IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v36y2011i3p255-264.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing development options in mining communities using stated preference techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Ivanova, Galina
  • Rolfe, John

Abstract

In this paper, two key insights are generated about community development options using stated preference techniques. Surveys were conducted to identify how residents of a mining town in central Queensland, Australia, viewed options for the development of their township. First, residents were asked in a Choice Modelling experiment how worthwhile it would be to achieve some more attractive development options if it came at a cost to them. Second, residents were asked in a Choice Behaviour experiment how the different development options might influence their decision to stay or shift from the town in the future. The same development options were used in both experiments to facilitate comparisons between the two assessment forms.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivanova, Galina & Rolfe, John, 2011. "Assessing development options in mining communities using stated preference techniques," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 255-264, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:36:y:2011:i:3:p:255-264
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420711000195
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Bennett, Jeffrey W. & van Bueren, Martin & Whitten, Stuart M., 2004. "Estimating society's willingness to pay to maintain viable rural communities," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), pages 1-26.
    2. Solomon, Fiona & Katz, Evie & Lovel, Roy, 2008. "Social dimensions of mining: Research, policy and practice challenges for the minerals industry in Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 142-149, September.
    3. Peter Howie & Sean M. Murphy & John Wicks, 2010. "An Application of a Stated Preference Method to Value Urban Amenities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(2), pages 235-256, February.
    4. Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeff & Louviere, Jordan, 2000. "Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 289-302, November.
    5. Alberini, Anna & Zanatta, Valentina & Rosato, Paolo, 2007. "Combining actual and contingent behavior to estimate the value of sports fishing in the Lagoon of Venice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 530-541, March.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, January.
    7. Yongsik Jeon & Joseph Herriges, 2010. "Convergent Validity of Contingent Behavior Responses in Models of Recreation Demand," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(2), pages 223-250, February.
    8. Prayaga, Prabha & Rolfe, John & Stoeckl, Natalie, 2010. "The value of recreational fishing in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia: A pooled revealed preference and contingent behaviour model," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 244-251, March.
    9. van Bueren, Martin & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2004. "Towards the development of a transferable set of value estimates for environmental attributes," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(1), pages 1-32.
    10. Nick Hanley & David Bell & Begona Alvarez-Farizo, 2003. "Valuing the Benefits of Coastal Water Quality Improvements Using Contingent and Real Behaviour," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(3), pages 273-285, March.
    11. Huang, Ju-Chin & Haab, Timothy C. & Whitehead, John C., 1997. "Willingness to Pay for Quality Improvements: Should Revealed and Stated Preference Data Be Combined?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 240-255, November.
    12. Anna Alberini & Alberto Longo, 2006. "Combining the travel cost and contingent behavior methods to value cultural heritage sites: Evidence from Armenia," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 30(4), pages 287-304, December.
    13. Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey (ed.), 2001. "The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2028.
    14. Mikesell, Raymond F, 1997. "Explaining the resource curse, with special reference to mineral-exporting countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 191-199, December.
    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. Jimena Silva Segovia & Pablo Zuleta Pastor & Estefany Castillo Ravanal & Tarut Segovia-Chinga, 2021. "Experiences of Being a Couple and Working in Shifts in the Mining Industry: Advances and Continuities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-18, February.
    2. Lim, Seul-Ye & Min, Seo-Hyeon & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2016. "The public value of contaminated soil remediation in Janghang copper smelter of Korea," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 66-74.
    3. Liang Wang & Kwame Awuah-Offei & Sisi Que & Wei Yang, 2016. "Eliciting Drivers of Community Perceptions of Mining Projects through Effective Community Engagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-17, July.
    4. Galina Williams & Ruth Nikijuluw, 2020. "The economic and social benefit of coal mining: the case study of regional Queensland," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 64(4), pages 1113-1132, October.
    5. Valente José Matlaba & Maria Cristina Maneschy & Jorge Filipe dos Santos & José Aroudo Mota, 2019. "Socioeconomic dynamics of a mining town in Amazon: a case study from Canaã dos Carajás, Brazil," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 32(1), pages 75-90, April.
    6. MacDonald, Darla Hatton & Rose, John M. & Johnston, Robert J. & Bark, Rosalind H. & Pritchard, Jodie, 2019. "Managing groundwater in a mining region: an opportunity to compare best-worst and referendum data," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(4), October.
    7. Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2020. "Public perspective on the environmental impacts of sea sand mining: Evidence from a choice experiment in South Korea," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    8. Boateng, Mark K. & Awuah-Offei, Kwame, 2017. "Agent-based modeling framework for modeling the effect of information diffusion on community acceptance of mining," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 1-11.
    9. Mason, Claire M. & Paxton, Gillian & Parsons, Richard & Parr, Joanna M. & Moffat, Kieren, 2014. "“For the benefit of Australians”: Exploring national expectations of the mining industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-8.
    10. Sisi Que & Liang Wang & Kwame Awuah-Offei & Wei Yang & Hui Jiang, 2019. "Corporate Social Responsibility: Understanding the Mining Stakeholder with a Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-12, April.
    11. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2014. "Valuation framing and attribute scope variation in a choice experiment to asses the impacts of changing land use from agriculture to mining," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Macquarie, Australia 165888, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. Sisi Que & Yu Huang & Kwame Awuah-Offei & Liang Wang & Songlin Liu, 2023. "Discrete Choice Experiment Consideration: A Framework for Mining Community Consultation with Case Studies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-17, August.
    13. Kwame Awuah-Offei & Sisi Que & Atta Ur Rehman, 2021. "Evaluating Mine Design Alternatives for Social Risks Using Discrete Choice Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-15, August.
    14. repec:elg:eechap:14395_26 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2014. "Assessing the trade-offs of increased mining activity in the Surat Basin, Queensland: preferences of Brisbane residents using nonmarket valuation techniques," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 58(1), January.

