How Sure Can You Be? A Framework for Considering Delivery Uncertainty in Benefit Assessments Based on Stated Preference Methods

The economic valuation of benefits resulting from environmental policies and interventions often assumes that environmental outcomes are certain. In fact, these outcomes are typically uncertain. This article proposes a methodological approach to incorporate delivery uncertainty into benefit estimation based on stated preference methods. In the study design of a choice experiment survey on land-based climate change mitigation, we explicitly include delivery uncertainty as the risk that a proposed mitigation project fails to deliver emission savings. We find that respondents’ preferences do not change significantly after being confronted with choices that included risk of failure. However, failure risk itself does have an important impact on the preferences for delivering emission reductions. We show that delivery uncertainty can have a large impact on stated preference estimation of benefits of public programmes. This result should condition conclusions drawn from ex-ante environmental cost-benefit analyses that make use of such benefit estimates.

[1]  N. Hanley,et al.  Should all Choices Count? Using the Cut-Offs Approach to Edit Responses in a Choice Experiment , 2009 .

[2]  J. Louviere,et al.  The Role of the Scale Parameter in the Estimation and Comparison of Multinomial Logit Models , 1993 .

[3]  John B. Loomis,et al.  Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference of Empirical Distributions , 2005 .

[4]  Antonio F. Amores,et al.  New approach for the assignment of new European agricultural subsidies using scores from data envelopment analysis: Application to olive-growing farms in Andalusia (Spain) , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[5]  K. Glenk,et al.  Modelling Outcome‐Related Risk in Choice Experiments , 2013 .

[6]  Jo Smith,et al.  Greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[7]  J. Isselstein,et al.  Rewarding farmers for delivering vascular plant diversity in managed grasslands: A transdisciplinary case-study approach , 2008 .

[8]  Pete Smith,et al.  Calculating carbon savings from wind farms on Scottish peat lands: a new approach , 2008 .

[9]  G. Pan,et al.  Policy and technological constraints to implementation of greenhouse gas mitigation options in agriculture , 2007 .

[10]  Wyn Grant,et al.  The Common Agricultural Policy , 1998 .

[11]  Geoffrey R. Gerdes,et al.  Valuing publicly sponsored research projects: Risks, scenario adjustments, and inattention , 2007 .

[12]  E. Bertke,et al.  Developing result-orientated payment schemes for environmental services in grasslands: Results from two case studies in North-western Germany , 2008 .

[13]  J. Swait.  A structural equation model of latent segmentation and product choice for cross-sectional revealed preference choice data☆ , 1994 .

[14]  Kyle W Meisterling,et al.  Decisions to reduce greenhouse gases from agriculture and product transport: LCA case study of organic and conventional wheat , 2009 .

[15]  N. Hanley,et al.  Modeling preference heterogeneity in stated choice data: an analysis for public goods generated by agriculture , 2009 .

[16]  Murat Işık.  An experimental analysis of impacts of uncertainty and irreversibility on willingness-to-pay , 2006 .

[17]  K. Glenk,et al.  Designing policies to mitigate the agricultural contribution to climate change: an assessment of soil based carbon sequestration and its ancillary effects , 2011 .

[18]  P. Boxall,et al.  Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach , 2002 .

[19]  Pete Smith,et al.  Carbon losses from soil and its consequences for land-use management. , 2007, The Science of the total environment.

[20]  J. Meyerhoff,et al.  Valuing the chances of survival of two distinct Eurasian lynx populations in Poland - do people want to keep the doors open? , 2013, Journal of environmental management.

[21]  Klaus Butterbach-Bahl,et al.  Carbon Sequestration in Arable Soils is Likely to Increase Nitrous Oxide Emissions, Offsetting Reductions in Climate Radiative Forcing , 2005 .

[22]  Klaus Glenk,et al.  Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods , 2008 .

[23]  R. Claassen,et al.  Agri-Environmental Policy at the Crossroads: Guideposts on a Changing Landscape , 2001 .

[24]  Nick Hanley,et al.  A contingent valuation study of uncertain environmental gains , 1995 .

[25]  Charles A. Holt,et al.  Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects , 2002 .

[26]  Riccardo Scarpa,et al.  Destination Choice Models for Rock Climbing in the Northeast Alps: A Latent-Class Approach Based on Intensity of Participation , 2004 .

[27]  Trudy Ann Cameron,et al.  Individual Option Prices for Climate Change Mitigation , 2002 .

[28]  Nick Hanley,et al.  Designing Policy for Reducing the Off-farm Effects of Soil Erosion Using Choice Experiments , 2005 .

[29]  I. Krinsky,et al.  On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities , 1986 .

[30]  Leah R Gerber,et al.  Including risk in stated-preference economic valuations: Experiments on choices for marine recreation. , 2009, Journal of environmental management.

[31]  Pete Smith,et al.  Carbon sequestration in the agricultural soils of Europe , 2004 .

[32]  Phoebe Koundouri,et al.  Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: The case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece , 2006 .

[33]  Göran Broman,et al.  A method for sustainable product development based on a modular system of guiding questions , 2007 .

[34]  Joffre Swait,et al.  The Akaike Likelihood Ratio Index , 1986, Transp. Sci..

[35]  A. Mokssit,et al.  Historical overview of climate change science , 2007 .

[36]  F. Knight.  The economic nature of the firm: From Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit , 2009 .

[37]  P. Jakus,et al.  Perceived Hazard and Product Choice: An Application to Recreational Site Choice , 2001 .

[38]  N. Hanley,et al.  Assessing the success of agri-environmental policy in the UK , 1999 .

[39]  R. Scarpa,et al.  Destination Choice Models for Rock Climbing in the Northeastern Alps: A Latent-Class Approach Based on Intensity of Preferences , 2005, Land Economics.

[40]  Bill Provencher,et al.  A Discussion of “Using Angler Characteristics and Attitudinal Data to Identify Environmental Preference Classes: A Latent-Class Model” , 2006 .

[41]  Pete Smith,et al.  Carbon Sequestration in European Agricultural Soils by 2010: potential, uncertainty, policy impacts , 2002 .

[42]  J. Lusk,et al.  Preferences for environmental quality under uncertainty , 2008 .

[43]  Jj Louviere,et al.  Confound it! That pesky little scale constant messes up our convenient assumptions , 2006 .

[44]  William J. Sutherland,et al.  How effective are European agri‐environment schemes in conserving and promoting biodiversity? , 2003 .