Duration: 10/01/2007 to 09/30/2012

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

Statement of Issues and Justification

Natural resource agencies and institutions at the federal, state, and local levels, as well as private landowners, attempt to balance economic growth and environmental quality. Emphasis on environmental quality is evident in provisions of the most recent Farm Bills; in agricultural land preservation programs at the local, state and federal levels; and in legislative mandates to federal agencies to justify their decisions regarding how natural resources are to be managed, including protecting environmental quality, providing wildlife habitat, and providing access for recreation.


In federal regulatory impact analyses, agencies use a benefit-cost analysis framework, which requires quantification of the monetary value of all natural resources, including those not traded in markets and thus lacking market prices. The need for valid and reliable economic estimates of non-market resources continues to grow as management philosophies and people's demands for environmental quality change. For example, federal land management agencies have adopted ecosystem management as a guiding principle, which requires information on environmental, social, and economic aspects of the quality of, and / or project impacts on, natural resources. The objectives of this regional research project are designed to provide non-market benefit and cost information needed by decision makers in the public and private sectors. The rechartered project will address important stakeholder issues such as recreation access to public and private lands; the valuation of ecosystem services; and effective management of natural hazards such as invasive species and forest fires.


Public and private agencies / institutions have expressed significant interest in the information provided through W1133. Stakeholders, such as USDA Forest Service and DOI Bureau of Land Management personnel, who participate in workshops on economics and social analyses, have requested information on non-market valuation of wildlife and other non-marketed attributes of natural resources. Stakeholder interest is directly evident from the frequent and extensive participation by them in W1133 annual meetings, including USDA Forest Service, USDA Economic Research Service, NOAA, US Fish and Wildlife Service, US Bureau of Reclamation, US Environmental Protection Agency, and private consultants, among others. W1133's research results help shape plans and policies (USDA Forest Service Strategic Plan and Resource Planning Act values, NOAA type A damage assessments), and direct future grant solicitations (US Environmental Protection Agency, 2005).


Experiment Stations gain several advantages from participating in W1133. This project brings together experts from across the country while avoiding duplication of effort in the development, design, and application of statistical models and survey methods. W1133 combines complementary specialized expertise at different experiment stations and federal agencies to leverage advancements in methods and applications, such as integrating quantitative methods (Nevada, New York and Iowa) with empirical applications (Colorado, Georgia and Michigan).


The organizational infrastructure created by W1133 generates synergies in non-market valuation research, which would likely dissipate should this research project not be rechartered. Without a regional project, there will likely be duplication of research effort and fragmented gains in information due to limited resources at individual Experiment Stations. Failure to conduct proposed research will leave many federal and state agencies without information needed to evaluate the economic effects of natural resource policies and management plans for public and private lands.

Proceedings from W1133 annual meetings, agency publications, and co-authored journal articles document the sustained collaboration of and contributions by participating Experiment Stations. Prior advancements in theory and applications of environmental economics made by this project have built a sound foundation for important refinements and new empirical applications by this group and other Experiment Stations and agencies over the next five years. Given many members of participating Experiment Stations have formal extension appointments and work closely with collaborators within and outside of W1133, broad dissemination of research results to various stakeholders occurs through public and agency workshops and cooperative extension publications.


This regional research project creates and maintains human and network capital infrastructures that can rapidly respond to requests of local, state and federal resource managers and policy makers for evaluating emerging policy issues. Often similar management and policy issues arise in different states. The ability of each Experiment Station's scientists to leverage the expertise of their fellow members in W1133 enables their rapid response to emerging issues through applications of the methods, survey instruments, and information originally developed by other W1133 members to address similar issues in their states. Note too that state membership has grown in the past decade, which indicates increasing interest in policy relevant non-market valuation and further expansion of the portfolio of researcher expertise.

Related, Current and Previous Work

The previous W1133 Western Regional Research Project had four objectives. This section outlines accomplishments for each of these objectives and identifies continuities with the current project recharter proposal.


Substantial progress was made on advancing the state-of-the-art in valuation methods. W1133 members are at the core of these advances; therefore, advances in valuation have been a common thread linking all objectives of this project. In 2003, W1133 members and collaborators released a book on valuation methods (Champ et al., 2003). This book provides theory and applications of the state-of-the-art in valuation and has become widely used in classrooms and as a de facto non-market valuation manual by state and federal agencies. Yet another book (Haab (Ohio) and McConnell, 2002) provides access to the statistical methods used in non-market valuation. In 2003, Freeman (2003) released the second edition of his book covering the theory and methods of measuring environmental and resource values. Ward and Beals (2000) book is a manual for applying the travel cost methods, while Hanley et al.s (2002) book is a manual for applying stated preference methods. Further evidence of W1133 members contributions in advancing valuation methods are abundantfor stated preference methods (Ready et al., 2005-Pennsylvania; Hoehn and Deaton, 2005-Michigan; Hearne, 2006-North Dakota), for revealed preference methods (Loomis and Richardson, 2003-Colorado; von Haefen, 2003, 2004-North Carolina; Moeltner and Hagerty, 2005-Nevada) and for benefit transfer methods (Rosenberger and Stanley, 2006-Oregon; Hoehn, 2006-Michigan).


