IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v154y2023ics1389934123001181.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is it more important to increase carbon sequestration, biodiversity, or jobs? A case study of citizens' preferences for forest policy in Finland

Author

Listed:
  • Mäntymaa, Erkki
  • Artell, Janne
  • Forsman, Jukka T.
  • Juutinen, Artti

Abstract

Forest management plays an important role in mitigating the most serious threats to the well-being of current and future generations: climate change and biodiversity loss. We examine citizens' preferences for alternative forest management policy goals, including the provision of carbon sinks, biodiversity, and forest sector jobs, using a discrete choice experiment in Finland. We explore preference heterogeneity using latent class multinomial logit models finding the highest willingness to pay for biodiversity-oriented forest policy. Comparing three forest policy scenarios, focusing on “Biodiversity,” “Climate,” or “Bioeconomy,” citizens preferred the overall environmental goals over economic ones. We observe considerable heterogeneity in respondents' preferences identifying five latent preference classes. The results provide valuable background information on citizens' values and preferences on tradeoffs built into future revisions of forest policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Mäntymaa, Erkki & Artell, Janne & Forsman, Jukka T. & Juutinen, Artti, 2023. "Is it more important to increase carbon sequestration, biodiversity, or jobs? A case study of citizens' preferences for forest policy in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:154:y:2023:i:c:s1389934123001181
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934123001181
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2023.103023?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Triviño, María & Juutinen, Artti & Mazziotta, Adriano & Miettinen, Kaisa & Podkopaev, Dmitry & Reunanen, Pasi & Mönkkönen, Mikko, 2015. "Managing a boreal forest landscape for providing timber, storing and sequestering carbon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 179-189.
    2. Eyvindson, Kyle & Duflot, Rémi & Triviño, María & Blattert, Clemens & Potterf, Mária & Mönkkönen, Mikko, 2021. "High boreal forest multifunctionality requires continuous cover forestry as a dominant management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    3. Simon Thorn & Anne Chao & Kostadin B. Georgiev & Jörg Müller & Claus Bässler & John L. Campbell & Jorge Castro & Yan-Han Chen & Chang-Yong Choi & Tyler P. Cobb & Daniel C. Donato & Ewa Durska & Ellen , 2020. "Estimating retention benchmarks for salvage logging to protect biodiversity," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-8, December.
    4. Erkki Mäntymaa & Ville Ovaskainen & Artti Juutinen & Liisa Tyrväinen, 2018. "Integrating nature-based tourism and forestry in private lands under heterogeneous visitor preferences for forest attributes," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(4), pages 724-746, March.
    5. Barreiro-Hurle, Jesus & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Martinez-Paz, Jose Miguel & Perni, Angel, 2018. "Choosing not to choose: A meta-analysis of status quo effects in environmental valuations using choice experiments," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 18(01), June.
    6. Himmler, Sebastian & Soekhai, Vikas & van Exel, Job & Brouwer, Werner, 2021. "What works better for preference elicitation among older people? Cognitive burden of discrete choice experiment and case 2 best-worst scaling in an online setting," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    7. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, September.
    8. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    9. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Boyle, Kevin J. & Leiserowitz, Anthony A., 2013. "Willingness-to-pay and policy-instrument choice for climate-change policy in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 617-625.
    10. Kataria, Mitesh, 2009. "Willingness to pay for environmental improvements in hydropower regulated rivers," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 69-76, January.
    11. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    12. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    13. David A. Hensher, 2006. "How do respondents process stated choice experiments? Attribute consideration under varying information load," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 861-878.
    14. Vincent Devictor & Chris van Swaay & Tom Brereton & Lluís Brotons & Dan Chamberlain & Janne Heliölä & Sergi Herrando & Romain Julliard & Mikko Kuussaari & Åke Lindström & Jiří Reif & David B. Roy & Ol, 2012. "Differences in the climatic debts of birds and butterflies at a continental scale," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(2), pages 121-124, February.
    15. Augustynczik, Andrey Lessa Derci & Gutsch, Martin & Basile, Marco & Suckow, Felicitas & Lasch, Petra & Yousefpour, Rasoul & Hanewinkel, Marc, 2020. "Socially optimal forest management and biodiversity conservation in temperate forests under climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    16. Immerzeel, Bart & Vermaat, Jan E. & Juutinen, Artti & Pouta, Eija & Artell, Janne, 2022. "Appreciation of Nordic landscapes and how the bioeconomy might change that: Results from a discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    17. Assmuth, Aino & Tahvonen, Olli, 2018. "Optimal carbon storage in even- and uneven-aged forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 93-100.
    18. Kallio, A.M.I. & Salminen, O. & Sievänen, R., 2013. "Sequester or substitute—Consequences of increased production of wood based energy on the carbon balance in Finland," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 402-415.
