SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Literature Cited

  • Adamowicz, W., P. Boxall, M. Williams, and J. Louviere. 1998. Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80:6475.
  • Bandara, R. 2004. Economic value of conservation: the case of the Asian elephant. South Asia Economic Journal 5:283300.
  • Bandara, R., and C. Tisdell. 2003. Comparison of rural and urban attitudes to the conservation of Asian elephants in Sri Lanka: empirical evidence. Biological Conservation 110:327342.
  • Bandara, R., and C. Tisdell. 2005. Changing abundance of elephants and willingness to pay for their conservation. Journal of Environmental Management 76:4759.
  • Bateman, I. J., et al. 2002. Economic valuation with stated preference techniques. A manual. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham , United Kingdom .
  • Bosetti, V., and D. Pearce. 2003. A study of environmental conflict: the economic value of grey seals in Southwest England. Biodiversity and Conservation 12:23612392.
  • Bowker, J. M., and J. R. Stoll. 1988. Use of dichotomous choice nonmarket methods to value the whooping crane resource. Journal of Agricultural Economics 70:327381.
  • Boyle, K. J., and R. C. Bishop. 1987. Valuing wildlife in benefit-cost analysis: a case study involving endangered species. Water Resources Research 23:943950.
  • Brookshire, D. S., M. A. Thayer, W. D. Schulze, and R. C. D'Arge. 1982. Valuing public goods: a comparison of survey and hedonic approaches. American Economic Review 72:165177.
  • Brookshire, D. S., L. S. Eubanks, and A. Randall. 1983. Estimating option prices and existence values for wildlife resources. Land Economics 59:115.
  • Brown, G., D. Layton, and J. Lazo. 1994. Valuing habitat and endangered species. Discussion paper 94-1. Institute for Economic Research, University of Washington, Seattle .
  • Brown, T., P. Champ, R. Bishop, and D. McCollum. 1996. Which response format reveals the truth about donations to a public good? Land Economics 72:152166.
  • Bulte, E., and C. V. Kooten. 1999. Marginal valuation of charismatic species: implications for conservation. Environmental and Resource Economics 14:119130.
  • Carson, R. T., L. Wilks, and D. Imber. 1994. Valuing the preservation of Australia's Kakadu conservation zone. Oxford Economic Papers 46:727749.
  • Chambers, C. M., and J. C. Whitehead. 2003. A contingent valuation estimate of the benefits of wolves in Minnesota. Ecological Economics 26:249267.
  • Christie, M., N. Hanley, J. Warren, K. Murphy, R. Wright, and T. Hyde. 2006. Valuing the diversity of biodiversity. Ecological Economics 58:304317.
  • Cicia, G., E. D'Ercole, and D. Marino. 2003. Cost and benefits of preserving farm animal genetic resources from extinction: CVM and bio-economic model for valuing a conservation program for the Italian Pentro horse. Ecological Economics 45:445459.
  • Corkeron, P. J. 2004. Whale watching, iconography, and marine conservation. Conservation Biology 18:847849.
  • Cummings, R. P., P. Ganderton, and T. McGuckin. 1994. Substitution effects in CVM values. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 76:205214.
  • DeKay, M. L., and G. H. McClelland. 1996. Probability and utility components of endangered species preservation programs. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2:6083.
  • Duffield, J. W. 1992. An economic analysis of wolf recovery in Yellowstone: park visitor attitudes and values. Pages 2.312.87 in J.Varley and W.Brewster, editors. Wolves for Yellowstone? National Park Service, Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming .
  • Duffield, J. W., and D. A. Patterson. 1992. Field testing existence values: comparison of hypothetical and cash transaction values. Benefits and costs in natural resource planning. 5th report (W-133). Western regional research publication. B. Retting, compiler. Department of Agriculture and Resource Economics, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.
  • Duffield, J. W., D. Patterson, and C. Neher. 1993. Wolves and people in Yellowstone: a case study in the new resource economics. Report. Liz Claiborne and Art Ortenberg Foundation, Missoula , Montana .
  • Eddy, T. G., G. G. Gallup, and D. Povinelli. 1993. Attribution of cognitive states to animals: anthropomorphism in comparative perspective. The Journal of Social Issues 49:87101.
  • Fredman, P. 1995. The existence of existence value –a study of the economic benefits of an endangered species. Journal of Forest Economics 1:307328.
  • Fredman, P., and M. Boman. 1996. Endangered species and optimal environmental policy. Journal of Environmental Management 47:381389.
  • Gen, S. 2004. Meta-analysis of environmental valuation studies. PhD dissertation. Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta .
  • Giraud, K. L., J. B. Loomis, and R. L. Johnson. 1999. Internal and external scope in willingness-to-pay estimates for threatened and endangered wildlife. Journal of Environmental Management 56:221229.
  • Giraud, K., B. Turcin, J. Loomis, and J. Cooper. 2002. Economic benefit of the protection program for the Steller sea lion. Marine Policy 26:451458.
