welcome everyone I’m spread suhali me research assistant professor with the institute for sustainable solutions welcome to our third weekly seminar series with a focus on ecosystem services I would also like to welcome the in addition to the students and community partners our online audience we are streaming the seminars live and we encourage the online viewers to ask questions at the end before I introduce two nite speakers Speaker I would like to invite coming to say a few words about connecting with ISS on social media thank you prefer so my name is kami I am an MBA here at PSU and also a grad research assistant for ISS just doing a plug right now for our facebook page and twitter page as well we are using Twitter and Facebook more and more to share news about sustainability Portland State exciting events photos and soon are going to be sharing job postings as well so they’re both really good resources for you to sort of stay close to what is happening in sustainability at PSU our Facebook page address is WWF facebook com / the Institute for sustainable solutions and you can also find that just by searching for sustainability at Portland State or this is the ISS important state and our twitter handle is twitter.com slash ISS pdx edu this is also available on our web page pdx a to you and just want to find a plug we are going to be giving away some reward some prizes for our new followers so monthly giveaways include gift certificates to the psu bookstore and also some chinook book which are green coupons for companies around portland so check us out thank you very much Thank You kami tonight’s speaker is dr sahan dissin I okay we who is a visiting professor with economics department here at Portland State University he is an applied economist working at the intersection of land use ecosystem services and conservation using non market valuation and mathematical programming methods his research consists of three main areas analyzing public preferences for ecosystem services using choice experiments surveys studying dynamic aspects of Conservation Reserve during design using site selection model models and creating spatially explicit land allocation models please join me in welcoming dr dissanayake can you hear me yeah ok so likes pressure said I’m sandy sonic I’m a visiting assistant professor at the economics department at Portland State University and this presentation I thought a lot about exactly how I want to present this and what I finally ended up was it’s going to be a two-part presentation the first part of the presentation is going to be a general motivation for why we want to study biodiversity Co system services and generally about nan market valuation methods right and again part of this was motivated by the fact that I don’t think many of you here are actually economists then the second part of the survey would actually be other of this presentation would be about my survey and the results that I find and I’m going to motivate that by motivating why I wanted to look at this specific study the methods that i use my results and a brief conclusion so hopefully there’s something here for everybody even if you’re not an environmental economics and you’re just you know looking for the first time at some of the tools that environment economists use again if you have clarifying questions feel free to interrupt me as I go along but if you have you no more substantial questions I think we can wait till the end I think that works better with all the recording as well so to motivate my work why should we care about ecosystem services and biodiversity I’m going to give you some facts and figures that come from the millennium ecosystem assessment which came out in 2005 and the team report which was the economics of ecosystem services and biodiversity which was a large inter-governmental

report that came out in 2010 so increasing conversion of undeveloped habitat to human-dominated landscapes back to urban and farming agricultural landscapes only about fifty percent of a forest area that existed at the beginning of agric when agriculture was first started remain today habitat loss and fragmentation is a primary cause of extinction right so it’s not important step not only important to actually think about preserving land conserving land it’s also important to think about the fragmentation issue which can have a lot of implications in terms of species extinction humans have this this is something that comes from the millennium ecosystem assessment humans have increased extinction rates by about a thousand fold over what they would be naturally and global in tactical systems systems are disappearing about one percent per year right so here are some facts and figures that sort of try to motivate why it’s important for us to focus and study ecosystem services and biodiversity and you know do we care about these and I like to think we do and you know obviously this whole seminar series is about ecosystem services so I think most of you who are here at some level would also agree with me this decade the UN declared this the decade for biodiversity from 2011 to 2020 so there’s also a large scale national and international efforts that are going on in terms of protecting ecosystem services and biodiversity how many of you heard of IPC see the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change how many of you heard of IP BES not as many way so IP BES is the Intergovernmental platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services which was convened last year right and this is sort of still in the middle of getting put together but again it emphasizes that there are global efforts that are being undertaken to study these issues of preserving biodiversity and produce producing ecosystem services now what can we do in terms of protecting and preserving ecosystem services ideally we want to try to preserve natural ecosystem services ecosystems and biodiversity right but this question becomes interesting to an economist because resources available for conservation are limited and this becomes a classic economic question you have these unlimited wants limited resources how do you allocate your resources to ensure you have optimal outcome right so the solution to this problem becomes how can you optimally identify the land that you want to preserve or the land that you want to rest or where do you want to undertake these efforts and if you think about this question there are two parts to answering this question you have ecological and spatial aspects that you need to think about species presence is obvious a factor that plays into this you also want to think about size and shape of the areas that you’re looking at and related to that you have connectivity and clustering issues again going back to the fragmentation issue you don’t want to have a collection of scattered sites that you think would be a good ecosystem or a good way of trying to protect biodiversity it’s important to have these connected contiguous areas real location is in becoming a that’s gaining in prominence because of climate change because of climate change you have these ecosystems and habitats that are changing and moving so the land that you protect today is not necessarily where might be the optimal for certain species in 50 years time so relocation is becoming much more important and crucial as you go through with restoration efforts this problem becomes interesting to an economist because there are economic considerations that you need to take into account obviously cost and budget right there are certain costs and budgets involved in doing any sort of conservation activity or providing ecosystem services you also have to worry about land prices and part of what you have to worry about land prices is that land prices can change endogenously as a result of activities that are being undertaken by conservation organizations for example if you go and buy land there is a possibility that the surrounding land prices increase people like to live close to nature and this is something that’s empirically being found so you have housing prices increased land prices increase but as a result of the conservation action agencies actions you know if they come back in the future trying to expand they would have to sort of pay a higher price so it’s important to understand this land price of x again development can be driven by conservation activities so again understanding what leads to the development and how that interacts with efforts to preserve and restore biodiversity and ecosystem services become important valuation again this was mentioned last week you know trying to put dollar values or trying to identify what values are for these various ecosystems is very important because a lot of the times if you look at policy makers they make decisions based on dollar values right it could be I think one of the examples I was mentioned last week was example about building a road you get certain economic

