User community preferences for climate change mitigation and adaptation measures around Hainich National Park, Germany

In contemporary media discourse, suggestions for publicly mandated climate change mitigation or adaptation measures are frequently challenged from a cost perspective. However, empirical data on the actual economic appreciation of local mitigation and adaptation measures expressed as citizen willingness-to-pay (WTP) are scarce. In this paper, we report results of a prefer- ence survey using a choice experiment (CE) that quantifies economic preferences for biodiversity- based climate change mitigation and adaptation in the region surrounding Hainich National Park (Thuringia, Germany). A representative sample of 302 respondents — the majority of them frequent Hainich forest visitors — was interviewed in autumn 2006. Nested logit analysis showed that respon- dents state a substantially positive WTP for climate change mitigation by afforestation (p < 0.001). If converted to WTP for an additional sequestration of carbon that average German citizens emit as CO2, a monetary value of 7.34 € yr -1 t C -1 is obtained. For increasing forest resistance and resilience against insect pests and storms (climate change adaptation) a WTP of 27.54 € yr -1 (p < 0.001) is obtained, and 16.83 € yr -1 (p < 0.001) is obtained for increasing the general resilience and resistance of forest ecosys- tems to environmental stressors. Respondents support moderate programs to eradicate invasive plants when compared to more aggressive eradication measures. Due to the lack of comparable studies, it can only be conservatively assumed that WTP would be lower if mitigation and adaptation measures were to be implemented in forests not, or only rarely, used by respondents. As all proposed means for climate change mitigation and adaptation contribute to local forest ecosystem biodiversity, the results of the study advocate the realization of measures that potentially benefit both climate policy and regional conservation concerns.

[1]  K. Glenk,et al.  Assessing economic preferences for biological diversity and ecosystem services at the Central Sulawesi rainforest margin — a choice experiment approach , 2007 .

[2]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[3]  J. Michael Brick,et al.  A Minimally Intrusive Method for Sampling Persons in Random Digit Dial Surveys , 2004 .

[4]  K. Train.  Recreation Demand Models with Taste Differences Over People , 1998 .

[5]  S. Allison,et al.  Decomposers in disguise: mycorrhizal fungi as regulators of soil C dynamics in ecosystems under global change , 2008 .

[6]  R. Zeckhauser,et al.  The Perception and Valuation of the Risks of Climate Change: A Rational and Behavioral Blend , 2005 .

[7]  Nina Buchmann,et al.  Net CO2 and H2O fluxes of terrestrial ecosystems , 1999 .

[8]  Olaf Kolle,et al.  Large carbon uptake by an unmanaged 250-year-old deciduous forest in Central Germany , 2002 .

[9]  M. G. Shelton,et al.  Successional Development of the Forest Floor and Soil Surface on Upland Sites of the East Gulf Coastal Plain , 1979 .

[10]  Richard A. Berk,et al.  Public Perceptions of Climate Change: A 'Willingness to Pay' Assessment , 1998 .

[11]  William G. Lee,et al.  Species redundancy: a redundant concept? , 1996 .

[12]  Robert B Jackson,et al.  Set-asides can be better climate investment than corn ethanol. , 2009, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[13]  G. Robertson,et al.  NITRIFICATION POTENTIALS IN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SUCCESSION , 1981 .

[14]  P. Widden,et al.  Biotic and abiotic factors affecting ectomycorrhizal diversity in boreal mixed-woods , 2003 .

[15]  N. Myers,et al.  Environmental services of biodiversity. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  Agroforestry development: An environmental economic perspective , 2004 .

[17]  W. Nordhaus.  The "Stern Review" on the Economics of Climate Change , 2006 .

[18]  John M. Rose,et al.  Applied Choice Analysis: A Primer , 2005 .

[19]  D. Cole,et al.  Stern Review and Its Critics : Implications for the Theory and Practice of Benefit-Cost Analysis , The , 2007 .

[20]  Petr Pyšek,et al.  Invasion by Heracleum mantegazzianum in different habitats in the Czech Republic , 1995 .

[21]  H. Herzog,et al.  American exceptionalism? Similarities and differences in national attitudes toward energy policy and global warming. , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  P. Meier-Abt,et al.  [Serious plant poisonings in Switzerland 1966-1994. Case analysis from the Swiss Toxicology Information Center]. , 1996, Schweizerische medizinische Wochenschrift.

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

[24]  S. Levitus,et al.  Warming of the World Ocean , 2000 .

[25]  J. Louviere,et al.  Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation , 1998 .

[26]  Andy F. S. Taylor,et al.  Afforestation of abandoned farmland with conifer seedlings inoculated with three ectomycorrhizal fungi—impact on plant performance and ectomycorrhizal community , 2007, Mycorrhiza.

[27]  M. Rejmánek.  Invasive plants: approaches and predictions , 2000 .

[28]  M. Loreau,et al.  Biodiversity and ecosystem productivity in a fluctuating environment: the insurance hypothesis. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[29]  Jordan J. Louviere,et al.  Introduction to Attribute-Based Stated Choice Methods , 1998 .

[30]  I. Kowarik.  Biologische Invasionen: Neophyten und Neozoen in Mitteleuropa , 2010 .

[31]  Peter J. Edwards,et al.  The value of biodiversity : Where ecology and economy blend , 1998 .

[32]  K. Lancaster.  A New Approach to Consumer Theory , 1966, Journal of Political Economy.

[33]  I. Bateman.  Economic valuation with stated preference techniques : a manual : department for transport , 2002 .

[34]  J. Régnière,et al.  Assessing the Impacts of Global Warming on Forest Pest Dynamics , 2022 .

[35]  K. McCann.  The diversity–stability debate , 2000, Nature.

[36]  R. Tol.  The Social Cost of Carbon: Trends, Outliers and Catastrophes , 2008 .

[37]  Udo Kuckartz.  Review: Helmut Kromrey (2006). Empirische Sozialforschung. Modelle und Methoden der standardisierten Datenerhebung und Datenauswertung , 2008 .

[38]  C. Parmesan.  Ecological and Evolutionary Responses to Recent Climate Change , 2006 .

[39]  A. Kinzig,et al.  Linking Soil Microbial Communities and Ecosystem Functioning , 2002 .

[40]  Lucas Reijnders,et al.  Acute View Transport biofuels: Can they help limiting climate change without an upward impact on food prices? , 2009, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[41]  Rainer Baumann,et al.  Environmental Indication: A Field Test of an Ecosystem Approach to Quantify Biological Self-Organization , 2001, Ecosystems.

[42]  Siwa Msangi,et al.  Ex post assessment methods of climate forecast impacts , 2006 .

[43]  Gerald Shively,et al.  Measuring the Opportunity Cost of Carbon Sequestration in Tropical Agriculture , 2003, Land Economics.

[44]  N. Stern.  What is the Economics of Climate Change , 2006 .

[45]  B. Muys,et al.  Carbon sequestration following afforestation of agricultural soils: comparing oak/beech forest to short‐rotation poplar coppice combining a process and a carbon accounting model , 2004 .

[46]  J. C. Forbes,et al.  Giant hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum): its spread and control with glyphosate in amenity areas. , 1982 .

[47]  P. Meyer,et al.  Die Struktur albanischer Rotbuchen-Urwälder – Ableitungen für eine naturnahe Buchenwirtschaft , 2003, Forstwissenschaftliches Centralblatt vereinigt mit Tharandter forstliches Jahrbuch.

[48]  J. Kutzbach,et al.  A test of the overdue-glaciation hypothesis , 2005 .