Informing and forming preferences in environmental valuation: Coral reef biodiversity

Abstract The level and depth of information provision required for making informed judgements over environmental options has remained troublesome in various contexts from individual choice through to international policy. In the valuation literature concern has been expressed for ‘information bias’ leading to distorted estimates of the worth of environmental entities (e.g. wildlife, ecosystems) because peoples intentions are formed during the valuation process by the information provided. Contending psychological models on the role of information and its relationship to ethical concerns are reviewed with respect to public decision processes over environmental entities. The robustness of pre-existing environmental preferences is then linked to ethical positions but their role is unclear. Empirical evidence is reported from a contingent valuation method study of coral reef biodiversity on the strong connections between informing and forming preferences and specific ethical beliefs regarding environmental entities.

[1]  Thomas C. Brown,et al.  Information Bias in Contingent Valuation: Effects of Personal Relevance, Quality of Information, and Motivational Orientation , 1996 .

[2]  Clive L. Spash,et al.  Ethics and environmental attitudes with implications for economic valuation , 1997 .

[3]  H. Cesar.  Collected Essays on the Economics of Coral Reefs , 2000 .

[4]  Baruch Fischhoff,et al.  Construal Processes in Preference Assessment , 1999 .

[5]  C. Spash.  Investigating Individual Motives for Environmental Action: Lexicographic Preferences, Beliefs and Attitudes , 1998 .

[6]  S. Hove.  Participatory approaches to environmental policy-making: the European Commission Climate Policy Process as a case study , 2000 .

[7]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[8]  Robert Cameron Mitchell,et al.  Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method , 1989 .

[9]  Timothy O'Riordan,et al.  Valuing Environmental Goods: An Assessment of the Contingent Valuation Method , 1987 .

[10]  John Hicks,et al.  The Rehabilitation of Consumers' Surplus , 1941 .

[11]  Thomas Dietz,et al.  Willingness to Pay for Public Goods: A Test of the Contribution Model , 1994 .

[12]  Jacquelin Burgess,et al.  Respondents' evaluations of a CV survey: a case study based on an economic valuation of the Wildlife Enhancement Scheme, Pevensey Levels in East Sussex , 1998 .

[13]  J. Payne,et al.  Measuring Constructed Preferences: Towards a Building Code , 1999 .

[14]  Jacquelin Burgess,et al.  Culture, Communication, and the Information Problem in Contingent Valuation Surveys: A Case Study of a Wildlife Enhancement Scheme , 2000 .

[15]  I. Ajzen.  The theory of planned behavior , 1991 .

[16]  J. Baron,et al.  Cost of Public Goods Affects Willingness to Pay for Them , 1996 .

[17]  C. Spash.  Assessing the Benefits of Improving Coral Reef Biodiversity: The Contingent Valuation Method , 2002 .

[18]  Charles C. Harris,et al.  Improving the contingent valuation method: A psychological perspective , 1989 .

[19]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction , 1992 .

[20]  C. Spash.  Ethical Motives and Charitable Contributions in Contingent Valuation: Empirical Evidence from Social Psychology and Economics , 2000 .

[21]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Stated Willingness to Pay for Public Goods: A Psychological Perspective , 1993 .

[22]  N. Hanley,et al.  Cost–Benefit Analysis and the Environment , 1993 .

[23]  Clive L. Spash,et al.  Ecosystems, contingent valuation and ethics: the case of wetland re-creation , 2000 .

[24]  A. Freeman.  Approaches to Measuring Public Goods Demands , 1979 .

[25]  K. Boyle.  Commodity Specification and the Framing of Contingent-Valuation Questions , 1989 .