al (1996) derived Scottish household WTP values of 97 per year and 62 per year to maintain Machair ESA and Breadalbane ESAs respectively, much of which was non-use value. The visitor to Scotland non-use value of 6 per adult visit to Scotland to protect all 300 N2K sites is also likely to be a reasonable value. However, it is not possible to compare this to any other similar type of valuation study due to the lack of similar valuation contexts. The top down valuation approach adopted for non-use values (i.e. asking a value for all 300 sites and splitting that value down) helped overcome potential aggregation problems. For example, if respondents were asked their value to protect a selection of individual sites, there would potentially have been serious income constraints when multiplying the benefits to a national level.",
keywords = "natura 2000, environmental economics, willingness to pay",
author = "R.E. Wright",
year = "2004",
language = "English",

}

Estimating the willingness-to-pay for Natura 2000 sites. / Wright, R.E.

2004.

Research output: Book/ReportOther report

TY - BOOK

T1 - Estimating the willingness-to-pay for Natura 2000 sites

AU - Wright, R.E.

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - The significant non-use values, in the order of 48 per year per Scottish household for protecting all 300 Natura 2000 sites is not that unreasonable when compared to other valuation studies. For example, Hanley et al (1996) derived Scottish household WTP values of 97 per year and 62 per year to maintain Machair ESA and Breadalbane ESAs respectively, much of which was non-use value. The visitor to Scotland non-use value of 6 per adult visit to Scotland to protect all 300 N2K sites is also likely to be a reasonable value. However, it is not possible to compare this to any other similar type of valuation study due to the lack of similar valuation contexts. The top down valuation approach adopted for non-use values (i.e. asking a value for all 300 sites and splitting that value down) helped overcome potential aggregation problems. For example, if respondents were asked their value to protect a selection of individual sites, there would potentially have been serious income constraints when multiplying the benefits to a national level.

AB - The significant non-use values, in the order of 48 per year per Scottish household for protecting all 300 Natura 2000 sites is not that unreasonable when compared to other valuation studies. For example, Hanley et al (1996) derived Scottish household WTP values of 97 per year and 62 per year to maintain Machair ESA and Breadalbane ESAs respectively, much of which was non-use value. The visitor to Scotland non-use value of 6 per adult visit to Scotland to protect all 300 N2K sites is also likely to be a reasonable value. However, it is not possible to compare this to any other similar type of valuation study due to the lack of similar valuation contexts. The top down valuation approach adopted for non-use values (i.e. asking a value for all 300 sites and splitting that value down) helped overcome potential aggregation problems. For example, if respondents were asked their value to protect a selection of individual sites, there would potentially have been serious income constraints when multiplying the benefits to a national level.

KW - natura 2000

KW - environmental economics

KW - willingness to pay

UR - http://cci.scot.nhs.uk/Publications/2004/06/19426/38121

M3 - Other report

BT - Estimating the willingness-to-pay for Natura 2000 sites

ER -