Valuing Ecosystem Management of Forests and Watersheds


The valuation of ecosystem services continues to receive a great deal of interest and resources over the past five years (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2003), with W1133 members making significant contributions to the theory and valuation of ecosystem services. National Research Councils (2005) book outlining the valuation of ecosystem services, in particular water services, had two W1133 members on the scientific committee (Boyle-Maine and Hoehn-Michigan). Daily and Ellisons (2002) book reviewed the construction of markets for ecosystem services. And Hechts (2005) book illustrates how non-market valuation can be integrated into national accounting frameworks. Other W1133 members (Loomis-Colorado; Bergstrom-Georgia) and other participants in W1133 (USDA Forest Service) have initiated collaboration on the conceptual foundations for the study of ecosystem services, including investigating the development of markets for ecosystem services (Brown, Bergstrom and Loomis, 2006). Progress also was made through advances in valuation methodology and empirical applications to ecosystem goods and services. W1133 members worked with the USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station to summarize knowledge on the economic benefits and impacts of designated wilderness. This culminated in a book on the values of wilderness (Cordell, Bergstrom, and Bowker, 2005). W1133 members specific contributions include Bergstrom (Georgia) as a co-editor and co-author of several chapters along with Loomis (Colorado). Rosenberger (Oregon) addressed the impacts of wilderness on local economies (Rosenberger and English 2005). Given the direct, close collaboration between W1133 and the stakeholder (USDA Forest Service), this book will receive widespread application on National Forests throughout the U.S. Other stakeholders include legislators and non-profit organizations.


Significant advances in understanding the role and impacts of forest fires on recreation, watersheds, habitat and other ecosystem services were made through cooperative research by W1133 members and the USDA Forest Service, providing contrasting effects across space and valuation methods (Loomis, 2004; Loomis et al., 2005-Colorado and USDA Forest Service; Englin et al., 2006-Nevada and USDA Forest Service). Other applications and tests focused on wetland services (Lupi et al., 2003 and Hoehn et al., 2004-Michigan; and participants Netusil, 2005 and Finnoff and Caplan, 2005) using stated preference and hedonic property methods. Additional contributions were made in other areas of ecosystem management, including private lands and wildlife habitat (Dennis et al., 2003-Massachusetts; Shultz and Rosenberger, 2004-North Dakota and Oregon; Wallmo et al., 2004-Michigan).


Ecosystem management and the valuation of ecosystem services is important for managers of public and private lands. There are significant use and passive use values associated with ecosystem services, many without credible economic estimates. Therefore, the valuation of ecosystem services will be expanded to include other emerging issues, such as natural weather events, climate change, and USDA priority research areas such as invasive species, as a primary objective of the project recharter proposal.


Valuing Changes in Recreational Access


Growing demand and conflict between motorized and non-motorized recreation continues to be a priority topic for BLM and USDA Forest Service. Substantial progress has been made on valuing changes in recreational access, in particular how to treat inherent biases in revealed and stated preference valuation methods. Hanley, Shaw and Wrights (2003) book provides applications of state-of-the-art in valuing outdoor recreation resources. Several W1133 members and collaborators contributed to the book, including one of the editors (Shaw-Texas). Nevada, Michigan, and Iowa have developed methods to identify and correct for avidity bias in onsite surveys (Shaw et al., 2003-Nevada, Michigan; Egan and Herriges, 2003-Iowa; Moeltner and Shonkwiler, 2005-Nevada). Collaborators from the USDA Forest Service, Wisconsin and Montana jointly investigated identifying, measuring and correcting for hypothetical bias with W1133 members from Connecticut, Colorado, and Pennsylvania (Champ et al., 2005; Johnson and Joglekar, 2005-Connecticut; Duffield et al., 2006; Ready et al., 2006-Pennsylvania; Loomis and Davies, 2006-Colorado). An issue of significant interest to managers of public and private land is the increased demand for motorized recreation. W1133 members from Nevada, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah and Kentucky have measured the use and value of off-highway vehicle use and snowmobiling in several states, adding significant information that was previously unavailable (Englin et al., 2003-Nevada; Bastian and Loomis, 2005-Wyoming, Colorado; Holmes and Englin, 2005-Nevada; Jakus and Blahna, 2004-Utah; Fleming and Johnson, 2005- Kentucky). In other investigations, Kentucky and collaborators from Texas have modeled the appropriate setting of fees and access to private land (Nguyen et al., 2006 and Kim et al., 2006-Texas; Fleming and Johnson, 2005 and Fleming et al., 2006-Kentucky).


Consensus of W1133 researchers and collaborators recognize that, despite significant progress in this area over the years, there is still a lot to be learned about how management of recreation access between motorized and non-motorized recreation users affects the benefits and the quality of recreational experiences they receive. Therefore, we have refined the focus of this objective to build upon what was accomplished over the last five years and to address the remaining issues in a coordinated fashion in our project recharter proposal.


Benefits and Costs of Agro-Environmental Policies


Progress was made regarding the benefits and costs of agro-environmental policies due to collaboration among federal agencies, universities and W1133 members. The demand for specialty foods and genetically modified foods were measured by New Hampshire and Washington (Giraud et al., 2004-New Hampshire; Bhattacharjee et al., 2006-Washington), while Utah examined the supply of irradiated foods (Jaenicke et al. 2006). Several studies provide evidence on the use of hedonic property and stated preference models for valuing the effects of agricultural and environmental policies on property values, including water quality (Poor et al., 2004; Petrie and Taylor, 2006; McLeod et al., 2006-Wyoming; Hand et al., 2006), agricultural land (Shultz, 2006), and natural amenities (Netusil and Chattopadhyay, 2005). Other contributions include an investigation in farm productivity (Paudel, 2006-Louisiana), the use of benefit information in evaluations of agro-environmental policies (Hansen, 2006) and the value of eco-certification of wood products (Jensen et al., 2004 and Jensen et al., 2003-Utah). Policy evaluations will continue to be in demand by federal agencies and other institutions, therefore we will continue investigations in this area in our project recharter proposal.


