IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/war/wpaper/2017-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is Forest Landscape Restoration Socially Desirable? A Discrete Choice Experiment Applied to the Scandinavian Transboundary Fulufjället National Park Area

Author

Listed:
  • Sviataslau Valasiuk

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Mikołaj Czajkowski

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Marek Giergiczny

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Tomasz Żylicz

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

  • Knut Veisten

    (Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo)

  • Askill Harkjerr Halse

    (Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo)

  • Iratxe Landa Mata

    (Institute of Transport Economics, Oslo)

  • Marine Elbakidze

    (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; Forest-Landscape-Society Network)

  • Per Angelstam

    (Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences; Forest-Landscape-Society Network)

Abstract

Landscape restoration can improve functionality of land cover patches as green infrastructure, which is essential to ensure the provision of a diverse range of ecosystem services. However, so far designation of protected areas in Fennoscandia has focused primarily on remnant patches of naturally dynamic forests, and not on landscape level restoration. We applied stated preference methodology to assess citizens’ preferences for forest landscape restoration in a cross-border region primarily managed for the industrial forestry, and – at the same time – hosting the transboundary Fulufjället National Park, shared between Sweden and Norway. There is scope for improving green infrastructure functionality by landscape restoration in adjacent forest areas, and including them into the National Park, which aims at gradual restoration of natural processes. In both countries, 54% and 55% choices made, respectively, indicated willingness to pay for extending the National Park by some area of forest landscape restoration.

Suggested Citation

  • Sviataslau Valasiuk & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Marek Giergiczny & Tomasz Żylicz & Knut Veisten & Askill Harkjerr Halse & Iratxe Landa Mata & Marine Elbakidze & Per Angelstam, 2017. "Is Forest Landscape Restoration Socially Desirable? A Discrete Choice Experiment Applied to the Scandinavian Transboundary Fulufjället National Park Area," Working Papers 2017-10, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    • Handle: RePEc:war:wpaper:2017-10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/index.php/download_file/3434/
    File Function: First version, 2016
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Domenico Pisani & Pasquale Pazienza & Enrico Vito Perrino & Diana Caporale & Caterina De Lucia, 2021. "The Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services of Biodiversity Components in Protected Areas: A Review for a Framework of Analysis for the Gargano National Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Castillo-Eguskitza, Nekane & Hoyos, David & Onaindia, Miren & Czajkowski, Mikolaj, 2019. "Unraveling local preferences and willingness to pay for different management scenarios: A choice experiment to biosphere reserve management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    stated preference valuation; passive protection; transboundary nature protected areas; naturally dynamics boreal forests; willingness-to-pay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    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:2017-10. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.