IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v15y2012icp108-113.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Avalanche protection by forests — A choice experiment in the Swiss Alps

Author

Listed:
  • Olschewski, Roland
  • Bebi, Peter
  • Teich, Michaela
  • Wissen Hayek, Ulrike
  • Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne

Abstract

Forests provide a variety of ecosystem goods and services to society, which often have the typical characteristics of a public good: non-excludability and non-rivalry. One of these services is avalanche protection of forests. A monetary valuation of this service would be helpful to provide efficient and effective protection to the local population. We present the results of a case study from the Swiss Alps, where we determined the willingness to pay for avalanche protection based on a choice experiment combined with virtual reality visualizations. Furthermore, we compare these results with the costs of alternative technical measures for natural hazard mitigation as well as with the results of a risk-based evaluation. We conclude that the willingness to pay for avalanche protection of forests is about the same range as the collective risk related to a 300-years avalanche event and within a range similar to the per-household costs of alternative measures. However, willingness to pay is substantially higher than the costs of silvicultural measures to maintain protection forest.

Suggested Citation

  • Olschewski, Roland & Bebi, Peter & Teich, Michaela & Wissen Hayek, Ulrike & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne, 2012. "Avalanche protection by forests — A choice experiment in the Swiss Alps," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 108-113.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:15:y:2012:i:c:p:108-113
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2011.10.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934111001791
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2011.10.002?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    2. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, September.
    3. Sven Fuchs & Magdalena Thöni & Maria McAlpin & Urs Gruber & Michael Bründl, 2007. "Avalanche Hazard Mitigation Strategies Assessed by Cost Effectiveness Analyses and Cost Benefit Analyses—evidence from Davos, Switzerland," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 41(1), pages 113-129, April.
    4. Anna Alberini & Stefania Tonin & Margherita Turvani & Aline Chiabai, 2007. "Paying for permanence: Public preferences for contaminated site cleanup," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 155-178, April.
    5. Adrienne Grêt-Regamey & Ian D Bishop & Peter Bebi, 2007. "Predicting the Scenic Beauty Value of Mapped Landscape Changes in a Mountainous Region through the Use of GIS," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(1), pages 50-67, February.
    6. Moore, Michael J & Viscusi, W Kip, 1990. "Models for Estimating Discount Rates for Long-term Health Risks Using Labor Market Data," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 381-401, December.
    7. Andrea Leiter & Gerald Pruckner, 2009. "Proportionality of Willingness to Pay to Small Changes in Risk: The Impact of Attitudinal Factors in Scope Tests," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(2), pages 169-186, February.
    8. Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey (ed.), 2001. "The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2028.
    9. Bateman, Ian J. & Day, Brett H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Jude, Simon, 2009. "Reducing gain-loss asymmetry: A virtual reality choice experiment valuing land use change," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 106-118, July.
    10. Pascal Haegeli & Wolfgang Haider & Margo Longland & Ben Beardmore, 2010. "Amateur decision-making in avalanche terrain with and without a decision aid: a stated choice survey," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 52(1), pages 185-209, January.
    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. Federica Isola & Sabrina Lai & Federica Leone & Corrado Zoppi, 2023. "Land Take and Landslide Hazard: Spatial Assessment and Policy Implications from a Study Concerning Sardinia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-23, January.
    2. Bösch, Matthias & Elsasser, Peter & Franz, Kristin & Lorenz, Martin & Moning, Christoph & Olschewski, Roland & Rödl, Anne & Schneider, Heike & Schröppel, Bettina & Weller, Priska, 2018. "Forest ecosystem services in rural areas of Germany: Insights from the national TEEB study," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 77-83.