value out of building a road but there’s detrimental is because you’re losing ecosystem services rightly so if you don’t have a way to compare it becomes hard from a policy makers point of view in terms of the accounting books how you’re going to make these decisions so part of what economics are trying to do is come up with valuation techniques that will give you some sort of values again it’s important to keep in mind that these are you know some values of what the ecosystem can give to consumers or give to the public related to that it’s important to understand consumer preferences again understanding consumer preference and the press my actual research presentation today is about consumer preferences and this is important because at some level you’re asking people to make a choice are you asking people to contribute to conservation efforts to contribute to preserving ecosystem services and in this sense understanding what drives what attributes are important to the general public can help conservation efforts right so understanding preferences can be very important so my research you know Traddles both of these sides of economic considerations and ecological and spatial aspects part of my work looks at land prices and end development so I have some emperor simulate simulation models that look at land price effects part of my work is looking at the collage achill and spatial aspects I actually work with the Army Corps of Engineers on a research project which has been going on for 34 years now we have three or four publications three publications a couple more that’s coming out where we look at conservation in military lands and that’s the sort of applied problem and this might be a surprising factor that many of you don’t know that military lands or the Department of Defense lands on average has the highest number of endangered and at-risk species compared to any other federal land management agency so they have on average a higher density than the Fish and Wildlife Service lands the Bureau of Land Management Service lands the National Park Service lands and again part of this is driven by the fact that there’s a lot of land that doesn’t get used and these mutilations are huge so there is a lot of biodiversity and ecosystem services in these lands so part of my work has been how can you optimally figure out protection for these endangered species in a working landscape given the fact that there’s military training going on given the fact that there are relocation considerations that need to be done yeah actually it in terms of the density of endangered species yes and I have actually a graph somewhere which it’s not on this slide but and and there’s there’s a couple of people who’ve been working on this problem Benton and they actually look at this this problem they find that there’s very high values and finally part of my work is looking at valuation and consumer preferences specifically I’m looking at understanding the willingness to pay to restore an ecosystem and and more than just the dollar value of how much people are willing to pay it’s also about understanding what the trade-offs are what actually drives people to contribute to a restoration efforts what are the attributes that really make a difference in terms of do of what the public has about and this work that I’m presenting today is joint work with Amy and no at the at the University of Illinois so to sort of you know step back and look at what economists do with regard to these problems economists have various toolkits and various methodology that they use to analyze problems part of what economists do typically use in terms of the two kiss is trying to understand human behavior using analytical models or using theoretical models so part of this work is what’s the optimal way to allocate resources or how do we expect people to behave right what what guides human behavior if you’re thinking of from a society point of view and sometimes part of this work is using numerical simulation methods I part of my work is actually coming up with numerical simulation methods that very certain parameters and then you try to analyze what happens in terms of behavior part of what economists do in a big part of what economists do is actually to use statistical methods to analyze data we are living in a world where we are producing more and more data and analyzing this data can tell you what drives people to behave the way they do so a big part of our economics is doing is studying data using statistical that at the same time when it comes to environmental goods we have a problem because we have incomplete markets and incomplete or imperfect information a lot of environmental goods are not sold on a market and a lot of the times you don’t have perfect information about anything but more more so about environmental goods and in this situation environmental economics you survey methods they use survey data to quantify preferences and place values on market amenities there could be goods

