IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aue/wpaper/2414.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Valuation of Marine Ecosystem Services in the Black Sea

Author

Listed:
  • George Halkos
  • Argyro Zisiadou
  • Panagiotis Stavros Aslanidis
  • Phoebe Koundouri

Abstract

The Black Sea region faces pressures on ecosystem services (ES) due to invasive species, waste, eutrophication, and biodiversity loss. We apply a stated preference technique, i.e. a choice experiment (CE), aiming to compare three hypothetical scenarios regarding the welfare impact of ES on citizens' lives in terms of willingness-to-pay (WTP). Initially, the distributed questionnaires underwent an econometric pre-test regarding the orthogonality of all CE scenarios in R-studio. Questionnaire distribution occurred from 29/05/2023 to 21/11/2023 with a total number of 375 responders from the three pilot sites: Turkey, Romania, and Georgia. The highest WTP occurred in Turkey (56.72€) for all scenarios followed by Georgia (49.04€), and Romania (47.96€). Moreover, the greater WTP value is demonstrated by Scenario C (25.51€) followed by Scenarios B (25.17€) and Scenario A (25.11€). Interesting socioeconomic characteristics derived from Cross-Tabulation Analysis that notably cannot impact the WTP are income, gender, and age. Furthermore, marital status and education might affect the WTP only in Romania, however, this is not demonstrated in Turkey or Georgia. Interestingly, the higher level of education in Romania is linked to lower WTP, nevertheless, education typically relates to environmental sensitivity. Another aspect is that occupation can change responders' WTP in Romania and Georgia, but not in Turkey. In essence, the economic valuation of ES through CE methodology can offer policymaking insights into Blue Growth initiatives.