Economic Values of Agricultural Land Preservation and Open Space


Substantial progress was made on this objective, although these issues are expected to continue to be important to federal agencies and other institutions. A book was released with W1133 members as an editor and contributors (Bergstrom, Goetz and Shortle 2004-Georgia, Pennsylvania), which documents the causes and effects of land use changes. Georgia and Pennsylvania recently reviewed twenty years of studies on the value of farmland amenities, demonstrating the effects of various attributes on value magnitudes and extensions of lessons learned to evaluating agricultural policies (Bergstrom and Ready, 2005-Georgia, Pennsylvania). Various methods for measuring the effects of and values for agricultural land and open space preservation have been applied by W1133 members and collaborators. Hailu and Rosenberger (2004-Oregon), Poor (2003), and Poor and Brule (2005) used aggregate-measures in a revealed preference framework to evaluate the effects of agricultural programs across broad regions. Other members and collaborators applied stated preference methods to evaluate agricultural land preservation policies (Dorfman et al., 2004-Georgia; Johnston and Giraud, 2004-Connecticut, New Hampshire; Netusil, 2005; and Johnston and Duke, 2006-Connecticut). Hedonic methods also were used to ascertain non-farm resource attributes of agricultural lands and potential policy impacts (Bastian and McLeod 2002-Wyoming; Ready and Abdalla, 2005-Pennsylvania). Consensus of W1133 researchers and collaborators recognize that, despite significant progress in this area over the years, there is still a lot to be learned about the values of agricultural land and open space preservation, and the effectiveness of preservation tools and land use policies. Therefore, we have refined the focus of this objective to build upon what was accomplished over the last five years and to address the remaining issues in a coordinated fashion in our project recharter proposal.


RELATED REGIONAL RESEARCH PROJECTS


Re-authorization of this proposed regional research project will directly contribute to meeting informational needs of federal, state and local agencies and other institutions that are not met by any existing or proposed regional research projects or coordinating committees. A search of the National Information Management and Support System (NIMSS) database found no other projects dealing with non-market valuation. The three most similar projects focus exclusively on water allocation for agricultural and other production purposes (W1190-active) or on rangelands and rural communities (WERA055-active with WERA_TEMP1921-draft recharter; W_TEMP1781-draft recharter of W192). W1190s focus is primarily on irrigated agriculture, not instream flow, fisheries and in situ water quality. Thus, W1190 complements W1133s proposed project on non-market uses of water with particular emphasis on the economic benefits of water quality improvements and instream flow. W1192 (W_TEMP1781-draft) focuses on rural communities and public rangelands, in particular linkages between agricultural production and community well-being, while WERA055 focuses solely on livestock grazing issues on public lands. W1133s focus is on uses of public and private lands, including rangelands, for recreation and amenity production. W1133, W1190, W1192, and WERA055 complement each other, providing decision-makers with a broader picture of public land management issues and policies than is provided by any project alone.

Objectives

1. Estimate the economic value of management actions and policies that reduce risk and uncertainty of natural hazards and agricultural land preservation
   
2. Develop and evaluate the accuracy and reliability of primary non-market valuation methods and benefit transfer for use by public agencies.
   