    3. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. Dong-Hyeon Kim & Byeong-Il Ahn & Eui-Gyeong Kim, 2016. "Metropolitan Residents’ Preferences and Willingness to Pay for a Life Zone Forest for Mitigating Heat Island Effects during Summer Season in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-15, November.
    5. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    6. Balbi Stefano & Giupponi Carlo & Olschewski Roland & Mojtahed Vahid, 2015. "The Total Cost of Water-Related Disasters," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 66(2), pages 225-252, August.
    7. Giuseppe Attanasi & Barbara Buljat Raymond & Agnès Festré & Andrea Guido, 2023. "Augmented Reality Technology as a Tool for Promoting Pro-environmental Behavior and Attitudes," GREDEG Working Papers 2023-15, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    8. Adam Pártl & David Vačkář & Blanka Loučková & Eliška Krkoška Lorencová, 2017. "A spatial analysis of integrated risk: vulnerability of ecosystem services provisioning to different hazards in the Czech Republic," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 89(3), pages 1185-1204, December.
    9. Elsasser, Peter & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Weller, Priska, 2016. "An updated bibliography and database on forest ecosystem service valuation studies in Austria, Germany and Switzerland," Thünen Working Papers 65, Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute, Federal Research Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries.
    10. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    11. Notaro, Sandra & Paletto, Alessandro, 2012. "The economic valuation of natural hazards in mountain forests: An approach based on the replacement cost method," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 318-328.
    12. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Using virtual environments to improve the realism of choice experiments: A case study about coastal erosion management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 193-208.
    13. Getzner, Michael & Gutheil-Knopp-Kirchwald, Gerlinde & Kreimer, Elisabeth & Kirchmeir, Hanns & Huber, Michael, 2017. "Gravitational natural hazards: Valuing the protective function of Alpine forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 150-159.
    14. Grilli, Gianluca & Fratini, Roberto & Marone, Enrico & Sacchelli, Sandro, 2020. "A spatial-based tool for the analysis of payments for forest ecosystem services related to hydrogeological protection," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    15. Brander, L.M. & Tankha, S. & Sovann, C. & Sanadiradze, G. & Zazanashvili, N. & Kharazishvili, D. & Memiadze, N. & Osepashvili, I. & Beruchashvili, G. & Arobelidze, N., 2018. "Mapping the economic value of landslide regulation by forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 101-109.
    16. Grammatikopoulou, Ioanna & Vačkářová, Davina, 2021. "The value of forest ecosystem services: A meta-analysis at the European scale and application to national ecosystem accounting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    17. Maria Giulia Cantiani & Clemens Geitner & Christine Haida & Federica Maino & Clara Tattoni & Daniele Vettorato & Marco Ciolli, 2016. "Balancing Economic Development and Environmental Conservation for a New Governance of Alpine Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-19, August.
    18. Berta Martín-López & Ines Leister & Pedro Lorenzo Cruz & Ignacio Palomo & Adrienne Grêt-Regamey & Paula A Harrison & Sandra Lavorel & Bruno Locatelli & Sandra Luque & Ariane Walz, 2019. "Nature’s contributions to people in mountains: A review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-24, June.
    19. Elisabeth Pötzelsberger & Hubert Hasenauer, 2015. "Forest–water dynamics within a mountainous catchment in Austria," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 77(2), pages 625-644, June.
    20. Unterberger, Christian & Olschewski, Roland, 2021. "Determining the insurance value of ecosystems: A discrete choice study on natural hazard protection by forests," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    21. Bianchi, Ettore & Accastello, Cristian & Trappmann, Daniel & Blanc, Simone & Brun, Filippo, 2018. "The Economic Evaluation of Forest Protection Service Against Rockfall: A Review of Experiences and Approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 409-418.
    22. Ryffel, Andrea Nathalie & Rid, Wolfgang & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne, 2014. "Land use trade-offs for flood protection: A choice experiment with visualizations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 111-123.

