Logo image
Back
Using a choice experiment and birder preferences to guide bird-conservation funding
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Using a choice experiment and birder preferences to guide bird-conservation funding

R. Steven, J.C.R. Smart, C. Morrison and J.G. Castley
Conservation Biology, Vol.31(4), pp.818-827
2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12849
url
Link to Published Version *Subscription may be requiredView

Abstract

Conservation of biodiversity, including birds, continues to challenge natural-area managers. Stated-preference methods (e.g., choice experiment [CE]) are increasingly used to provide data for valuation of natural ecosystems. We used a CE to calculate birders’ willingness to pay for different levels of bioecological attributes (threatened species, endemic species, and diversity) of birding sites with hypothetical entry fees. The CE was delivered at popular birding and avitourism sites in Australia and the United Kingdom. Latent-class modeling results revealed heterogeneous preferences among birders and correspondingly variable willingness to pay. Four clear groups were apparent: quantity-driven birders, special-birds seekers, confused respondents, and price-is-no-object birders. Quantity-driven birders were attracted to sites that deliver high levels of diversity and endemic species for which they were willing to pay $135 and $66 to visit, respectively, above what they were willing to pay to visit a site with low levels of diversity and few endemic and threatened species . Special-bird seekers valued threatened species and high levels of endemic species most (willingness to pay $45 and $46, respectively). Confused respondents’ preferences were difficult to determine, but they were the most sensitive to the hypothetical entry fees, unlike the price-is-no-object birders, who were not at all sensitive to cost. Our findings demonstrate that birders are amenable to paying for their preferred birding experience. These payments could provide an alternative source of funding in some avitourism sites on both public and private land. Such alternative revenue streams should be explored and given full consideration in increasingly competitive conservation-financing environments.

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

Source: InCites

Metrics

54 Record Views
34 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Citation topics
6 Social Sciences
6.122 Economic Theory
6.122.1087 Contingent Valuation
Web Of Science research areas
Biodiversity Conservation
Ecology
Environmental Sciences
ESI research areas
Environment/Ecology
Logo image