3. Quantify the economic benefits of ecosystem services and evaluate mechanisms for their provision
   

Methods

Objective 1: Natural Resource Management under Uncertainty This objective will estimate the economic value to society of management actions and policies that reduce risk and uncertainty of natural hazards and agricultural land preservation. Two primary tasks are associated with this objective: (1) economic analysis of agricultural land and open space, and (2) economic analysis of natural hazards such as fire, invasive species, natural events, and climate change. Task 1-1: Economic Analysis of Agricultural Land, Open Space and Wildland-Urban Interface Issues While the desirable effects of conserving agricultural lands and open space are well-established (e.g., reductions in soil erosion, improvements in air and water quality, expansion of wildlife habitat and wetlands, and places for recreating), little is known about the economic values of these beneficial consequences. In many states, voters have self-imposed taxes or directed state lottery revenue toward the purchase of agricultural lands and open space. Many tools for agricultural land preservation are available, including zoning regulations, conservation easements, fee simple-purchases, land use planning, purchase of development rights, etc.; however, efficient allocations require information on the fair market value of such agricultural land preservation. Since open space is not a traditional land use, traditional real estate appraisal techniques fall short of providing accurate estimates of the value of open space to society. This task will provide information on the economic values of different types of agricultural land and open space, and evaluate land preservation tools including regulatory and economic conservation programs. Nine states (DE, GA, MI, NC, NY, OH, OR, PA, WY) will work together to accomplish this task. Participating states will estimate the economic value of preserving agricultural land and open space, including how values vary with the differing attributes of these lands across regions. The effectiveness of management policies and tools also will be evaluated and compared across states, determining the contexts and conditions for which different policies are effective and efficient in meeting their goals. This information will be useful to state and county governments as they design agricultural land preservation and open space programs, as well as identifying priority lands to protect. New York, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio and Oregon will apply hedonic property methods, while Georgia, Michigan, Ohio, Delaware and Wyoming, will apply stated preference methods in estimating economic values of open space. Comparisons between valuation methods and across regions will be made. In addition, Michigan, Oregon, and Wyoming will use these methods to evaluate the effectiveness of various land use management tools including transferable permit systems, purchase of development rights, conservation easements, and land use zoning. Task 1-2: Economic Analysis of Natural Hazards Issues (Fire, Invasive Species, Natural Events, Climate Change) Natural resource management is a risky business. A significant portion of the risk resource managers face arises from natural hazards such as fire, invasive species, natural events (hurricanes, floods, tornadoes), and climate change. Risk and uncertainty of events occurring and their relative impacts need to be better conveyed to decision makers and the public. It is well-known that scientific measures of risk and lay perceptions of risk often diverge. Better means of communicating risks to lay audiences seems appropriate if public discourse is to be informed by scientific findings (which includes measures of risk and probabilities). The USDA Forest Services Chief, Dale Bosworth, identified four primary threats to sustainable management of national forestsfuels and fire, invasive species, unmanaged recreation, and habitat fragmentation. This task directly addresses two of these threats and other probabilistic events by estimating the benefits or costs associated with the changes, evaluating the risk of events occurring, and management or policy responses to them. Colorado, Washington, Nevada and the USDA Forest Service (including the Rocky Mountain, Pacific Southwest, and Southern Research Stations) will measure the non-market impacts of fire and fire prevention programs, perceptions of risk, and how to manage these risks. Colorado, Washington and USDA Forest Service will apply stated preference and hedonic property methods, while Nevada will complement these approaches through applying revealed preference methods. Results from these applications will be used to compare and contrast across states and management programs. Michigan and Nevada will apply revealed preference and benefit transfer methods to measure impacts of invasive species in specific waterbodies, while the USDA Forest Service will complement these approaches by evaluating invasive species management alternatives using stated preference methods. Michigan, Texas and Nevada will jointly evaluate impacts and risks associated with weather-related events, such as hurricanes, floods and / or tornados, using stated preference methods. Michigan will also apply hedonic property methods as contrast. California and Washington will evaluate the impacts of climate change on agricultural production and value using revealed preference methods and stated preference methods, respectively. Collectively, the six states (CO, WA, NV, MI, TX, CA) and three USDA Forest Service research stations (PSW, RMRS, SRS) involved in this task will apply stated preference and revealed preference methods across a variety of natural hazards and in different states. This will provide information for the comparison of impacts, risks and management / policy responses to deal with these natural hazards. This collaborative and joint research avoids the need for every state to compare every possible method. Objective 2: Advances in Valuation Methods This objective will develop and evaluate the accuracy and reliability of non-market valuation methods for their use by public agencies. There are two tasks associated with this objectivebenefit transfer and primary valuation. W1133 members and collaborators are at the forefront of non-market valuation as noted earlier. We will continue to advance the state-of-the-art in non-market valuation to address pressing concerns of stakeholders like the USDA Forest Service and US Environmental Protection Agency. Task 2-1: Improving Validity and Efficiency in Benefit Transfers Data and techniques for benefit transfer are increasingly being requested by federal agencies (USDA Forest Service, National Park Service, US Environmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Reclamation) and other institutions as an alternative to expensive and time-consuming primary valuation. However, there are uncertainties and potential biases of unknown magnitude associated with benefit transfer methods (Office of Management and Budget, 2003). Improvements in the validity and efficiency of benefit transfer is a primary theme for recent US Environmental Protection Agency STAR competitive grant programs, and in FY2010, the STAR program is planning a major effort to synthesize current research on benefit transfer, which will rely heavily on W1133s past research and members expertise. Five states (OH, OR, NV, CT, MI, GA), in collaboration with CO, AR, USDA Forest Service and US Environmental Protection Agency, will evaluate several approaches to benefit transfers including meta-regression analysis and Bayesian methods to address bias (in particular, publication selection bias), levels of aggregation of data, and the overall efficiency, validity and efficacy of the methods. Resource issues of this task include recreation use valuation, wetland valuation, and USDA conservation practice / program valuation. GA, OH and OR will also develop and examine improved and innovative benefit transfer data platforms that are directly linked to policy and management needs for agency use. These data platforms are expected to provide benefit transfer practitioners with efficient means to access valuation data and derive accurate estimates of non-market values for a variety of resources and policy / management issues. Task 2-2: Improving Valuation Methods and Technology Eight states (MA, IA, PA, MI, NC, WA, NY, IL) will evaluate approaches to reduce hypothetical bias, improve experimental design, and evaluate new statistical estimators. Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and New York will evaluate innovative ways to reduce hypothetical bias in stated preference surveys. Reducing hypothetical bias will increase the robustness, applicability, and comparability of non-market values with market values for other resources and increase the acceptability of non-market values to managers and other stakeholders. Collectively, these three states will evaluate complementary approaches to reducing hypothetical bias including a prediction-based method for eliciting willingness-to-pay estimates, calibration approaches, and development of realistic incentive mechanisms for soliciting actual contributions to projects, respectively. Iowa and Michigan will evaluate different experimental designs for improving primary valuation. Michigan will evaluate web-based versus mail surveys as an efficient means to gather data. Iowa will be evaluating the use of Bayesian approaches to bid design in stated preference surveys and the convergent validity of contingent behavior responses. These two states will compare the ability to apply new design approaches to electronic and paper versions of surveys. Iowa, Washington, Illinois and North Carolina will compare different estimators for efficient estimation of values from survey data. Iowa will evaluate the use of Bayesian techniques (Gibbs sampling and data augmentation) that allow for more flexible functional forms in the dual Kuhn-Tucker model and the impact of non-response bias in recreation demand surveys. Washington, Illinois and North Carolina will work with combining stated preference and revealed preference data. Washington will evaluate a hybrid choice model that incorporates behavioral economic dimensions, Illinois will compare hedonic and choice-based estimation of environmental impacts on property values, and North Carolina will use stated preference data to identify marginal values of observable site attributes in revealed preference models that account for unobserved site attributes. All of the above survey instruments, data and analysis methods will be shared with other stations for applications and testing across multiple states. Objective 3: Valuation of Ecosystem Services This objective will provide estimates of the economic benefits of ecosystem services and evaluate mechanisms for their provision. Ecosystem management is a holistic approach to managing natural resources that integrates biophysical, social, and economic components. Ecosystem management is endorsed by federal land management agencies (USDA Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service). The outputs of an ecosystem management approach include ecosystem goods and services such as recreation opportunities, wetlands, clean air and water, wildlife habitat, wilderness, forage, timber and ecological functions such as nutrient cycling and climate regulation. This proposal will target three areasrecreational access, ecosystem services flows, and water quality. Task 3-1: Valuing Changes in Recreational Access Access to public and private land for recreation continues to be of particular importance for federal agencies such as USDA Forest Service, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service, state and local parks, recreation and forestry departments, among other agencies and institutions. Recreation has many individual and societal benefits including health, educational, and quality-of-life. However, as populations continue to grow and the popularity of recreation continues to increase, there are increasing conflicts with other natural resources (e.g., one of the USDA Forest Service Chiefs main threatsunmanaged recreation), crowding and congestion. In turn, this can lead to rationing of access to public lands with potential spillovers to private lands. Federal mandates may restrict the ability of private landowners to supply recreation to the public due to ecological issues such as endangered species, pollution, and other concerns. Efficient allocation of land to different uses and solving conflicts among recreational uses (e.g., motorized versus non-motorized) requires information on the relative economic benefits of various recreation activities. Nine states (KY, TX, OR, ND, NV, MI, WY, OH, CO) will collaborate on issues related to valuing changes in recreational access. Kentucky, Oregon, North Dakota, Nevada, Wyoming and Colorado will jointly provide information on the value of access to public and private lands for a variety of recreation activities, settings, and regions. In particular, Kentucky will evaluate private landowners willingness to allow access to their land for recreational uses using stated preference and revealed preference methods. Oregon will measure the health benefits associated with recreating in outdoor settings using revealed preference methods. North Dakota and Nevada will evaluate the benefits of recreation access using stated preference and revealed preference methods, respectively, allowing for cross-regional comparisons. Wyoming and Colorado will evaluate access to lands for winter recreation. Texas and Michigan will evaluate the effects of conservation programs on access to public and private land for recreational fishing. Texas will evaluate the effect of a tradable permit program for enhancing fisheries by using revealed preference methods on fishing in the Gulf of Mexico near Texas, Florida, Mississippi and Louisiana. Michigan, using revealed preference and benefit transfer methods, will measure the benefits of recreational access for fishing, while Ohio uses similar methods in Ohio. Task 3-2: Valuing Changes in Ecosystem Services Flows Estimating economic values for ecosystem goods and services is difficult, especially for those goods and services further removed from established markets. As noted in the introduction, W1133 has made significant contributions to our understanding of ecosystem services valuation. However, more information is needed about how the public values ecological goods and ecosystem services, how these goods and services are produced by mixed public and private land ownership at the landscape scale, and how markets can be established to efficiently provide these goods and services in an open economy. Seven states (MI, WY, MA, NH, GA, CO, OH) and two federal agencies (USDA Forest Service, USDA Economic Research Service) will collaboratively measure values for ecosystem goods and services and evaluate market mechanisms for their provision. Michigan and USDA Economic Research Service will estimate economic values for wetlands and watershed services using stated preference methods and analyze the effectiveness of the Wetland Reserve Program in minimizing program operational costs while maximizing environmental performance. Wyoming, Georgia, Colorado, Michigan, and the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station will use stated preference, revealed preference, production function, and cost replacement methods, combined with Geographic Information System modeling, to classify and estimate values for ecosystem goods and services. Data will be shared to enable comparative analyses. In addition, they will evaluate the benefits and costs of various ecosystem service provision mechanisms, including self-organized private transactions, government-organized transactions, government fees, public and private grants, and the development of ecosystem services markets (tradable permits, carbon and pollution credits, offset programs, etc.). Massachusetts and New Hampshire will use stated preference methods to measure the tradeoffs associated with alternative energy production through a wind farm and scenic vistas. Ohio will examine joint liability contracts with landowners for improvements in water quality. Combined, these W1133 members will provide theory and empirical evidence on the type and magnitude of ecosystem service values that will help shape future research and discourse on this important topic. Task 3-3: Valuing Changes in Water Quality Water quality continues to be of particular importance for many federal, state, and local agencies. Water quality issues range from impacts on recreational experiences to health effects. Seven states (TX, CO, ND, IA, PA, NC, UT) will jointly measure the value of water quality for recreation and health. Texas, Colorado and North Dakota will use stated preference methods to measure reductions in risks from arsenic and nitrate pollution of drinking water, and evaluate public preferences for local water quality programs. Iowa, Pennsylvania and North Carolina will use revealed preference and stated preference methods to measure the effect of different water quality attributes on recreational experiences and values for ecological health of several water bodies in the Northeast and Midwest. Pooling of stated preference data sets will allow investigation of a broader range of water pollutants, concentrations and how regional demographic differences influence willingness to pay for protecting water quality.

