IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v61y2015icp227-236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing unfamiliar Mediterranean deep-sea ecosystems using visual Q-methodology

Author

Listed:
  • Zanoli, Raffaele
  • Carlesi, Lorenzo
  • Danovaro, Roberto
  • Mandolesi, Serena
  • Naspetti, Simona

Abstract

Monetary valuation of non-market environmental goods and services such as marine ecosystems is a difficult task, usually approached by stated preference methods. Valuation results are often unstable since preferences for unfamiliar, often highly abstract and complex environmental goods depend on the level of previous knowledge of the participant stakeholders and the information provided to them. In this paper, Q methodology has been applied to explore subjective perspectives on Mediterranean deep sea, which is among the least explored environment in the world. The participant sample consisted in eight Ph.D. students, half of which with a Marine Life Sciences degree. They were asked to perform a Q-sorting experiment, and rank a Q sample of 36 underwater photographs of the marine wildlife, landscapes, and ecosystems in the Mediterranean deep sea. Photographs were sorted by each topic according to a subjective priority relative to (a) a personal overall view; (b) their perception of the potential interest for fishermen; and (c) as if they were fishermen. The study revealed three distinct discourses on the subjective importance of deep-sea ecosystems in the Mediterranean Sea: “Noah’s Ark Fans”, “Ecosystem Functions Supporters” and “Deep Coral Lovers”. Data analysis showed that the main differences between factors could be related to the experience and the cultural background of the participants. This study improved our knowledge about individuals’ perceptions on Mediterranean deep-sea ecosystems and represents a preliminary step for their monetary valuation.

Suggested Citation

  • Zanoli, Raffaele & Carlesi, Lorenzo & Danovaro, Roberto & Mandolesi, Serena & Naspetti, Simona, 2015. "Valuing unfamiliar Mediterranean deep-sea ecosystems using visual Q-methodology," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 227-236.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:227-236
    DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.08.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X15002286
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.08.009?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. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    2. Hynes, Stephen & Norton, Danny & Corless, Rebecca, 2014. "Investigating societal attitudes towards the marine environment of Ireland," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 57-65.
    3. Friedrich, Laura A. & Jefferson, Rebecca & Glegg, Gillian, 2014. "Public perceptions of sharks: Gathering support for shark conservation," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-7.
    4. Jobstvogt, Niels & Hanley, Nick & Hynes, Stephen & Kenter, Jasper & Witte, Ursula, 2014. "Twenty thousand sterling under the sea: Estimating the value of protecting deep-sea biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 10-19.
    5. Louis Guttman, 1954. "Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 19(2), pages 149-161, June.
    6. ., 2013. "Conceptual framework and analytical methodologies," Chapters, in: International Review of National Competitiveness, chapter 3, pages 23-58, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Armatas, Christopher A. & Venn, Tyron J. & Watson, Alan E., 2014. "Applying Q-methodology to select and define attributes for non-market valuation: A case study from Northwest Wyoming, United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 447-456.
    8. Bernedette Umali Cornelius & Ukpepi Obinna I. Enukoha & Esu, 2013. "Method of Teaching," Journal of Social Sciences (COES&RJ-JSS), , vol. 2(3), pages 159-166, July.
    9. Giles Atkinson & Ian Bateman & Susana Mourato, 2012. "Recent advances in the valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 22-47, Spring.
    10. Barkmann, J. & Glenk, K. & Keil, A. & Leemhuis, C. & Dietrich, N. & Gerold, G. & Marggraf, R., 2008. "Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 48-62, March.
    11. Jodie E. Smith & Michael J. Risk & Henry P. Schwarcz & Ted A. McConnaughey, 1997. "Rapid climate change in the North Atlantic during the Younger Dryas recorded by deep-sea corals," Nature, Nature, vol. 386(6627), pages 818-820, April.
    12. Erwin, Patrick M. & López-Legentil, Susanna & Schuhmann, Peter W., 2010. "The pharmaceutical value of marine biodiversity for anti-cancer drug discovery," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 445-451, December.
    13. Norse, Elliott A. & Brooke, Sandra & Cheung, William W.L. & Clark, Malcolm R. & Ekeland, Ivar & Froese, Rainer & Gjerde, Kristina M. & Haedrich, Richard L. & Heppell, Selina S. & Morato, Telmo & Morga, 2012. "Sustainability of deep-sea fisheries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 307-320.
    14. Jefferson, R.L. & Bailey, I. & Laffoley, D. d′A. & Richards, J.P. & Attrill, M.J., 2014. "Public perceptions of the UK marine environment," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 327-337.
    15. ., 2013. "Methodology and research framework," Chapters, in: The Geography of the Internet, chapter 3, pages 67-80, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Van Dover, C.L. & Aronson, J. & Pendleton, L. & Smith, S. & Arnaud-Haond, S. & Moreno-Mateos, D. & Barbier, E. & Billett, D. & Bowers, K. & Danovaro, R. & Edwards, A. & Kellert, S. & Morato, T. & Poll, 2014. "Ecological restoration in the deep sea: Desiderata," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 98-106.
    17. ., 2013. "Four assessment methods," Chapters, in: Private Property and Takings Compensation, chapter 4, pages 35-58, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Aanesen, Margrethe & Armstrong, Claire & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Falk-Petersen, Jannike & Hanley, Nick & Navrud, Ståle, 2015. "Willingness to pay for unfamiliar public goods: Preserving cold-water coral in Norway," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 53-67.
    19. MacDonald, Patricia A. & Murray, Grant & Patterson, Michele, 2015. "Considering social values in the seafood sector using the Q-method," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 68-76.
    20. ., 2013. "Methodology of Islamic economics," Chapters, in: What is Wrong with Islamic Economics?, chapter 4, pages 54-71, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    21. ., 2013. "Methodology and data description," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship and Development Index 2013, chapter 6, pages iii-iii, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. Armstrong, Claire W. & Foley, Naomi S. & Tinch, Rob & van den Hove, Sybille, 2012. "Services from the deep: Steps towards valuation of deep sea goods and services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 2-13.
    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. Alexander, Kim S. & Parry, Lucy & Thammavong, Phomma & Sacklokham, Silinthone & Pasouvang, Somphanh & Connell, John G. & Jovanovic, Tom & Moglia, Magnus & Larson, Silva & Case, Peter, 2018. "Rice farming systems in Southern Lao PDR: Interpreting farmers’ agricultural production decisions using Q methodology," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 1-10.
    2. Angie Chung & Dennis F. Kinsey, 2019. "An Examination of Consumers’ Subjective Views that Affect the Favorability of Organizational Logos: An Exploratory Study Using Q Methodology," Corporate Reputation Review, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(3), pages 89-100, August.