there could be a different non-market things that are not exchanged on the market and in terms of trying to use non market valuation methods the basic question that economics trying to answer is what’s the value of an environmental amenity and if you think about this question of what’s the value of an environmental immunity you have a couple of different ways of looking at this you have a functional value of an ecosystem and you have sort of a value helped by people so the functional value of an ecosystem could be things like erosion control carbon sequestration nutrient recycling prevention of soil erosion these are all functional values of an ecosystem that a lot of ecologists and economics work on trying to identify and characterize at the same time you also have the value that’s held by people right and these values can be divided up into use values and non-use values the use values for example are if you are engaging in recreation right there’s a park you go for a walk that’s sort of a use-value non-use values would be sort of the existence and bequest values and sort of example would be know if I stood here and said hey I just got an email that said the last polar bear just died I’m pretty sure a lot of you would feel some unhappiness at that you knowing that even though you might never go to the North Pole and you know actually see a polar bear interact with the polar bear just the fact that they’re no longer there can be something that you know gives you a certain level of unhappiness the fact that your grandkids might not be able to actually see them even in a zoo right so there’s non-news values that you can try to capture so this is what economists try to do in terms of environment determines we try to capture some of these values at the same time like I mentioned before you have a problem because you don’t have markets for these Goods so you don’t have prices and because you don’t have prices you need to use none market valuation techniques and nan market valuation techniques are aimed at trying to identify one a dollar value in terms of how much are people willing to pay and to trying to identify what are the different preferences and characteristics that drive people’s behavior towards these environmental amenities so there are two types of non market valuation methods does anybody know what they are if you’ve taken a class in environmental economics this should be something that’s very familiar what are the two main categories of non market valuation methods well that’s an example of one category contingent valuation way so I’m looking at you know you have revealed preference methods and review preference methods are so this is good because I’m actually having slides that is telling you something you don’t know revealed preference meds are methods that use existing market behavior to get values for goods that are not typically transacted in a market examples would be hedonic analysis where you use typically housing price values right so if you have a lake or a conservation area then you can use you can look at the housing price values and see how it changes as you are closer to this environmental immunity and away from it for the same type of houses with the same number of rooms and the same square footage and so on and then you can statistically estimate what the value of that good is right so hedonic pricing would be doing that the travel cost method is something that gets used a lot with sort of large parks a recreation areas where you see how far people are willing to travel and use that information to impute a cost about how much people are willing to pay or how much this this is worth but the game to do revealed preference methods you need to have an existing connection with a market right it doesn’t have to be the good itself is being sold but you need to have some connection and this often is not the case with some a lot of non market value environmental goods so you also look at what’s called stated preference methods it stated preference methods are basically survey methods where you are able to describe a hypothetical good or a policy or some scenario and see what people’s willingness to pay and preferences off of that and there are two exam both of stated preference methods contingent valuation which was mentioned before is is one survey method and a recent survey method that’s been used in the last 5-10 years is a choice experiment service and these are both stated preference survey methods and my work is actually about a choice experiment service so I’ll talk in more in detail about that now when you use stated preference method it’s important to keep in mind that you are valuing a hypothetical good in some sense or a hypothetical scenario right so that’s a good thing because you don’t have to have a connection to a real market at the same time that’s also a weakness because you have a hypothetical bias that sort of embedded into the decision-making that’s going on and it’s always important to keep that in mind as you’re going through with this service so before I start on my survey and why I did it I thought would be nice for me to give a few examples of the stated preference service because you know so again these are just a couple of examples that I found that I thought would be very interesting the first one was a study that was done in 2003 by Bosma trying to look at the willingness to pay to preserve this edgemere

National Forest in the Netherlands and she finds that the willingness to pay for this National Forest is about it’s somewhere between a dollar a euro and two euros right so she actually comes up with you no empirical estimate saying well this is how much people would be willing to pay to preserve this and the the issue in that particular study was that part of this was going to be converted into a city so the what she was trying to identify was you know how much is it actually worth two people assuming you also have sort of increase in recreation at the same time so if they found that there would be about a gyro or two euros in terms of the willingness to pay now these survey methods are not only aimed at identifying dollar values right so this is the example of dollar value but there’s a lot more valuable information that you can extract from the service so here’s a survey that was done about the Everglades in Florida and the part of the survey was trying to identify what drives people to engage in conservation activities and part of it was trying to identify how they how the way you present information changes things so they actually do a study where they have to sample they have a structural characterization and a functional characterization of the ecosystems right so they look to see how these different ways of presenting the ecosystem can influence what people’s choices are so if you talk more about the functional side of it or you talk more about the structural side what actually happens they actually get different estimates and they also find that socio-economic and external factors can affect the dollar value but but instead enough in addition to just calculating a dollar value they’re able to extract information about how to present information this is an example of a willingness to pay a study that was done to look at what drives anglers in terms of preferences for restoring salmon habitat and for salmon if they engaged in fishing and they find that what what drives the the preferences are actually the stock of the fish the size of the the stock of fish and not necessarily if it’s natural or not which sort of makes sense if you are a fisherman you are interested in trying to make sure you you know you able to catch fish and the this is the fact whether the fish was actually natural was of a lesser issue in these studies so these studies can be used to you know get information about a wide range of preferences not just dollar values the last example is so I’m from Sri Lanka so the last example is a case study that comes from Sri Lanka about the human elephant conflict now in Sri Lanka this is a big problem you have you know in rural areas you have a lot of farmers that loose crops because of elephants and as a result sometimes they would go out and you know shoot elephants and elephants actually come into villages and sometimes they’re people actually die because of these elephants coming in tearing houses down so that’s a big issue that’s been going on that’s been studied extensively and there was a stated preference study that was done to try to identify the willingness to pay and part of what they did was they compared the urban and rural willingness to pay to protect the Asian elephant and obviously they found that the urban willingness to pay was much higher because well when people like to see elephants and they want they like to go and see the elephants well as the same time the people who live in these rural villages are not necessarily excited because their crops get stolen or eating and some the houses get damaged and so on but the interesting part of this study was they did study to see if you could compensate for the damage and they find that the urban willingness to pay minus the loss of damages is actually greater than zero right so this says it’s possible to come up with a scheme where you can you know get the urban population to cover the loss that’s incurred by the rural community by the farmers so this is what an economics would say is a caldo hicks optimal solution because there is a positive outcome that comes where you know both the the elephant survived and people actually getting a positive italy right so these are some examples of how you can use these non market valuation service they’re not necessarily all about getting dollar values it’s more about trying to understand what the preferences are sorry that’s the willingness to pay it’s a it’s how much people would be willing to pay in terms of predicting a species or restoring an ecosystem and they find that you know the people in the cities are willing to pay a larger sum than then the rural community at the same time if you look at the the values from the urban to the rural that that is enough to cover the losses that are incurred sorry I please ask if there are other acronyms somewhere in there that haven’t explained so in terms of my specific research study right I want I’m trying to use these survey techniques and I have three questions that I’m trying to answer my first question is I want to understand the willingness to pay for