Suggested Citation

  • George Halkos & Argyro Zisiadou & Panagiotis Stavros Aslanidis & Phoebe Koundouri, 2024. "Valuation of Marine Ecosystem Services in the Black Sea," DEOS Working Papers 2414, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    • Handle: RePEc:aue:wpaper:2414
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wpa.deos.aueb.gr/docs/2024.BRIDGE.BS.MPRA.pdf
    File Function: First version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Phoebe Koundouri & George Halkos & Conrad Landis & Angelos Alamanos, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Valuation for supporting Sustainable Life Below Water," DEOS Working Papers 2316, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    2. George Halkos & Steriani Matsiori, 2018. "Gathering society's opinion of the sustainable management and economic value of the coastal zone," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(6), pages 701-712, November.
    3. Fletcher, Ruth & Baulcomb, Corinne & Hall, Clare & Hussain, Salman, 2014. "Revealing marine cultural ecosystem services in the Black Sea," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(PA), pages 151-161.
    4. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2014. "Exploring social attitude and willingness to pay for water resources conservation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 54-62.
    5. Knowler, D., 2005. "Reassessing the costs of biological invasion: Mnemiopsis leidyi in the Black sea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 187-199, January.
    6. Phoebe Koundouri & George Halkos & Conrad Landis & Konstantinos Dellis & Artemis Stratopoulou & Angelos Plataniotis & Elisa Chioattoa, 2023. "Valuation of Marine Ecosystems and Sustainable Development Goals," DEOS Working Papers 2308, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    7. Nalle, Darek J. & Montgomery, Claire A. & Arthur, Jeffrey L. & Polasky, Stephen & Schumaker, Nathan H., 2004. "Modeling joint production of wildlife and timber," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 997-1017, November.
    8. Remoundou, Kyriaki & Koundouri, Phoebe & Adaman, Fikret & Nunes, Paulo A.L.D., 2011. "Are Preferences for Environmental Quality Sensitive to Financial Funding Schemes? Evidence from a Marine Restoration Programme in the Black Sea," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 108204, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    9. Oleson, Kirsten L.L. & Barnes, Michele & Brander, Luke M. & Oliver, Thomas A. & van Beek, Ingrid & Zafindrasilivonona, Bienvenue & van Beukering, Pieter, 2015. "Cultural bequest values for ecosystem service flows among indigenous fishers: A discrete choice experiment validated with mixed methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 104-116.
    10. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    11. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2018. "Environmental attitudes and preferences for coastal zone improvements," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 153-166.
    12. Louviere, Jordan J & Hensher, David A, 1983. "Using Discrete Choice Models with Experimental Design Data to Forecast Consumer Demand for a Unique Cultural Event," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 10(3), pages 348-361, December.
    13. Kyriaki Remoundou & Fikret Adaman & Phoebe Koundouri & Paulo Nunes, 2014. "Is the value of environmental goods sensitive to the public funding scheme? Evidence from a marine restoration programme in the Black Sea," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1173-1192, December.
    14. Baulcomb, Corinne & Fletcher, Ruth & Lewis, Amy & Akoglu, Ekin & Robinson, Leonie & von Almen, Amanda & Hussain, Salman & Glenk, Klaus, 2015. "A pathway to identifying and valuing cultural ecosystem services: An application to marine food webs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 128-139.
    15. Kyriaki Remoundou & Phoebe Koundouri & Areti Kontogianni & Paulo Nunes & Michalis Skourtos, 2009. "Valuation of natural marine ecosystems: an economic perspective," DEOS Working Papers 0906, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    16. Jan Vandemoortele, 2011. "If not the Millennium Development Goals, then what?," Third World Quarterly, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 9-25.
    17. Phoebe Koundouri & Conrad Landis & Kostas Dellis & Artemis Stratopoulou, 2023. "Valuation of Marine Ecosystems and Sustainable Development Goals," DEOS Working Papers 2304, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    2. Siikamki, Juha, 2001. "Valuing Benefits of Finnish Forest Biodiversity Conservation: Fixed and Random Parameter Logit Models for Pooled Contingent Valuation and Contingent Rating/Ranking Survey Data," Western Region Archives 321696, Western Region - Western Extension Directors Association (WEDA).
    3. Grafeld, Shanna & Oleson, Kirsten & Barnes, Michele & Peng, Marcus & Chan, Catherine & Weijerman, Mariska, 2016. "Divers' willingness to pay for improved coral reef conditions in Guam: An untapped source of funding for management and conservation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 202-213.
    4. Vassiliki Vlami & Ioannis P. Kokkoris & Stamatis Zogaris & George Kehayias & Panayotis Dimopoulos, 2020. "Cultural Ecosystem Services in the Natura 2000 Network: Introducing Proxy Indicators and Conflict Risk in Greece," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-27, December.
    5. Moritz A. Drupp & Zachary M. Turk & Ben Groom & Jonas Heckenhahn, 2023. "Limited substitutability, relative price changes and the uplifting of public natural capital values," Papers 2308.04400, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    6. Nguyen, Manh-Hung & Nguyen, Thi Lan Anh & Nguyen, Tuan & Reynaud, Arnaud & Simioni, Michel & Hoang, Viet-Ngu, 2021. "Economic analysis of choices among differing measures to manage coastal erosion in Hoi An (a UNESCO World Heritage Site)," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 529-543.
    7. Na-na Wang & Liang-guo Luo & Ya-ru Pan & Xue-mei Ni, 2019. "Use of discrete choice experiments to facilitate design of effective environmentally friendly agricultural policies," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1543-1559, August.
    8. 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).
    9. Han-Shen Chen, 2019. "Establishment and Application of an Evaluation Model for Orchid Island Sustainable Tourism Development," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-16, March.
    10. Spanou, Elisavet & Kenter, Jasper O. & Graziano, Marcello, 2020. "The Effects of Aquaculture and Marine Conservation on Cultural Ecosystem Services: An Integrated Hedonic – Eudaemonic Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    11. Koundouri, Phoebe & Halkos, George & Landis, Conrad & Alamanos, Angelos, 2023. "Ecosystem Services Valuation for supporting Sustainable Life Below Water," MPRA Paper 122009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Xiao, Lan & Haiping, Tang & Haoguang, Liang, 2017. "A theoretical framework for researching cultural ecosystem service flows in urban agglomerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 95-104.
    13. 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.
    14. Ferrini, Silvia & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2007. "Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: A Monte Carlo study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 342-363, May.
    15. Nikos Chatzistamoulou & Phoebe Koundouri, 2020. "SDGs Patterns Across the Globe: From Theory to Practice," DEOS Working Papers 2016, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    16. Silvia Ferrini & Riccardo Scarpa, 2005. "Experimental Designs for Environmental Valuation with Choice-Experiments: A Monte-Carlo Investigation," Working Papers in Economics 05/08, University of Waikato.
    17. Imran Khan & Hongdou Lei & Gaffar Ali & Shahid Ali & Minjuan Zhao, 2019. "Public Attitudes, Preferences and Willingness to Pay for River Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-17, October.
    18. Nick Hanley & Douglas MacMillan, 2000. "Contingent Valuation Versus Choice Experiments: Estimating the Benefits of Environmentally Sensitive Areas in Scotland: Reply," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 129-132, January.
    19. Tin Cheuk Leung, 2013. "What Is the True Loss Due to Piracy? Evidence from Microsoft Office in Hong Kong," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(3), pages 1018-1029, July.
    20. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ecosystem management; human impacts; valuation studies; choice experiment; stated preferences; blue economy; sustainable development goals;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development
    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • R10 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - General
    • R11 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Regional Economic Activity: Growth, Development, Environmental Issues, and Changes
    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:aue:wpaper:2414. 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: Ekaterini Glynou (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/diauegr.html .

    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.