1 / 16

Demand and Economic Values for Great Lakes Wetland Restoration and Preservation Programs

CARRS. Agricultural Economics. Demand and Economic Values for Great Lakes Wetland Restoration and Preservation Programs. Frank Lupi, Michael D. Kaplowitz, John P. Hoehn. IAGLR May 26, 2005. Rationale. Great Lakes Wetlands Services not necessarily protected Great Lakes Wetland Policy

julio
Download Presentation

Demand and Economic Values for Great Lakes Wetland Restoration and Preservation Programs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CARRS Agricultural Economics Demand and Economic Values for Great Lakes Wetland Restoration and Preservation Programs Frank Lupi, Michael D. Kaplowitz, John P. Hoehn IAGLR May 26, 2005

  2. Rationale • Great Lakes Wetlands • Services not necessarily protected • Great Lakes Wetland Policy • Legislation & policy interest in “restoration” • Lack Information on Public Preferences

  3. The Mail Survey Random Sample • 1650 Michigan adults • Dillman Method • 5 contact mail survey • Color booklet • 44% response rate

  4. Main Parts of Questionnaire • Wetland information and questions • Uses of wetlands • Perceived threats • Familiarity with wetland programs • Importance of wetlands • Choice and valuation questions • Preferences for types of wetland programs • Willingness to pay to finance programs

  5. What is Important? How important are Great Lake wetlands for … ?

  6. Program’s Primary Focus Variable

  7. Restoration/Preservation Effort Variable

  8. Land Acquisition Method Variable

  9. Stated Choice Results ** Significant at 1%. * Significant at 5%.

  10. 0.04X-0.0003X2 Mix of Preservation / Restoration Satisfaction 0 25 50 75 100 % Preservation

  11. Willingness to Pay for Program

  12. Influence of Variables on WTP • Negative effects Cost ** Rural residents * • Positive effects Biodiversity ** Water quality/flood control ** Waterfowl * More preservation/less restoration * Environmental group members ** Visited wetlands* ** Significant at 1%. * Significant at 5%.

  13. Statewide WTP Estimate • Estimated WTP for Programs • Mean value = $163 • C.I. = ( $116, $209) • Value per acre = $20,500 • But, only 25% have WTP>0

  14. What does it all mean? • Attitudes indicated wetlands are very important; people cared. • Program preferences based on trade-offs suggest • Preservation “effect” • Biodiversity; flood control and water quality • Preference for more secure property acquisition • Why willingness to pay = 0 for most people, even though they “care”?

  15. Acknowledgements • Research Support • Michigan Sea Grant • MSU Land Policy Program • Student Fellowship Support • Lake Michigan Federation • Project Team: • Frank Lupi, Michael Kaplowitz, and John Hoehn • Students: Oscar Arreola and Melissa Gibson

More Related