Measurement of Progress and Results

Outputs

• The publications, presentations, and website will provide state and federal agencies, and non-profit organizations with a broad set of empirical estimates of the economic values of agricultural land preservation and open space protection, ecosystem services, and risk management outcomes (fire, invasive species, natural events, climate change), multiple recreation activities for different regions, water quality, and related estimated demand and benefit functions.
• The publications, presentations, and website will provide state and federal agencies and non-profit organizations evaluations of market and regulatory mechanisms for the provision of ecosystem goods and services.
• The publications, presentations, and website will provide state and federal agencies and non-profit organizations with measures of the effectiveness of ecosystem and risk management strategies, programs and tools.
• The publications, presentations, and website will provide state and federal agencies and non-prfit organizations with improvements in primary valuation and benefit transfer methods that are applicable to the quanitfy economic benefits of their programs and for use in their budgeting process.

Outcomes or Projected Impacts

• Improve federal, state, local and private institutional decision-making with respect to managing public and private lands by reducing risks associated with natural hazards such as fire, invasive species, weather-related natural events, and climate change; the provision of ecosystem goods and services; and efficient mix of recreation opportunities to society
• Cost and time savings to public agencies from availability of state-of-the-art valuation methods and databases for benefit transfers that the agencies can quickly and inexpensively employ in their management plans and EIS's on non market natural resources
• Enhance public agency and private landowner ecosystem service marketing decisions by providing information on the efficiency and effectiveness of alternative programs for the marketing and provision of ecosystem goods and services.

Milestones

(2009): Data collection methods will be collaboratively designed, and primary and secondary data on use of natural resources for recreation, ecosystem services will be gathered.

(2010): Initial stated and revealed preference models will be jointly developed, and estimated, economic values derived, and preliminary results shared with stakeholders to obtain their suggestions on usefulness.

(2012): Outcomes from this research will be detailed in documents in the form of reports, submitted manuscripts, workshops for agencies, professional meetings, extension publications by participating members available via links on the proposed W1133 website.

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Outreach Plan

Outreach Plan


Many W1133 members have extension appointments (Michigan, New York) or work closely with their extension colleagues. Links to participating members extension publications such as bulletins and fact sheets will be provided on the W1133 website. This provides additional opportunities to disseminate research outcomes to field settings and policy applications.


The annual meeting of W1133 members and collaborators provides an ideal opportunity to share results with each other including member and partner universities, personnel from several federal agencies (USDA Forest Service, USDA Economic Research Service, US Bureau of Reclamation, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, among others), state agencies and consulting firms. The papers from this meeting are published electronically in an annual proceeding that is made available to all attendees, Agricultural Experiment Stations, agricultural economics departments at land grant universities, and anyone else that is interested. An annual report including minutes of our business meeting is posted on the NIMSS website.


Joint research between W1133 members and USDA Forest Service personnel is expected to continue to be published through USDA Forest Service publications (e.g., General Technical Reports, Research Notes, and Research Papers) that are made available through the USDA Forest Services web sites and publicized as USDA Forest Service new publications outlets.


Members of W1133 have a long tradition of publishing their research in peer-reviewed journals. This outlet will continue to be utilized as a means of verification through the review process and dissemination to other researchers and practitioners. These journals include not only economics and agricultural economics journals (such as American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Environmental and Resource Economics, Ecological Economics, Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, etc.), but many natural resource journals (such as Journal of Forestry, Water Resources Research, North American Journal of Fisheries Management, Journal of Environmental Management, Journal of Leisure Research, among many others), for which many of our members serve on the editorial boards and provide peer-reviews of submitted manuscripts.


The results of the research proposed in this project also will be presented by W1133 members and collaborators at various professional meetings and workshops. W1133 members routinely provide training workshops for USDA Forest Service personnel as a means to provide guidance and technical skills necessary to transfer research results to field applications. W1133 members and collaborators also disseminate their research results through various economics workshops including Iowas Heartland Economics Conference, Ohios Annual Workshop on Benefit Cost Analysis, Colorados Environmental Economics Workshop, Washingtons Forest Ecosystem Management Mini-Course, North Carolinas Camp Resources and Californias Occasional Conference on Environmental Economics. Audiences for these various workshops include state and local policy makers, graduate students, and research scientists.

Organization/Governance

We will follow revised standard NIMSS governance procedures.


W1133 elects a secretary/treasurer, who in the following year becomes the Vice-President, and the following year the President.


Secretary/Treasurer is responsible for meeting registration and minutes of the meeting.


The Vice President and President help to coordinate research of participating schools and agencies among the objectives. The Vice President and President arrange the annual meeting location and agenda with input from participants at the business meeting to facilitate achievement of the objectives.