environmental goods and how they are influenced by the presence of an alternate environmental good nearby so the basic idea is if you are trying to preserve a certain area it could be a wetland or a forest or some sort of you know endangered species that’s living in a certain area and you have already people that are have have experienced this ecosystem service or they have an opportunity to go and you know visit an ecosystem service similar to this how does that influence your willingness to pay so if you have for example a wetland close by are you willing to pay more or less than somebody who doesn’t have a wetland close by to rest or additional wetland alright so that’s one of the questions that’s running through this and I’m just curious how many of you think that if you had a certain ecosystem it could be a forest or grassland or a great land nearby and somebody asked you about restoring another one do you think your willingness to pay would be higher than somebody who didn’t have one close by or lower how many think it would be higher about half of you okay how many of you think it would be lower okay so a little less so that’s one of the questions I’m trying to answer right so if you think about neoclassical economics economics has this downward sloping demand curve the basic idea is well the first donut you eat gives you a lot of Italy to the 38th donut that you eat is going to make you sick right so the more you have of a good you’re going to pay less so according to that paradigm the the code you neoclassical economics you would actually say that the the mahajan willingness to pay for this additional unit would be less at the same time there’s recently been work that about endogenous preferences this work shows that your preferences evolve and your preferences change right so if you experiencing a good if you’re able to go and visit a certain ecosystem then you might be more you might have a higher willingness to pay than somebody who’s actually not experienced that ecosystem before right so it’s it’s sort of you know different from the downward sloping demand curve argument it’s it’s looking to say that your preferences can change depending on what you are exposed to so that’s one of the questions I’m trying to answer another question that I’m trying to answer is in terms of measuring biodiversity what actually do people care about and this is motivated by the fact that single measures of conservation success typically species richness is used in a lot of studies in ecological studies in environmental economic studies in restoration studies you try to find that you know this biodiversity hotspots that have the most number of species you try to find the land that maximizes the amount of species that you can preserve in that restored area but in terms of public references right not from the ecological point of view but in terms of public preferences what actually do people care about is it species richness which is the number of different species that you have or is it the population density so if you look outside and you see a lot of black birds that are around does that make you you know happy is that what you want to see and you don’t necessarily you might not understand that they’re not the same species or that they’re not endangered okay all the presence of endangered species again you have a lot of work that’s been done focused on individual endangered species you have a lot of conservation efforts that sort of you know go based on these charismatic species so in terms of the public what matters do people care about these endangered species or do people care about some combination of these different conservation subsist goods so I part of what the research is about is trying to understand what this preference is up and in terms of maximizing social welfare from restoration efforts it’s important to understand this because a lot of restoration can be done in a way that you can change these attributes right so these are not just hypothetical attributes the example that I look at which is cross lines depending on how you maintain grasslands you can actually cater the grassland to focus more towards endangered species or more towards species richness where you have a lot of species or more towards having you know a bunch of the same kind of species but you’ll see a lot so it’s possible to change by based on your management techniques what the outcome is of a restoration activity and in that situation this is this work is trying to understand what do people actually care about and related to this another question I’m interested in is trying to see what the trade-off or the substitutability between these different goods are again the idea here is if you have a lot of species do you care less or more about having some endangered species or is it the fact that if you have a lot of endangered species you care less about everything else you don’t care if you only see one bird as long as you know that you know that’s an endangered bird you know so trying to understand what that’s absolute ability is is the surface what a one motivation that runs through this work so basically going to goods act as compliments or substitutes and what does that mean in terms of your optimal restoration because if you are looking at a trade off where they work as substitutes that means you don’t care about what the interactions are between them you just care about having a lot of something or is it the fact that you care about you know having these large areas with lots of different species and lots of different individuals and endangered species trying to understand what those

