IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/war/wpaper/2013-09.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Impact of Individual Risk Preferences on Valuing Preservation of Threatened Species: an Application to Lynx Populations in Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Bartczak

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Susan Chilton

    (Newcastle University Business School)

  • Jürgen Meyerhoff

    (Technische Universität Berlin, Institute for Landscape and Environmental Planning)

Abstract

A recent innovation in environmental valuation surveys has been to acknowledge the inherent uncertainties surrounding the provision of environmental goods and services and to incorporate it into non-market survey designs. So far, little is known about how people assimilate and respond to such uncertainty, particularly in terms of how it affects their stated valuations. In this paper we focus on the impact of risk preferences on people’s investments in environment. Individual risk preferences are elicited through a standard, incentivized multiple price list mechanism and used as a independent variable in the analysis of a choice experiment valuing the preservation of two threatened lynx populations in Poland. We find that risk-seeking respondents were more likely to choose the status quo option, which was the riskiest option in terms of the survival of the two distinct lynx populations. Risk seekers revealed also a significantly lower willingness to pay for lynx preservations.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Bartczak & Susan Chilton & Jürgen Meyerhoff, 2013. "The Impact of Individual Risk Preferences on Valuing Preservation of Threatened Species: an Application to Lynx Populations in Poland," Working Papers 2013-09, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    • Handle: RePEc:war:wpaper:2013-09
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/inf/wyd/WP/WNE_WP94.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2013
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klaus Glenk & Sergio Colombo, 2011. "How Sure Can You Be? A Framework for Considering Delivery Uncertainty in Benefit Assessments Based on Stated Preference Methods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(1), pages 25-46, February.
    2. Luigi Guiso & Monica Paiella, 2008. "Risk Aversion, Wealth, and Background Risk," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(6), pages 1109-1150, December.
    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. Wright, Austin L. & Sonin, Konstantin & Driscoll, Jesse & Wilson, Jarnickae, 2020. "Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 544-554.
    2. Grossmann, Volker, 2008. "Risky human capital investment, income distribution, and macroeconomic dynamics," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 19-42, March.
    3. Cardak, Buly A. & Martin, Vance L., 2023. "Household willingness to take financial risk: Stockmarket movements and life‐cycle effects," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    4. Goytom Abraha Kahsay & Daniel Osberghaus, 2018. "Storm Damage and Risk Preferences: Panel Evidence from Germany," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 301-318, September.
    5. Luc Arrondel & André Masson, 2013. "Measuring savers' preferences how and why?," PSE Working Papers halshs-00834203, HAL.
    6. Sebastian Koehne & Nicola Pavoni & Arpad Abraham, 2011. "Optimal Income Taxation with Asset Accumulation," 2011 Meeting Papers 1161, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    7. Robert Östling & Erik Lindqvist & David Cesarini & Joseph Briggs, 2016. "Wealth, Portfolio Allocations, and Risk Preference," 2016 Meeting Papers 1089, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    8. de Blasio, Guido & De Paola, Maria & Poy, Samuele & Scoppa, Vincenzo, 2018. "Risk Aversion and Entrepreneurship: New Evidence Exploiting Exposure to Massive Earthquakes in Italy," IZA Discussion Papers 12057, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Freudenreich, Hanna & Musshoff, Oliver & Wiercinski, Ben, 2017. "The Relationship between Farmers' Shock Experiences and their Uncertainty Preferences - Experimental Evidence from Mexico," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 256212, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    10. Sebastian Doerr & Thomas Drechsel & Donggyu Lee, 2021. "Income inequality, financial intermediation, and small firms," BIS Working Papers 944, Bank for International Settlements.
    11. Ege Aksu & Sidhya Balakrishnan & Eric Bettinger & Jonathan S. Hartley & Michael S. Kofoed & Dubravka Ritter & Douglas A. Webber, 2024. "Navigating Higher Education Insurance: An Experimental Study on Demand and Adverse Selection"," Working Papers 24-07, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    12. Ruiz-Tagle, Jaime & Tapia, Pablo, 2011. "Chile: early retirement, impatience and risk aversion," Revista CEPAL, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL), December.
    13. Gennaro Bernile & Vineet Bhagwat & Ambrus Kecskés & Phuong‐Anh Nguyen, 2021. "Are the risk attitudes of professional investors affected by personal catastrophic experiences?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 50(2), pages 455-486, June.
    14. Checchi, Daniele & Fiorio, Carlo V. & Leonardi, Marco, 2013. "Intergenerational persistence of educational attainment in Italy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 229-232.
    15. Ignaciuk, Ada & Malevolti, Giulia & Scognamillo, Antonio & Sitko, Nicholas J., 2022. "Can food aid relax farmers’ constraints to adopting climate-adaptive agricultural practices? Evidence from Ethiopia, Malawi and the United Republic of Tanzania," ESA Working Papers 324073, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Agricultural Development Economics Division (ESA).
    16. Chueh-Yung Tsao & Ya-Chi Huang, 2018. "Revisiting the issue of survivability and market efficiency with the Santa Fe Artificial Stock Market," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 13(3), pages 537-560, October.
    17. Joseph G. Eisenhauer, 2003. "Approximation bias in estimating risk aversion," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(38), pages 1-10.
    18. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    19. Hu, Jinyan & Jiang, Mingming & Zhang, Bo, 2015. "Social Network, Financial Market Participation and Asset Allocation: Evidence from China," RIEI Working Papers 2015-06, Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Research Institute for Economic Integration.
    20. Lapierre, Margaux & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Bougherara, Douadia & Préget, Raphaële & Sauquet, Alexandre, 2023. "Designing agri-environmental schemes to cope with uncertainty," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    choice experiment; environmental good; lottery experiment; lynx preservation; risk preferences; status quo effect;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    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:war:wpaper:2013-09. 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: Marcin Bąba (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.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.