    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. De Ayala Bilbao, Amaya & Hoyos Ramos, David & Mariel Chladkova, Petr, 2012. "Landscape valuation through discrete choice experiments: Current practice and future research reflections," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    2. Ryffel, Andrea Nathalie & Rid, Wolfgang & Grêt-Regamey, Adrienne, 2014. "Land use trade-offs for flood protection: A choice experiment with visualizations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 111-123.
    3. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Le, Hoa Thu & Nguyen, Hang Dieu & Ngo, Mai Thanh & Nguyen, Hong Quang, 2021. "Examining ordering effects and strategic behaviour in a discrete choice experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 394-413.
    4. Wan Norhidayah W Mohamad & Ken Willis & Neil Powe, 2019. "The Status Quo In Discrete Choice Experiments: Is It Relevant?," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 65(02), pages 507-532, March.
    5. Christoph Rheinberger, 2011. "A Mixed Logit Approach to Study Preferences for Safety on Alpine Roads," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(1), pages 121-146, May.
    6. Hao Li & Michael T Bennett & Xuemei Jiang & Kebin Zhang & Xiaohui Yang, 2017. "Rural Household Preferences for Active Participation in “Payment for Ecosystem Service” Programs: A Case in the Miyun Reservoir Catchment, China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-21, January.
    7. Mat Alipiah, Roseliza & Anang, Zuraini & Abdul Rashid, Noorhaslinda Kulub & Smart, James C. R. & Wan Ibrahim, Wan Noorwatie, 2018. "Aquaculturists Preference Heterogeneity towards Wetland Ecosystem Services: A Latent Class Discrete Choice Model," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 52(2), pages 253-266.
    8. Rid, Wolfgang & Haider, Wolfgang & Ryffel, Andrea & Beardmore, Ben, 2018. "Visualisations in Choice Experiments: Comparing 3D Film-sequences and Still-images to Analyse Housing Development Alternatives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 203-217.
    9. Carole Ropars-Collet & Mélody Leplat & Philippe Le Goffe & Marie Lesueur, 2015. "La pêche professionnelle est-elle un facteur d’attractivité récréative sur le littoral ?," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 66(4), pages 729-754.
    10. Carole Ropars–Collet & Mélody Leplat & Philippe Le Goffe & Marie Lesueur, 2015. "Commercial Fishery as an Asset for Recreational Demand on the Coastline: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in France, United Kingdom and Belgium," 2015 EAFE (European Association of Fisheries Economists) Conference Papers 009, Nisea.
    11. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    12. de Ayala, Amaia & Hoyos, David & Mariel, Petr, 2015. "Suitability of discrete choice experiments for landscape management under the European Landscape Convention," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 79-96.
    13. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Robinson, Jackie & Whitty, Jennifer A. & Kaneko, Shinji & Nguyen, The Chinh, 2015. "Attribute non-attendance in discrete choice experiments: A case study in a developing country," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 22-33.
    14. Michael Brock & Grischa Perino & Robert Sugden, 2017. "The Warden Attitude: An Investigation of the Value of Interaction with Everyday Wildlife," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(1), pages 127-155, May.
    15. 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).
    16. Divine Ikenwilo & Sebastian Heidenreich & Mandy Ryan & Colette Mankowski & Jameel Nazir & Verity Watson, 2018. "The Best of Both Worlds: An Example Mixed Methods Approach to Understand Men’s Preferences for the Treatment of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(1), pages 55-67, February.
    17. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    18. Kim, Junghun & Seung, Hyunchan & Lee, Jongsu & Ahn, Joongha, 2020. "Asymmetric preference and loss aversion for electric vehicles: The reference-dependent choice model capturing different preference directions," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    19. Broberg, Thomas & Daniel, Aemiro Melkamu & Persson, Lars, 2021. "Household preferences for load restrictions: Is there an effect of pro-environmental framing?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    20. Rogers, Abbie A. & Cleland, Jonelle, 2010. "Comparing Scientist and Public Preferences for Conserving Environmental Systems: A Case of the Kimberley’s Tropical Waterways and Wetlands," Research Reports 107579, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.

    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:15:y:2012:i:c:p:108-113. 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.