IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/csi/report/05_001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Value of Habitat and Agriculture

Author

Abstract

The report summarises the results of a non-market valuation study of Habitat and Agriculture in the Upper South East (Upper SE) of South Australia. A non-market valuation technique known as choice modelling was used to elicit values in the form of willingness to pay from people in the Upper SE, Adelaide and the rest of the State. The regional and state-wide preferences for the habitat improvement provide one more piece of information relating to the difficult issues around the configuration of the cleared and uncleared landscape in the Upper South East of South Australia.

Suggested Citation

  • Darla Hatton MacDonald, 2005. "The Value of Habitat and Agriculture," Natural Resource Management Economics 05_001, Policy and Economic Research Unit, CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, Australia.
    • Handle: RePEc:csi:report:05_001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.clw.csiro.au/publications/consultancy/2005/value_of_habitat_and_agriculture.pdf
    Download Restriction: none
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Layton, David F., 2000. "Random Coefficient Models for Stated Preference Surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 21-36, July.
    2. Whitten, Stuart M. & Bennett, Jeffrey W., 2001. "A Travel Cost Study of Duck Hunting in the Upper South East of South Australia," 2001 Conference (45th), January 23-25, 2001, Adelaide, Australia 126064, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. P.M.S. Jones, 1994. "The Value of Diversity," Energy & Environment, , vol. 5(3), pages 215-225, September.
    4. Mark Morrison & Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey & Jordan Louviere, 2002. "Choice Modeling and Tests of Benefit Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(1), pages 161-170.
    5. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    6. Jeffrey Lockwood, 1999. "Agriculture and biodiversity: Finding our place in this world," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 16(4), pages 365-379, December.
    7. Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2004. "What's it worth? An examination of historical trends and future directions in environmental valuation," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), pages 1-25.
    8. Mark Morrison, 2000. "Aggregation Biases in Stated Preference Studies," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 215-230, June.
    9. repec:bla:ausecp:v:39:y:2000:i:2:p:215-30 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Armsworth, Paul R. & Kendall, Bruce E. & Davis, Frank W., 2004. "An introduction to biodiversity concepts for environmental economists," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 115-136, June.
    11. Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey (ed.), 2001. "The Choice Modelling Approach to Environmental Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2028.
    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. Dyack, Brenda & Connor, Jeffery D. & Hatton MacDonald, Darla, 2005. "Screening options and setting priorities for River Murray floodplains," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 137858, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Roy Brouwer, 2009. "Multi-Attribute Choice Modeling of Australia’s Rivers and Wetlands: A Meta-Analysis of Ten Years of Research," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-05, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    3. Balderas Torres, Arturo & MacMillan, Douglas C. & Skutsch, Margaret & Lovett, Jon C., 2015. "Reprint of ‘Yes-in-my-backyard’: Spatial differences in the valuation of forest services and local co-benefits for carbon markets in México," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 283-294.
    4. Morrison, Mark & Bergland, Olvar, 2006. "Prospects for the use of choice modelling for benefit transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 420-428, December.
    5. Balderas Torres, Arturo & MacMillan, Douglas C. & Skutsch, Margaret & Lovett, Jon C., 2015. "‘Yes-in-my-backyard’: Spatial differences in the valuation of forest services and local co-benefits for carbon markets in México," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 130-141.

    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. Mike Young, 1999. "Costing Dust: How much does wind erosion cost the people of South Australia?," Natural Resource Management Economics 99_001, Policy and Economic Research Unit, CSIRO Land and Water, Adelaide, Australia.
    2. Dyack, Brenda & Connor, Jeffery D. & Hatton MacDonald, Darla, 2005. "Screening options and setting priorities for River Murray floodplains," 2005 Conference (49th), February 9-11, 2005, Coff's Harbour, Australia 137858, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Michael Keane & Nada Wasi, 2013. "Comparing Alternative Models Of Heterogeneity In Consumer Choice Behavior," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(6), pages 1018-1045, September.
    4. Boyle, Kevin J. & Morrison, Mark & Taylor, Laura O., 2004. "Why Value Estimates Generated Using Choice Modelling Exceed Contingent Valuation: Further Experimental Evidence," 2004 Conference (48th), February 11-13, 2004, Melbourne, Australia 58370, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    5. Julia Martin-Ortega & Giacomo Giannoccaro & Julio Berbel, 2011. "Environmental and Resource Costs Under Water Scarcity Conditions: An Estimation in the Context of the European Water Framework Directive," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(6), pages 1615-1633, April.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Khan, Md. Tajuddin & Kishore, Avinash & Joshi, Pramod Kumar, 2016. "Gender dimensions on farmers’ preferences for direct-seeded rice with drum seeder in India:," IFPRI discussion papers 1550, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    9. 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.
    10. Concu, Giovanni B., 2007. "Investigating distance effects on environmental values: a choice modelling approach," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 51(2), pages 1-20.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Bjorner, Thomas Bue & Hansen, L.G.Lars Garn & Russell, Clifford S., 2004. "Environmental labeling and consumers' choice--an empirical analysis of the effect of the Nordic Swan," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 411-434, May.
    14. Riccardo SCARPA & Fiorenza SPALATRO & Maurizio CANAVARI, 2005. "Investigating Preferences For Environment Friendly Production," Others 0505003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Nakamura, Akihiro, 2015. "Mobile and fixed broadband access services substitution in Japan considering new broadband features," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 140-154.
    16. Choi, Andy S. & Ritchie, Brent W. & Papandrea, Franco & Bennett, Jeff, 2010. "Economic valuation of cultural heritage sites: A choice modeling approach," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 213-220.
    17. Gillespie Rob & Kragt Marit E., 2012. "Accounting for Nonmarket Impacts in a Benefit-Cost Analysis of Underground Coal Mining in New South Wales, Australia," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 3(2), pages 1-29, May.
    18. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.
    19. Hong il Yoo, 2012. "The perceived unreliability of rank-ordered data: an econometric origin and implications," Discussion Papers 2012-46, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    20. Zhang, Fan & Fogarty, James, 2015. "Nonmarket Valuation of Water Sensitive Cities: Current Knowledge and Issues," Working Papers 207694, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Australia; habitat; agriculture; land;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q0 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General
    • Q1 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture
    • Q2 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation

    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:csi:report:05_001. 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: Marcia Sanderson (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pecsiau.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.