implications are again from the public’s point of view so to answer these questions I focus on grasslands and I’ll explain why I focus on grasslands now this is an example of three different grasslands that you can find in the in North America you have a sort of short grass prairie mixed grass prairie and then trawl grass prairie so the study was actually done in Illinois so most of what the grasslands that exist in Illinois actually tallgrass prairie so the study was about restoring 12 grass prairie the reason and so this is example of what I mean by a grassland so a grassland isn’t sort of these little pieces of grass that you see on the highway between the roads and it’s not sort of these grassy areas that you have in the middle of a farm area or sort of urban area they actually large tracts of connected land that’s able to sustain an ecosystem in its original condition and the collage achill literature says that you would need to have a bottom at least a hundred acre grassland to be able to generate the original conditions that existed so this is sort of what I mean by a grassland the reason I focus on grasslands is twofold one there’s a increasing loss of grasslands in North America right does anybody know what these are from the midwest you would what yeah farm so that exactly they’re pivot irrigated farms right so you have a lot of peabody irrigated farms this is a two pictures from a NASA land cover data so when you look this is sort of what you see you see these pivot irrigated farms where you have a lot of farming that happens and its pivot irrigated so you see these circles and you know 20 to 30 years ago this would have all been grassland right it’s now converted to farming and you have your little bits of grass land in the middle of these farming area but that’s not an ecosystem that can you know nurture the or the the biodiversity and the ecosystem services that you would typically find in a grassland in Illinois this problem is actually much worse and you know I ninety-nine point nine percent of grasslands have been converted so it’s not ninety percent it’s not ninety-nine percent it’s actually 99.9 and these two maps sort of again highlight this difference this is a map of 18 the grasslands in 1820 and this is a map that I made that’s similar it’s a map of rural grasslands so they’re not showing you exactly the same thing but again as you can see there are no I don’t know if how clear this is but there’s a smattering of yellow that’s you know this little dots that are not connected so there’s been a big conversion of grasslands in Illinois and the reason this is even a bigger problem than just a disappearing ecosystem is because there’s a lot of endangered species that are associated with grass lands that are also disappearing as a result of grasslands disappearing so 17 out of 28 grassland bird species have decreased in the last you know 30 to 40 years so if you look at the ecological literature the general consensus is that well to prevent this decline in species we need to rest or grasslands so the best way to try to you know prevent these problems of this conservation crisis from continuing and becoming larger in structures start restoring grasslands and there is a lot of work that’s been done to restore large tracts of grassland now at the same time this work that’s been done to restore grassland does not take public preferences or the values of consumers into account so there’s been no nan market valuation studies no environmental economics we’ve actually studied grasslands as an ecosystem and if you think about the fact that crafts lands are a cool system where based on your management techniques you can actually change the outcome you can change the number of species that live there you can change the way it looks then I think it’s very important to get public input or to understand what these preferences are because that can enable optimal solution in terms of maximizing welfare right partly you’re asking for funding partly in terms of what people care about and again just to reiterate the fact that no more economic valuation studies have actually looked at grasslands there’s a lot of studies that look at wetlands a lot of studies that look at forests individual endangered species you have dollar values you have lots of other information about the preferences but grasslands have sort of been ignored in this literature so this was another reason to actually look at grasslands now again to summarize my three research questions how does the presence of an existing environmental good in this case grasslands affect your willingness to pay right how much you’re willing to pay to resto an additional environmental public good what’s the trade-off or the subsidy durability between different conservation success mushy of biodiversity you have different ways that you can measure biodiversity how do the consumers view them with respect to each other and finally what are the consumers preferences and willingness to pay for restoring a grassland as an ecosystem right again the first two questions are very general they can be applied to any co system any sort of restoring ecosystem protecting biodiversity the last ones focus more on grasslands now in terms of answering these questions I use a choice experiment survey now like I said before

choice experiment surveys are stated preference methods that can elicit values and preferences for different hypothetical policies goods or scenarios and the reason that I focus on a choice of true and serving right so again I said there are two types of stated preference methods contingent valuation service and choice experiment studies the reason that I focus on a choice experiment surveys because it allows us to calculate what’s called part worth utilities basically it allows us to figure out what the trade-offs between different attributes in a good are and that comes from this the way this methodology is built so this methodology is built on consumer theory that started with Lancaster the idea behind consume this this methodology is that people get utility not from the goods that they consume but from the attributes of that good and this is a methodology that actually comes from marketing it’s been used a lot in transportation and recently it’s been used in environmental economics so the basic idea is if you look at how people by their pizza the choices are if the people that the choices that people make is not about which pizza bites it’s actually about what is on that pizza it could be the size of the Cross who could be the toppings or if you’re thinking about people buying a car it’s you know it’s people make choices based on what car they buy but it’s actually driven by you know the legroom that you have the size of the engine or the how much power the acceleration the car has so it’s basically the attributes that drive people’s choices so that’s sort of what this survey technique is built up upon right and the idea is you would describe a service or a good and you have attributes and then based on the choices you can figure out how these attributes sort of relate to each other so again I when you do a choice excrement survey typically you have set of choice questions you are asking the respondent to make a choice between a set of goods so they choose between two or more goods and the characteristics of each of these bundles that they choose change right so I’m not expecting it we will read the text here but just to show you typically so this is one bundle and this is the second bundle and you would make a choice saying I choose a or b and these are characteristics that change right so this is not my survey this is a survey about understanding preferences for hospital services it’s about you know the distance to hospitals the waiting times so this is also a methodology that gets used by health economists but the idea would be something like this where you have these attributes that are the important attributes and you have two bundles or two scenarios and you would make a choice and then econometric lee we can sort of figure out what actually drives these choices and how they’re related to each other so when you do a survey like this actually when you do any type of server it’s very important to make sure that you cover all the relevant attributes right because if you don’t what’s going to happen is person a is going to assume something different from person be when they’re answering the same survey so it’s very important to make sure that all relevant associated attributes with the good that you’re looking at has been taken into account so I’ve been working on this survey for about I guess about three years now and so it’s gone through quite a lot of changes we initially started doing informal focus groups just talked to a bunch of people trying to sort of you know characterize this problem and once we had that information we made sort of a rough survey then talked with collages and biologische and then made a bunch of changes based on their input then went and talked to actual land managers who actually maintained grasslands and then we made some changes as a result of this and then finally we did formal focus groups right so we did formal focus groups last June I guess no yeah sometime in spring last year so we know we are building this for about a year and a half up to that point and as a result of all this we have this final list of attributes that we have that we change in the survey part we have species richness population density and the presence of endangered species again these are the conservation success measures that I’m interested in measuring I also have the prevalence of wildflowers the reason I have the prevalence of wildflowers is because of because of the fact that people care about wildflowers it’s been shown that in terms of restoration effects in terms of you know a parks nature that’s one of the things that people actually care about a lot i also have a frequency of control bones because that’s something that is very important in terms of maintaining grasslands so the first time I had this did the surveyed I didn’t have it and then when I was talking to the collages and the lamb 90s they were like what do you mean you don’t have fine there that’s a crucial component of maintaining grassland and it’s also a component that has a detrimental effect because of ash and you know so if you’re living nearby it can sort of have an effect on you so you know we included that distance the site and cost for sort of obvious reasons trying to understand how much it would cost and how the distance place into this so this is what my survey looks like as you can see I have one option or one possibility for a grassland I have another possibility or grassland and then there is this opt-out option where you don’t want to do any restoration and then the respondent would make a choice and so the way the

