IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cpp/issued/v23y1997i1p69-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Opportunity Costs of Spotted Owl Management Options for British Columbia

Author

Listed:
  • Roger T. Reid
  • Michael S. Stone

Abstract

It is estimated that there are fewer than 100 pairs of northern spotted owls in Canada all located in the southwestern mainland of British Columbia. In 1986, the spotted owl was designated as an endangered species. A recovery plan was developed setting out six management options to stabilize spotted owl populations and eventually lead to an improvement in the status of the species. The purpose of the present paper is to report estimates of the opportunity costs of the options for recovering the owl populations. The primary opportunity costs of the recovery options would be the foregone timber harvests in the area inhabited by spotted owls. Aggregate and annual household opportunity cost estimates are reported. The paper also describes some of the benefits that can arise from the protection of endangered species and discusses some problems in measuring these values.

Suggested Citation

  • Roger T. Reid & Michael S. Stone, 1997. "Opportunity Costs of Spotted Owl Management Options for British Columbia," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 23(1), pages 69-82, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:23:y:1997:i:1:p:69-82
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0317-0861%28199703%2923%3A1%3C69%3AOCOSOM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3
    Download Restriction: only available to JSTOR subscribers
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Montgomery Claire A. & Brown Jr. , Gardner M. & Adams Darius M., 1994. "The Marginal Cost of Species Preservation: The Northern Spotted Owl," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 111-128, March.
    2. George B. Frisvold & Peter Condon, 1994. "Biodiversity Conservation And Biotechnology Development Agreements," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 12(3), pages 1-9, July.
    3. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    4. Claire Montgomery & Gardner M. Brown, 1992. "Economics Of Species Preservation: The Spotted Owl Case," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 10(2), pages 1-12, April.
    5. Kenneth J. Arrow & Anthony C. Fisher, 1974. "Environmental Preservation, Uncertainty, and Irreversibility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 88(2), pages 312-319.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anthony Scott, 2001. "Economists, Environmental Policies and Federalism," The State of Economics in Canada: Festschrift in Honour of David Slater, in: Patrick Grady & Andrew Sharpe (ed.),The State of Economics in Canada: Festschrift in Honour of David Slater, pages 405-449, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.
    2. Wilson, Jeffrey J. & Lantz, Van A. & MacLean, David A., 2010. "A benefit-cost analysis of establishing protected natural areas in New Brunswick, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 94-103, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Catherine Chambers & Paul Chambers & John Whitehead, 1997. "Historical resources, uncertainty and preservation values: An application of option and optimal stopping models," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 21(2), pages 51-61, June.
    2. Kohn, Robert E., 1999. "Thresholds and complementarities in an economic model of preserving and conserving biodiversity," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 151-172, June.
    3. Robert Innes & George Frisvold, 2009. "The Economics of Endangered Species," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 485-512, September.
    4. Helfand, Gloria E. & Berck, Peter & Maull, Tim, 2003. "The theory of pollution policy," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 6, pages 249-303, Elsevier.
    5. Anne van Aaken & Janis Antonovics & Susan Rose-Ackerman, 2016. "The Limits of Cost/Benefit Analysis When Disasters Loom," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 7, pages 56-66, May.
    6. Ojea, Elena & Loureiro, Maria L., 2011. "Identifying the scope effect on a meta-analysis of biodiversity valuation studies," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 706-724, September.
    7. Stuart Harris, 1996. "Economics of the Environment: A Survey," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 72(217), pages 154-171, June.
    8. Lewandrowski, J. & Darwin, R. F. & Tsigas, M. & Raneses, A., 1999. "Estimating costs of protecting global ecosystem diversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 111-125, April.
    9. Vredin Johansson, Maria & Heldt, Tobias & Johansson, Per, 2006. "The effects of attitudes and personality traits on mode choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 507-525, July.
    10. Richard S. J. Tol & In Chang Hwang & Frédéric Reynès, 2012. "The Effect of Learning on Climate Policy under Fat-tailed Uncertainty," Working Paper Series 5312, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    11. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    12. Luttmer, Erzo F. P. & Zeckhauser, Richard & Kousky, Carolyn, 2006. "Permits to Elicit Information," Working Paper Series rwp06-049, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    13. Laure Cabantous & Olivier Chanel & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2009. "Transport, Health and Climate Change: Deciding on the Optimal Policy," Economie Internationale, CEPII research center, issue 120, pages 11-36.
    14. Narain, Urvashi & Hanemann, W. Michael & Fisher, Anthony C., 2004. "The Temporal Resolution of Uncertainty and the Irreversibility Effect," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt7nn328qg, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    15. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann, & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert C. Mitchell & Stanley Presser & Paul A. Rudd & V. Kerry Smith & Michael Conaway & Kerry Martin, 1997. "Temporal Reliability of Estimates from Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 151-163.
    16. Nick Hanley & Douglas MacMillan & Robert E. Wright & Craig Bullock & Ian Simpson & Dave Parsisson & Bob Crabtree, 1998. "Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(1), pages 1-15, March.
    17. Dow, W.H., 1995. "Welfare Impacts of Health Case User Fees : A Health- Valuation Approach to Analysis with Imperfect Markets," Papers 95-21, RAND - Labor and Population Program.
    18. Jackie Krafft & Isabelle Nicolaï, 1995. "Commitment Procedures In R&D Investments : An Examination Of Different Varieties," Post-Print hal-01799270, HAL.
    19. John A. List, 2001. "Do Explicit Warnings Eliminate the Hypothetical Bias in Elicitation Procedures? Evidence from Field Auctions for Sportscards," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1498-1507, December.
    20. Daniel W. Sacks & Betsey Stevenson & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Subjective well-being, income, economic development and growth," Working Paper Series 2010-28, Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpp:issued:v:23:y:1997:i:1:p:69-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Iver Chong (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.utpjournals.press/loi/cpp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.