Literature Cited

Bastian, C, D McLeod, M Germino, W Reiners and B Blasko. 2002. The Contribution of Environmental Amenities to Agricultural Land Values: Hedonic Modelling Using Geographic Information Systems Data. Ecological Economics. 40(3): 337-349.


Bateman, IJ, RT Carson, B Day, M Hanemann, N Hanley, et al. 2002. Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.


Bergstrom, JC and RC Ready. 2005. What Have We Learned from 20 Years of Farmland Amenity Valuation Research? In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Bergstrom, JC, SJ Goetz and JS Shortle. 2004. Land Use Problems and Conflicts. NY: Routledge.


Bhattacharjee, S, P Wandschneider, and J Yoder. 2006. Modeling Consumers Intended Buying Decision of GM Food: A Simulation Latent Variable Approach Integrating Psychometric and Econometric Aspects of Consumer Decision-Making. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Brown, TC, JC Bergstrom and JB Loomis. 2006. What are ecosystem services? Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Champ, PA, KJ Boyle and TC Brown (eds.). 2003. A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.


Champ, PA, RC Bishop and R Moore. 2005. Approaches to Mitigating Hypothetical Bias. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Cordell, HK, JC Bergstrom and JM Bowker (eds.). 2005. The Multiple Values of Wilderness. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.


Daily, GC and K Ellison. 2002. The New Economy of Nature: The Quest to Make Conservation Profitable. Washington, DC: Island Press.


Dennis, DF, TH Stevens and DB Kittredge. 2003. Nonlinearity in Valuation. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #16.


Dorfman, JH, B Lavigno and JC Bergstrom. 2004. Preserving Farmland through Private Markets and Dedicated Funding. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Duffield, JW, PA Champ, DA Patterson and CJ Neher. 2006. Do Fishermen Lie? Measuring Hypothetical Bias across Response Formats. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Egan, K and J Herriges. 2003. Mixed Poisson Regression Models with Individual Panel Data from an On-Site Sample. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #16.


Englin, J, T Holmes and R Niell. 2003. Alternative Systems of Semi-Logarithmic Incomplete Demand Equations: Modeling Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Site Demand. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #16.


Englin, J, T Holmes, J Lutz, A Longhorn and JM Gonzalez. 2006. Valuing Forest Fires: A Large Scale Approach. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Finnoff, D and AJ Caplan. 2005. A Bioeconomic Model of the Great Salt Lake Watershed. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Fleming, RA and R Johnson. 2005. WTA for Consumptive and Non-Consumptive Use Access to Private Lands when Affirmative Responses are Poisson Events. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Fleming, RA, A Pagoulatos, R Johnson and R Brown. 2006. Willingness to Accept by Private Land Owners for Consumptive and Non-Consumptive Uses. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Freeman, AM, III. 2003. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods. Second Edition. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.


Giraud, KL, CA Bond and J Keeling. 2004. Consumer Preferences for Locally Made Specialty Food Products Across Northern New England. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Haab, TC and KE McConnell. 2002. Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: The Econometrics of Non-Market Valuation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.


Hailu, JG and RS Rosenberger. 2004. Modeling migration effects on agricultural land: A growth equilibrium model. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 33(1):50-60.


Hand, MS, J Bjarke, J Thacher and D McCollum. 2006. Amenities, Wages, and the Use of Stated Preference Surveys. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Hanley, N, WD Shaw and RE Wright (eds.). 2003. The New Economics of Outdoor Recreation. Cheltenham/Northampton: Edward Elgar.


Hansen, L. 2006. Benefit Variables Applied in USDA Agri-Environmental Policy Analyses. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Hearne, R. 2006. The Use of Attitudinal Responses as Explanatory Variables in Choice Experiments. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Hecht, JE. 2005. National Environmental Accounting: Bridging the Gap between Ecology and Economy. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.


Hoehn, JP and BJ Deaton. 2005. An Empirical Framework for Evaluating the Welfare Gains and Losses from Credence Attribute Labeling. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Hoehn, JP, F Lupi, MD Kaplowitz. 2004. The Effects of Questionnaire Formats on Elicited Preferences and Values in Stated Preference Experiments. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Hoehn, JP. 2006. Sampling Issues and Value Comparisons in the Meta Analysis of Ecosystem Benefit Estimates. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Jakus, PM and D Blahna. 2004. Removing de facto Wilderness Designation: Modeling Changes in Use Patterns and Economic Value for All-Terrain Vehicles. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Jaenicke, EC, RW Harrison KL Jensen and PM Jakus. Forthcoming. Follow the Leader: Adoption Behavior in Food Retailers Decision to Offer Fresh Irradiated Ground Beef. Journal of Agribusiness (October 2006).


Jensen, KL, PM Jakus, BC English and J Menard. 2003. Market Participation and Willingness to pay for Environmentally Certified Hardwood Products. Forest Science 49(4):632-641.


Jensen, KL, PM Jakus, BC English and J Menard. 2004. Consumers Willingness to Pay for Eco-Certified Wood Products. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics 36(3):617-626.