survey is constructed they actually make seven they see seven different scenarios like this and each one has different values so I didn’t go into this because of time but when you do a choice experiment survey one reason it’s difficult to do is because you have to come up with these values using experimental design techniques to make sure that you are describing or the whole possible space of all the values so there’s actually some methodology involved in terms of coming up with these different values but the idea is you change the value so i actually have 59 choice questions and 19 different versions of my survey that got sent out and they all have different values and as these values change you can see how people make a choice and that gives you information about what’s driving their choice so that’s what the survey actually looks like i did a mail survey partly for finding reasons ideally would be nice to actually do online survey or even more idea if you had a lot more money you would actually want to go and talk to people individually you answer all their questions and then make them do the survey but most of you to finding reasons i did the mail survey i sent out two thousand surveys I included incentives dollar bills in about half of them send out a reminder I got 360 surveys back and 263 were complete right so because they answer multiple questions in each of these surveys i have about 1,600 observations with regard to my survey now in terms of analyzing the data these discrete choice models choice instrument surveys have this sort of a choice data you are making a choice right so when you’re making a choice you use what’s called a discrete choice model to analyze this data and typically people use what’s called a multinomial logit model and so that’s what I do in addition to that I do something a little bit more complicated way I do a mix multinomial logit model and the difference here is that I’m able to extract information about how the preferences change over people based on their individual characteristics so I don’t just get average values i actually get values that tell me based on people’s characteristics you know what actually changes and that’s something I’m playing around with but it gives you a lot more information so methodologically that’s one of the things that i do and these are the equations that i’m estimating i’m not going to get into those because of time but again if you have questions later on we can we can talk about that so my survey responses were very close to this so this is this is my data set and this is what the state averages are it’s a slightly older group the income similar it’s slightly more educated it’s slightly more mail but in general I was very happy this is you know 2050 surveys that I got back and in general the response seemed to be fairly similar to the state population so in terms of my results now very quickly I find that I do two kinds of analyzing of this year’s first I look at what i call main effects which is trying to see which of these attributes that of the seven attributes that I had was actually important and i find that everything except for burning is significant right so the important thing here is that all three of these conservation success measures are important what that means is as a conservation organization you know if you are interested if you are trying to maximize what people care about if you’re trying to take people’s perceptions into account then just focusing on species richness is not sufficient because you’re sort of missing out on the picture that people care about all of these other measures well in terms of answering my second question which is trying to understand the subsidies ability again I do these trade off interaction terms and they are all significant right so forget the numbers for now what they mean what that means is that people look at these conservation success measures as substitutes so ideally if you have a very high species richness you care less about population density or endangered species if you have a very high species richness you care less about population density right so the sort of act as substitutes as opposed to sort of compliments and what this means this has strong implications for in terms of how you want to manage and characterize your grassland because it says in terms of maximizing population what you want to end up is not with sort of a uniform increase of all these variables but a more selected solution where you have either a very high number of species or a very high population density but low numbers of the other two alright so this has implications in terms of how you want to approach conservation in in terms of grasslands finally in terms of this public good near question I find that if you have a grassland near people actually willing to pay more but if you have a non grassland nature your nature near that’s not very significant so what you see is that people who live near grasslands are willing to pay more to rest or another grassland then somebody who doesn’t have a grassland near them right so this sort of goes back to this