    19. Tyrväinen, Liisa & Mäntymaa, Erkki & Ovaskainen, Ville, 2014. "Demand for enhanced forest amenities in private lands: The case of the Ruka-Kuusamo tourism area, Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 4-13.
    20. Tadesse, Tewodros & Teklay, Gebreegziabher & Mulatu, Dawit W. & Rannestad, Meley Mekonen & Meresa, Tigabu Molla & Woldelibanos, Dawit, 2022. "Forest benefits and willingness to pay for sustainable forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    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. Yang, Yi & Zhu, Yu & Zhao, Yiwen, 2024. "Improving farmers’ livelihoods through the eco-compensation of forest carbon sinks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    2. Ruokamo, Enni & Juutinen, Artti & Ashraf, Faisal Bin & Haghighi, Ali Torabi & Hellsten, Seppo & Huuki, Hannu & Karhinen, Santtu & Kopsakangas-Savolainen, Maria & Marttila, Hannu & Pongracz, Eva & Roma, 2024. "Estimating the economic value of hydropeaking externalities in regulated rivers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 353(PA).
    3. Rocchi, L. & Campioni, R. & Brunori, A. & Mariano, E., 2023. "Environmental certification of woody charcoal: A choice experiments application," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    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. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, 2020. "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(1), March.
    2. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    3. Sardaro, Ruggiero & Faccilongo, Nicola & Roselli, Luigi, 2019. "Wind farms, farmland occupation and compensation: Evidences from landowners’ preferences through a stated choice survey in Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    4. Ruggiero Sardaro & Nicola Faccilongo & Francesco Contò & Piermichele La Sala, 2021. "Adaption Actions to Cope with Climate Change: Evidence from Farmers’ Preferences on an Agrobiodiversity Conservation Programme in the Mediterranean Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-17, May.
    5. Misal, Haleema & Varela, Elsa & Voulgarakis, Apostolos & Rovithakis, Anastasios & Grillakis, Manolis & Kountouris, Yiannis, 2023. "Assessing public preferences for a wildfire mitigation policy in Crete, Greece," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    6. Richard Yao & Riccardo Scarpa & John Rose & James Turner, 2015. "Experimental Design Criteria and Their Behavioural Efficiency: An Evaluation in the Field," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(3), pages 433-455, November.
    7. Sacher, Philipp & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Mayer, Marius, 2022. "Evidence of the association between deadwood and forest recreational site choices," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    8. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    9. Dhakal, Bhubaneswor & Yao, Richard T. & Turner, James A. & Barnard, Tim, 2012. "Recreational users' willingness to pay and preferences for changes in planted forest features," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 34-44.
    10. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    11. Mäntymaa, Erkki & Juutinen, Artti & Tyrväinen, Liisa & Karhu, Jouni & Kurttila, Mikko, 2018. "Participation and compensation claims in voluntary forest landscape conservation: The case of the Ruka-Kuusamo tourism area, Finland," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 14-24.
    12. Fraser, Iain & Balcombe, Kelvin & Williams, Louis & McSorley, Eugene, 2021. "Preference stability in discrete choice experiments. Some evidence using eye-tracking," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    13. Olsthoorn, Mark & Schleich, Joachim & Guetlein, Marie-Charlotte & Durand, Antoine & Faure, Corinne, 2023. "Beyond energy efficiency: Do consumers care about life-cycle properties of household appliances?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    14. Stefania Troiano & Matteo Carzedda & Francesco Marangon, 2023. "Better richer than environmentally friendly? Describing preferences toward and factors affecting precision agriculture adoption in Italy," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    15. Wendong Zhang & Brent Sohngen, 2018. "Do U.S. Anglers Care about Harmful Algal Blooms? A Discrete Choice Experiment of Lake Erie Recreational Anglers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 868-888.
    16. Ching‐Hua Yeh & Stefan Hirsch, 2023. "A meta‐regression analysis on the willingness‐to‐pay for country‐of‐origin labelling," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 719-743, September.
    17. Kolo, Horst & Kindu, Mengistie & Knoke, Thomas, 2020. "Optimizing forest management for timber production, carbon sequestration and groundwater recharge," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    18. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Le, Hoa Thu & Nguyen, Hang Dieu & Le, Thanh Ha & Nguyen, Hong Quang, 2021. "Estimating economic benefits associated with air quality improvements in Hanoi City: An application of a choice experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 420-433.
    19. Chiadmi, Ines & Traoré, Sidnoma Abdoul Aziz & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2020. "Asian tiger mosquito far from home: Assessing the impact of invasive mosquitoes on the French Mediterranean littoral," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    20. Talevi, Marta & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Das, Ipsita & Lewis, Jessica J. & Singha, Ashok K., 2022. "Speaking from experience: Preferences for cooking with biogas in rural India," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).

    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:eee:forpol:v:154:y:2023:i:c:s1389934123001181. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.