Johnston, RJ and DP Joglekar. 2005. Is Hypothetical Bias Universal? Validating Stated Preference Responses using Binding Public Referenda. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Johnston, RJ and JM Duke. 2006. Welfare Implications of the Policy Process: Estimating Context-Sensitive Willingness to Pay for Agricultural and Open-Space Conservation. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Johnston, RJ and KL Giraud. 2004. Modeling Preference Asymmetries in Stated Preference Data: An Application to Rural Land Preservation. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Kim, HN, RT Woodward, WD Shaw and WL Griffin. 2006. Distributional Consequences of Fees in a Discrete Choice Model of Recreation Demand with Incomplete Data: An Application to Mode-Specific Fishing. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Loomis, JB and RB Richardson. 2003. An External Validity Test of Intended Behavior: Comparing Revealed Preference and Intended Visitation in Response to Climate Change. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #16.


Loomis, JB and S Davies. 2006. A New Approach to Correct for Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Models: The Orbit Procedure. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Loomis, JB, J Miller, A Gonzalez-Caban and J Champ. 2005. Comparing Videotape Survey Administration and Phone Interviews in Contingent Valuation of Forest Fire Management. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Loomis, JB. 2004. Do Nearby Forest Fires Cause a Revision in Residential Property Values? Journal of Forest Economics 10(3):149-157..


Lupi, F, MD Kaplowitz and JP Hoehn. 2003. Split-Sample Comparisons of Experimental Designs for Stated Choice Models with an Application to Wetland Mitigation. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #16.


McLeod, DM, R Coupal and S Lieske. 2006. Water Projects and Exurban Sprawl: WTP for Increased Water Charges as Derived Demand for Environmental Amenities. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2003. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.


Moeltner, K and D Hagerty. 2005. Specification of Driving Costs in Models of Recreation Demand. Land Economics 81(1):127-143.


Moeltner, K and JS Shonkwiler. 2005. Intercept and Recall: Examining Avidity Carryover in On-Site Sample Data. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


National Research Council. 2005. Valuing Ecosystem Services. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.


Netusil, NR and S Chattopadhyay. 2005. Economic Benefits of Large Patches of Tree Canopy: A Second-Stage Hedonic Price Analysis. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Netusil, NR. 2005. The effect of environmental zoning and amenities on property values: Portland, Oregon. Land Economics 81(2):227-246.


Nguyen, N, WD Shaw, RT Woodward, R Paterson and K Boyle. 2006. An Empirical Investigation of Option Prices for Hunting Permits. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Office of Management and Budget. 2003. Circular A-4: Regulatory Analysis. Washington, DC: Office of Management and Budget. (Available on-line at: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf).


Paudel, KP. 2006. Should We Be Despaired? A WTP/WTA Difference Among Broiler Producers in Louisiana. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Petrie, R and L Taylor. 2006. Estimating the Value of Water Use Permits: A Hedonic Approach Applied to Farmland in the Southeastern US. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Poor, PJ and R Brule. 2005. Socio-Economic Aspects of Open Space and Agricultural Land Preservation. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Poor, PJ, KL Pessagno and R Paul. 2004. Hedonic Property Valuation Study: Water Chemistry versus Biological Indicators for the St. Marys River Watershed. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Poor, PJ. 2003. Combining Voluntary State Agricultural Support and Agricultural Land Preservation Programs: An Evaluation of Farmer Characteristics. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #16.


Ready, R. and C. Abdalla. 2005. The Amenity and Disamenity Impacts of Agriculture: Estimates from a Hedonnic Model. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 87(2): 314-326.


Ready, R, A Fisher, D Guignet, R Stedman and J Wang. 2005. A Pilot Test of a New Stated Preference Valuation Method: Continuous Attribute-Based Stated Choice. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Ready, R, J Lawton and PA Champ. 2006. Respondent Uncertainty in Choice Experiments: A Comparison of Real and Hypothetical Choices. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Rosenberger, RS and TD Stanley. 2006. Generalization, Measurement and Publication Selection: Sources of Error in Benefit Transfer and their Management. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


Rosenberger, RS, DBK English and M Sperow. 2005. Rural Economies in Transition: Duration Models of Eastern Wilderness Designation. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #18.


Shaw, WD and E Fadali. 2003. Comparing Consumers Surplus Estimates Calculated from Intercept and General Survey Data. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #16.


Shultz, S and R Rosenberger. 2004. Reductions in the Economic Value of Walleye and Salmon Fishing Due to Low Water Levels at Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Shultz, S. 2006. The Availability and Geographical Specificity of Agricultural Land Value Data: Implications for Hedonic Studies. Paper presented at W1133s annual meeting, February 22-25, 2006, San Antonio, TX.


US Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Environmental Economics Research Strategy. EPA.600/R-04/195. Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency. (Available on-line at: http://www.epa.gov/ord/htm/documents/econresearch.pdf)


Von Haefen, RH. 2003. Incomplete Demand Systems, Corner Solutions, and Welfare Measurement. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #16.


Von Haefen, RH. 2004. Empirical Strategies for Incorporating Weak Complementarity into Continuous Demand System Models. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Wallmo, K, F Lupi, B Peyton and P Bull. 2004. Public and Hunter Trade-Offs between Deer Populations and the External Effects of Deer. In Proceedings of the W1133 annual meeting, Interim Report #17.


Ward, FA and D Beal. 2000. Valuing Nature with Travel Cost Models: A Manual. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

CA, CO, CT, DE, GA, IA, IL, KY, LA, MA, ME, MI, MS, NC, ND, NH, NV, NY, OH, OR, PA, UT, VA, WA, WV, WY

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

U.S. Air Force Academy