    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. Lienhoop, Nele & Ansmann, Till, 2011. "Valuing water level changes in reservoirs using two stated preference approaches: An exploration of validity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1250-1258, May.
    2. Rowan, Emma & Longo, Alberto, 2009. "Enriching Stakeholder participation through Environmental Valuation; Eliciting Preferences for a National Park Designation in Northern Ireland," 83rd Annual Conference, March 30 - April 1, 2009, Dublin, Ireland 51071, Agricultural Economics Society.
    3. Simões, Paula & Barata, Eduardo & Cruz, Luís, 2013. "Joint estimation using revealed and stated preference data: An application using a national forest," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 249-266.
    4. Paula Simões & Luís Cruz & Eduardo Barata, 2012. "Non-market Recreational Value of a National Forest: Survey Design and Results," GEMF Working Papers 2012-09, GEMF, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra.
    5. Voltaire, Louinord & Koutchade, Obafèmi Philippe, 2020. "Public acceptance of and heterogeneity in behavioral beach trip responses to offshore wind farm development in Catalonia (Spain)," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    6. Luís Cruz & Paula Simões & Eduardo Barata, 2014. "Combining Observed and Contingent Travel Behaviour: The Best of Both Worlds?," Notas Económicas, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra, issue 40, pages 7-25, December.
    7. Figini, Paolo & Vici, Laura, 2012. "Off-season tourists and the cultural offer of a mass-tourism destination: The case of Rimini," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 825-839.
    8. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Marek Giergiczny & Jakub Kronenberg & Jeffrey Englin, 2019. "The Individual Travel Cost Method with Consumer-Specific Values of Travel Time Savings," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(3), pages 961-984, November.
    9. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2008. "Testing for differences in benefit transfer values between state and regional frameworks," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 52(2), pages 1-20.
    10. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John & Brouwer, Roy, 2009. "Public values for improved water security for domestic and environmental use," Research Reports 94818, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    11. 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.
    12. Windle, Jill & Rolfe, John, 2014. "Valuation framing and attribute scope variation in a choice experiment to asses the impacts of changing land use from agriculture to mining," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Macquarie, Australia 165888, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    13. Pascoe, Sean, 2019. "Recreational beach use values with multiple activities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 137-144.
    14. Chun-Chu Yeh & Crystal Jia-Yi Lin & James Po-Hsun Hsiao & Chin-Huang Huang, 2019. "The Effect of Improving Cycleway Environment on the Recreational Benefits of Bicycle Tourism," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-11, September.
    15. Hocheol Jeon & Joseph A. Herriges, 2017. "Combining Revealed Preference Data with Stated Preference Data: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(4), pages 1053-1086, December.
    16. Eggert, Håkan & Olsson, Björn, 2004. "Heterogeneous preferences for marine amenities: A choice experiment applied to water quality," Working Papers in Economics 126, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    17. Folkersen, Maja Vinde, 2018. "Ecosystem valuation: Changing discourse in a time of climate change," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 1-12.
    18. Chin†Huang Huang, 2017. "Estimating the environmental effects and recreational benefits of cultivated flower land for environmental quality improvement in Taiwan," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 48(1), pages 29-39, January.
    19. Christine Bertram & Heini Ahtiainen & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Kristine Pakalniete & Eija Pouta & Katrin Rehdanz, 2020. "Contingent Behavior and Asymmetric Preferences for Baltic Sea Coastal Recreation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(1), pages 49-78, January.
    20. Rolfe, John & Loch, Adam & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2002. "Framing effects and benefit transfer in the Fitzroy basin," 2002 Conference (46th), February 13-15, 2002, Canberra, Australia 174038, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.

    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:jrpoli:v:36:y:2011:i:3:p:255-264. 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/inca/30467 .

    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.