explanation of endogenous preferences your preferences evolve as you as you experience something and as a result you are willing to pay more now this has implications for conservation management because it says if you potentially if you educate consumers you know if you take kids to go see you OC parks then if you encourage people to come to ecosystems see different kinds of areas then your willingness to pay and support for conservation activities will grow right so potentially that’s an implication that that’s that’s coming from here I’m also able to use this data to calculate the total willingness to pay for a grass land right and this is again a dollar value even though it’s not the most important part of this I can calculate and again the results are in a table because these values change by distance and by whether you have a grass than you or not so for a respondent who doesn’t have a grassland near if this restoration happens 10 miles away they would be willing to pay about $66 per household per year for somebody who has a grass idea it would could be as high as 93 so I’m able to actually calculate values and these can be helpful again it’s important to keep in mind that these are just average values that you’re seeing right now you can also see this distance decay effect right the further away you go the less you are willing to pay and you see that grasslands the people who have a respondent’s we have a grassland you have a higher willingness to pay to compare this with other ecosystem services you see that it’s sort of similar to the range of wetlands and it’s also somewhere similar to the range of CV studies for forests again I put these in red because you have to be very careful about interpreting these large numbers because they’re in each study that you do there’s a lot of context effects you’re looking at a specific study but when you look at a study like this where you’re adding up numbers and comparing them and sort of taking them out of the context that they would not you have to be a little careful about interpreting them so they would have had different values of recreation they would have a lot of differences in that sense but in general these numbers seem very similar to what you what people have found for a lot of other ecosystem services I’m going to skip the next few slides so in conclusion I find that species richness population density and the presence of endangered species are all significant in terms of public willingness to pay all right so if you care about what the public things then these are all significant at the same time I find that these three goods act as substitutes and what that means is if you want to characterize a grassland that you know Kate is best to the public you get either either something like endangered species haven or something like a duck factory or a quail factory right something that just has lots of very common birds so again this is you know something that basically has strong implications that’s coming from this paper it’s also something that I’m still playing around with to see exactly what these implications are finally I find that the willingness to pay for a draw Senya is higher and that’s potentially explained by endogenous preferences does anybody have another explanation for why this might be the case why people who live close to grasslands have our high willingness to pay yeah exactly right so one possible explanation is what economists call locational sorting where you make your you know decisions about where you want to live based on the area that you like now you know one reason I think this might not be very significant is because in housing values are fairly high the willingness to pay he has fairly low and also the nature near variable was not significant that would mean that people are making their choices about where to live about being close just to cross lines and not to nature in general but again this brings up this valve point that if you educate and give information about ecosystems then you are likely to get more engagement back from from the public I can also calculate the total willingness to pay and this provides information that can be used if you’re trying to do a sort of a cost-benefit analysis and finally I find that these interaction terms that I have are very significant and that’s something that doesn’t get done in a lot of choice experience studies so that’s one of the things that also comes out of out of this paper so in general a lot of people i want to thank but specifically a part of the study was funded by the Robert shobha dissertation award and the initiative is our research board so the study actually wouldn’t have happened without that information so yeah so that’s the end of my presentation there’s some slides I skipped that we can go back to if you have questions but I’m up for questions I think you have to come to the market you mentioned that this is a way to

calculate people’s preferences for different trade-offs can you talk a little bit more about the trade-offs I can see all the different benefits but if there was like you know some kind of jobs trade-off or economic trade I’ve had it how did you incorporate your assessments of those preferences for those trade-offs so that that’s a good question I when I said trade-offs i was actually referring to the trade-offs between the different conservation success measures trying to see what matters more in terms of biodiversity in terms of species richness and in long those strengths the reason I didn’t look at something like jobs is because there’s actually been a lot of studies and typically what you find is that if there’s a negative correlation so for example if you are restoring farmland to grassland and if you if there’s a loss of jobs then people are willing to pay less for that whereas if you do this restoration in a way that doesn’t affect rural livelihoods then the willingness to pay tends to be higher so there’s been a lot of work that that actually have studies this that the trade-offs I was referring to more most more more about these conservation success measures yeah I actually for this study actually didn’t look at it I did make sure and this was something that came up so in the front material for the survey it says that this restoration is going to be from marginal land so it’s not going to be land that’s taken out of farming it’s going to be marginal unused land right now so we were trying to mitigate this trade-off issue of jobs being lost in that high well first I’m glad that your example was actually about restoration rather than just you know conservation because we don’t have that much left that to be just you know conserved in its pristine state so but we have a concert or actually a restoration issue here in Portland that I’d like to get your thoughts on how you might approach this through you know your survey technique and all and that is that the portland city council i think was last april voted to actually require habitat restoration on the North reach of the whip River this is for the the river plan the city has long had underway this this river plan and it took several years even to get to the point where they had with just the north reached part of it and in any case the industry’s along the north 3likes schnitzer steel and Gunderson and you know big heavy industry and all went to the land use Board of Appeals and actually a court of appeals and decided you know it was actually decided in their favor that no they didn’t have to do habitat restoration when they were going to really you know have a reuse of any of the landscape to know how would you use your information you know your approach I guess in changing the outcome there so I’m actually nocturia so the outcome here was that there were companies or institutions that were using the land and the idea was that they would need to rest or something Evelyn somewhere else yeah yeah well they could either restore it on their own land if they say if they were you know adding a building or what-have-you it would be triggered when they were making a revision and all and then they could either restore it on their own land or they could pay to have it restored somewhere else one example is toyota at what’s that gate for there is a particular term for it but in any case it’s number four they actually restored no at least 50 feet may it may have been even as much as 150 feet of riverfront property they took it out of pavement and put it into native plants trees shrubs and had incredible results in terms of wildlife and all and in fact it even was a real boon for their employees it made it much more interesting to come

