Quantifying preferences for the natural world using monetary and nonmonetary assessments of value.
Quantifying preferences for the natural world using monetary and nonmonetary assessments of value.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/cobi.12215
复制
发表时间：
2014-04
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Armsworth PR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dallimer M;Tinch D;Hanley N;Irvine KN;Rouquette JR;Warren PH;Maltby L;Gaston KJ;Armsworth PR
鉴于用于生物多样性保护的资金有限，有必要了解人们对其不同组成部分的偏好。迄今为止，这种偏好在很大程度上是用金钱来衡量的。然而，人们如何评价生物多样性可能与经济理论不同，对于货币指标是否总是合适，或者其他方法在多大程度上提供替代和互补的价值观点，几乎没有达成共识。我们使用选择实验来比较城市绿地的休闲游客愿意为生物多样性增强(鸟类、植物和水生大型无脊椎动物物种丰富度的增加)支付的金钱金额，以及自我报告的来自相同地点的幸福感的心理收益。支付意愿(WTP)的估计是显著的和积极的，受访者报告了来自环境心理学理论(反思、依恋、与过去的连续性)的三个轴在幸福感方面的高增长。这两个指标大体上一致。自我幸福感得分高于中位数的参与者愿意为提高物种丰富度支付比得分低于中位数的参与者明显更高的金额，而不考虑分类群。在选择实验中，参与者的社会经济和人口背景在决定他们的幸福感或选择付费选项的可能性方面几乎没有起到什么作用。立地水平的环境特征只与WTP有一定的相关性，但与自我报告的幸福感有很强的相关性。这两种方法都可能反映出场地的环境属性和自然界未被观察到的个人偏好异质性的组合。我们的结果表明，在环境偏好的评估中，这两个指标都将提供相互一致的结果，尽管哪种方法更可取取决于人们为什么希望衡量自然世界的价值。
Given that funds for biodiversity conservation are limited, there is a need to understand people’s preferences for its different components. To date, such preferences have largely been measured in monetary terms. However, how people value biodiversity may differ from economic theory, and there is little consensus over whether monetary metrics are always appropriate or the degree to which other methods offer alternative and complementary perspectives on value. We used a choice experiment to compare monetary amounts recreational visitors to urban green spaces were willing to pay for biodiversity enhancement (increases in species richness for birds, plants, and aquatic macroinvertebrates) with self-reported psychological gains in well-being derived from visiting the same sites. Willingness-to-pay (WTP) estimates were significant and positive, and respondents reported high gains in well-being across 3 axes derived from environmental psychology theories (reflection, attachment, continuity with past). The 2 metrics were broadly congruent. Participants with above-median self-reported well-being scores were willing to pay significantly higher amounts for enhancing species richness than those with below-median scores, regardless of taxon. The socio-economic and demographic background of participants played little role in determining either their well-being or the probability of choosing a paying option within the choice experiment. Site-level environmental characteristics were only somewhat related to WTP, but showed strong associations with self-reported well-being. Both approaches are likely to reflect a combination of the environmental properties of a site and unobserved individual preference heterogeneity for the natural world. Our results suggest that either metric will deliver mutually consistent results in an assessment of environmental preferences, although which approach is preferable depends on why one wishes to measure values for the natural world.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
Adamowicz, W;Boxall, P;Louviere, J
通讯作者：
Louviere, J
影响因子：
3.3
作者：
Fuller, Richard A.;Irvine, Katherine N.;Gaston, Kevin J.
通讯作者：
Gaston, Kevin J.
影响因子：
9.8
作者：
Blanchflower, DG;Oswald, AJ
通讯作者：
Oswald, AJ
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Kuo, FE
通讯作者：
Kuo, FE
影响因子：
7
作者：
Christie, Mike;Hanley, Nick;Hyde, Tony
通讯作者：
Hyde, Tony