    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. Geneviève Robert, 2015. "Implementation of a process continuous improvement in the MSHS services [Mise en place d'une démarche d'amélioration continue dans les services de la Maison des Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société," Working Papers hal-01338880, HAL.
    2. Geneviève Robert, 2015. "Implementation of a process continuous improvement in the MSHS services [Mise en place d'une démarche d'amélioration continue dans les services de la Maison des Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société," Post-Print hal-01338880, HAL.
    3. Steffen E. Schummer & Kathleen Otto & Lena Hünefeld & Maria U. Kottwitz, 2019. "The role of need satisfaction for solo self-employed individuals’ vs. employer entrepreneurs’ affective commitment towards their own businesses," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 9(1), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Muhammad Imran & Samina Akhtar & Yuee Chen & Shabbir Ahmad, 2021. "Environmental Education and Women: Voices From Pakistan," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(2), pages 21582440211, April.
    5. Norton, Daniel & Hynes, Stephen, 2014. "Valuing the non-market benefits arising from the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 84-96.
    6. Börger, Tobias & Hattam, Caroline, 2017. "Motivations matter: Behavioural determinants of preferences for remote and unfamiliar environmental goods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 64-74.
    7. Bartkowski, Bartosz & Lienhoop, Nele & Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2015. "Capturing the complexity of biodiversity: A critical review of economic valuation studies of biological diversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-14.
    8. Nick Hanley & Stephen Hynes & Niels Jobstvogt & David M. Paterson, 2014. "Economic valuation of marine and coastal ecosystems:Is it currently fit for purpose?," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2014-11, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    9. Folkersen, Maja Vinde, 2018. "Ecosystem valuation: Changing discourse in a time of climate change," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 1-12.
    10. Nicholas Tyack & Milan Ščasný, 2018. "Social Valuation of Genebank Activities: Assessing Public Demand for Genetic Resource Conservation in the Czech Republic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
    11. Palola, Pirta & Bailey, Richard & Wedding, Lisa, 2022. "A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    12. Jaung, Wanggi & Putzel, Louis & Bull, Gary Q. & Kozak, Robert & Markum,, 2016. "Certification of forest watershed services: A Q methodology analysis of opportunities and challenges in Lombok, Indonesia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 51-59.
    13. George Halkos & Panagiotis Stavros Aslanidis & Angelos Plataniotis & Phoebe Koundouri, 2024. "Global insights on Sustainable Development Goal 14: Reviewing willingness-to-pay levels for marine ecosystem protection and conservation," DEOS Working Papers 2416, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    14. Kieslich, Marcus & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2021. "Implementation context and science-policy interfaces: Implications for the economic valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    15. Norton, D. & Hynes, S., 2014. "A Choice Experiment Approach to assess the costs of degradation as specified by the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive," Working Papers 186382, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    16. Kristīne Pakalniete & Heini Ahtiainen & Juris Aigars & Ingrīda Andersone & Aurelija Armoškaite & Henning Sten Hansen & Solvita Strāķe, 2021. "Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Service Benefits and Welfare Impacts of Offshore Marine Protected Areas: A Study from the Baltic Sea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-30, September.
    17. Namakando, Namakando, 2020. "Stakeholder perceptions of raw water quality and its management in Fetakgomo and Maruleng municipalities of Limpopo Province," Research Theses 334769, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    18. Tobias Börger & Oliver Frör & Sören Weiß, 2017. "The relationship between perceived difficulty and randomness in discrete choice experiments: Investigating reasons for and consequences of difficulty," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2017-03, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    19. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    20. Hatton MacDonald, Darla & Ardeshiri, Ali & Rose, John M. & Russell, Bayden D. & Connell, Sean D., 2015. "Valuing coastal water quality: Adelaide, South Australia metropolitan area," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 116-124.

    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:marpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:227-236. 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/marpol .

    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.