to work every day and all so you know so we have one really good example already there but you know the other industries are just refusing to to cooperate and part of the idea is to help our endangered salmon you know are certainly a part of it yeah that’s that’s that’s a good question i’m not i think part of where this methodology might be useful is to identify what the characteristics of this restoration efforts might be that make it attractive to the firms that do them right i mean is that some way to design these restoration efforts in a way that would make it more attractive to the firm’s one of the so in this particular study i looked at biodiversity indicators i’m actually working with dave alvin and rhonda use a master student here they have a project it’s stepping back a little and looking at ecosystem services broadly so instead of this very specific but ever sending indicators that project is looking at you know what matters more is it controlling water temperature having biodiversity zip the carbon sequestration so it’s taking a step back and you know obviously costs and management options so you know this sort of survey would be helpful to have the these participant participating firms take the and then to see what actually drives is his best is it just a cost initiative what would make them actually you know come out and take part in something like this what you’re trying to identify that information you could construct a survey along these you know same methodologies that would try to answer that question but that’s you know it’s about incentives trying to understand what in terms incentives would get people to actually engage our gate films to engage in that sort of activity right yeah just wanted ugh I had a kind of a clarification question and it’s I’m a restoration practitioner I’m looking at some of the different attributes that you’re trying to kind of you know see how much priority there is over other certain ones I just wondering how much feedback you got from actual restoration practitioners because a good restoration practitioner can kind of address all the attributes with one sort of plan versus kind of breaking it up in and you know kind of parceling it up I guess I was just wondering about your choice experiment and whether or not that was actually based on feedback for a Mercer ation practitioners about the different attributes that we’re going to be tangible you know within their overall design right no so we debated we talked to a grass and restoration ecologists you know bloody collages and actually land managers who actually maintain and manage grasslands so these attributes came out from that process so for example the example I gave about fire not being there and you know it was added on because the restorations but you said well that’s something that gets used and it’s not something that you know we can really avoid it’s possible to more it’s possible to do this other things but you know the effect of fire is different so we did talk a lot so these attributes sort of came through their conversations at the same time you know the way the survey presence you have sort of this independence between these attributes which won’t be the case if you actually doing the actual restoration but the idea behind this is to identify which of these sort of drive drive the restoration but if you actually do in this restoration on practice well that all these attributes would be linked together at some level to create any kind of fictitious scenarios in order to you know see kind of to emphasize certain attributes of others or was it all kind of based on it was it was all achievable goals except you know the way these choice experience surveys are done you actually very the attribute levels randomly so some of these attribute levels would be unrealistic from a real point of view but in terms of the actual restoration that would happen they would be realistic film I mean yeah yeah thanks so a quick question how did offsetting think it’s called where companies can purchase a land that’s like kind of protected or whatever in like an urban area or something like that and then they can go and get tax credit credits or some kind of incentive to go save for us somewhere else or something like that how did your survey take that into account as far as i consent evora is that did that come into play as far as conservation so this

sylvia was aimed at households right so the the respondents were actually individual households you know people who just you know who weren’t associated with firms or companies organizations so it was looking at public willingness to pay and public preferences this other project that that that’s be going along is actually more along those lines is trying to understand what are in terms of you know offsets what do companies care about in terms of you know getting carbon credits or ecosystem credits in some sense but but this was focused on households how did you inform your respondents was their section in the survey that defined the different attributes that they all had the same idea of what they were talking about yeah so the survey again it was a mail service for those limited information but it had information about what this grassland was about grasslands in general then it also had information about each of the attributes so describe like for example species richness meant that you’ll be able to see lots of different kinds of birds if you if you’re talking about population density it meant that we’d see a lot of you know birds in total but perhaps not from different kinds so each of these attributes were explained in the front material as well as what grassland restoration was and that this was a hundred acre restoration there was some access to recreation and the fire can have a negative effect on based on these things so there was a lot of front material in the survey good question so in general terms how does the value held by people compared with the functional value of a particular amenity as determined by the colleges so I think these are very different values and this is always something I think you have to be very careful when you do not market valuation studies because you can’t expect to get functional values out of you know people who are not experts and the way I look at this the idea isn’t to say this well the value that you’re getting from people is it’s like that it subsumes the functional value in some sense I’d the way I look at it that they’re very independent values because for the most part people will not have an idea about that there’s a biodiversity value or a carbon sequestration value or a nutrient recycling value I think those are sort of complicated concepts that an expert will understand but a non-expert won’t so I think these values are very independent in many senses what you are identifying here is a use and non-use value combination it’s not about well if you have lots of grasslands it’s going to mitigate greenhouse gases and prevent you know I don’t think you are capturing any of these functional values from a survey like this and we were very careful not to you know try to confuse that issue in some sense so I think these values that you’re getting are purely if you go back to my slide that had those different types of values so I you know I think the survey is capturing these not the functional values at all and I don’t know if you’ve ever stood if anybody’s ever studied this but as people become more aware of the functional value does their non use value also change so well I don’t know about that I you know the amount of information that you give is shown to affect the outcomes and part of that is not just the dollar value but also the variances that you get in these estimates they tend to get narrower as you provide more information I would assume that if people know more then that willingness to pay would be higher yeah okay thank you other questions I just wanted to know I kind of came in here late do you have any like websites or any anything where you have like this type of information and they also to piggyback on the corporate and company side of the equation as far as these well so that his lands go yeah so this was focused on on individual households right and if you want information about this obviously there’s a paper that’s still a working progress but you know it’s something that that’s actually on my website so I talk to me afterwards I can tell you where to find the paper in terms of this other ecosystem service and sort of firms getting involved that’s this particular project is very much a work in progress right now but

there is a literature about corporate responsibility and sort of how you know these green initiatives impact corporate values so that there is a fairly large literature on that it’s not an area that I’m familiar with unfortunately okay thank you well thank you for coming and for questions

You Want To Have Your Favorite Car?

We have a big list of modern & classic cars in both used and new categories.