Economic valuation of biodiversity conservation:: the meaning of numbers

被引:119
|
作者
Martin-Lopez, Berta [1 ]
Montes, Carlos [1 ]
Benayas, Javier [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Autonoma Madrid, Dept Ecol, Social Ecol Syst Lab, E-28049 Madrid, Spain
关键词
attitudes toward animals; biodiversity conservation; conservation policy; economic valuation of biodiversity; meta-analysis; willingness to pay;
D O I
10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00921.x
中图分类号
X176 [生物多样性保护];
学科分类号
090705 ;
摘要
Recognition of the need to include economic criteria in the conservation policy decision-making process has encouraged the use of economic-valuation techniques. Nevertheless, whether it is possible to accurately assign economic values to biodiversity and if so what these values really represent is being debated. We reviewed 60 recent papers on economic valuation of biodiversity and carried out a meta-analysis of these studies to determine what factors affect willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation. We analyzed the internal variables of the contingent-valuation method (measure of benefits, vehicle of payment, elicitation format, or timing of payment) and anthropomorphic, anthropocentric and scientific factors. Funding allocation mostly favored the conservation of species with anthropomorphic and anthropocentric characteristics instead of considering scientific factors. We recommend researchers and policy makers contemplate economic valuations of biodiversity carefully, considering the inherent biases of the contingent-valuation method and the anthropomorphic and anthropocentric factors resulting from the public's attitude toward species. Because of the increasing trend of including economic considerations in conservation practices, we suggest that in the future interdisciplinary teams of ecologists, economists, and social scientists collaborate and conduct comparative analyses, such as we have done here. Use of the contingent-valuation method in biodiversity conservation policies can provide useful information about alternative conservation strategies if questionnaires are carefully constructed, respondents are sufficiently informed, and the underlying factors that influence willingness to pay are identified.
引用
收藏
页码:624 / 635
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Economic valuation for the conservation of marine biodiversity
    Beaumont, N. J.
    Austen, M. C.
    Mangi, S. C.
    Townsend, M.
    [J]. MARINE POLLUTION BULLETIN, 2008, 56 (03) : 386 - 396
  • [2] Economic Valuation of Biodiversity Conservation in the Makiling Forest Reserve, Philippines
    Camacho, Lenid
    Yeo-Chang, Youn
    Camacho, Sofronio C.
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIRST GLOBAL FORUM OF ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS IN FORESTRY, 2010, : 131 - 146
  • [3] Economic Valuation of the Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation in South Korea: Correcting for the Endogeneity Bias in Contingent Valuation
    Choi, Ik-Chang
    Kim, Hyun No
    Shin, Hio-Jung
    Tenhunen, John
    Trung Thanh Nguyen
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2017, 9 (06)
  • [4] THE LIMITS OF ECONOMIC VALUATION OF BIODIVERSITY
    Maris, Virginie
    Reveret, Jean-Pierre
    [J]. ATELIERS DE L ETHIQUE-THE ETHICS FORUM, 2009, 4 (01): : 52 - 66
  • [5] David Pearce and the economic valuation of biodiversity
    R. David Simpson
    [J]. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2007, 37 : 91 - 109
  • [6] The economic valuation of biodiversity as an abstract good
    Meinard, Yves
    Grill, Philippe
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2011, 70 (10) : 1707 - 1714
  • [7] Economic valuation of biodiversity: sense or nonsense?
    Nunes, PALD
    van den Bergh, JCJM
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2001, 39 (02) : 203 - 222
  • [8] David Pearce and the economic valuation of biodiversity
    Simpson, R. David
    [J]. ENVIRONMENTAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS, 2007, 37 (01): : 91 - 109
  • [9] Economic valuation of biodiversity: A comparative study
    Nijkamp, Peter
    Vindigni, Gabriella
    Nunes, Paulo A. L. D.
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2008, 67 (02) : 217 - 231
  • [10] Economic valuation of wildlife conservation
    Simone Martino
    Jasper O. Kenter
    [J]. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 2023, 69