  • Gunnthorsdottir, A. H. 2001. Physical attractiveness of an animal species as a decision factor for its preservation. Anthrozoös 14:204215.
  • Hageman, R. 1985. Valuing marine mammal populations: benefits valuations in a multi-species ecosystem. Administrative report LJ-85–22. Southwest Fisheries Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, La Jolla , California .
  • Hageman, R. 1986. Economic Valuation of marine wildlife: existence value exist? Marine pollution environmental damage assessment report. EE-0121. National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington , D.C.
  • Hagen, D., J. Vincent, and P. Welle. 1992. Benefits of preserving old-growth forest and the spotted owl. Contemporary Policy Issues 10:1325.
  • Hammack, J., and G. Brown. 1974. Waterfowl and wetlands: toward bioeconomic analysis. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore , Maryland .
  • Hanemann, M., J. Loomis, and B. Kanninen. 1991. Statistical efficiency of double-bound dichotomous choice contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 73:12551263.
  • Herzog, H. A., and G. M. Burghardt. 1988. Attitudes towards animals: origins and diversity. Anthrozoös 1:214222.
  • Horne, P., and L. Petäjistö. 2003. Preferences for alternative moose management regimes among finish landowners: a choice experiment approach. Land Economics 79:472482.
  • Howland, H. C., S. Merola, and J. R. Basarab. 2004. The allometry and scaling of the size of vertebrate eyes. Vision Research 44:20432065.
  • Hsee, C. K., and Y. Rottenstreich. 2004. Music, pandas, and muggers: on the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 133:2330.
  • IUCN (World Conservation Union). 2006. IUCN red list of threatened species. IUCN, Cambridge , United Kingdom . Available from http://www.iucnredlist.org (accessed February 2007).
  • Jakobsson, K. M., and A. K. Dragun. 1996. Contingent valuation and endangered species: methodological issues and applications. Edward Elgar , Cheltenham , United Kingdom .
  • Kaltenborn, B. P., T. Bjerke, J. W. Nyahongo, and D. R. Williams. 2006. Animal preferences and acceptability of wildlife management actions around Serengeti National Park, Tanzania. Biodiversity and Conservation 15:46334649.
  • Kellert, S. R., and K. J. Berry. 1980. Phase III: knowledge, affection and basic attitudes toward animals in American society. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington , D.C .
  • King, D., D. Flynn, and W. Shaw. 1988. Total and existence values of a herd of desert bighorn sheep. Benefits and costs in natural resource planning. Interim report. Western regional research publication W-133. University of California, Davis .
  • Kontoleon, A., and T. Swanson. 2003. The willingness to pay for property rights for the giant panda: can a charismatic species be an instrument for nature conservation? Land Economics 79:483499.
  • Kotchen, M. J., and S. D. Reiling. 1998. Estimation and questioning economic values for endangered species: an application and discussion. Endangered Species Update 15:7783.
  • Langford, I. H., A. Kntogianni, M. S. Skourtos, S. Georgiou, and I. J. Bateman. 1998. Multivariate mixed models for open-ended contingent valuation data. Willingness to pay for conservation of monk seals. Environmental and Resource Economics 12:443456.
  • Loomis, J., and E. Ekstrand. 1997. Economic benefits of critical habitat for the Mexican spotted owl. Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 22:356366.
  • Loomis, J., and E. Ekstrand. 1998. Alternative approaches for incorporating respondent uncertainty when estimating willingness to pay: the case of the Mexican spotted owl. Ecological Economics 27:2941.
  • Loomis, J. B., and A. González-Cabán. 1998. A willingness-to-pay function for protecting acres of spotted owl habitat from fire. Ecological Economics 25:315322.
  • Loomis, J. B., and D. M. Larson. 1994. Total economic value of increasing gray whale populations: results from a contingent valuation survey of visitors and households. Marine Resource Economics 9:275286.
  • Loomis, J. B., and D. S. White. 1996. Economic benefits of rare and endangered species: summary and meta-analysis. Ecological Economics 18:197206.
  • Macmillan, D. C., L. Philip, N. Hanley, and B. Alvarez-Farizo. 2002. Valuing the non-market benefits of wild goose conservation: a comparison of interview and group-based approaches. Ecological Economics 43:4959.
  • Martín-López, B., C. Montes, and J. Benayas. 2007. The non-economic motives behind the willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation 139:6782.
  • Mascia, M. B., J. P. Brosius, T. A. Dobson, B. C. Forbes, L. Horowitz, M. A. McKean, and N. J. Turner. 2003. Conservation and social sciences. Conservation Biology 17:649650.
  • MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2003. Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Island Press, Washington , D.C .
  • MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington , D.C .
  • Mitchell, R. C., and R. T. Carson. 1989. Using survey to value public goods. The contingent valuation method. Resources for the Future, Washington , D.C .
  • OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2002. Handbook of biodiversity valuation. OECD, Paris .
  • Olsen, D., J. Richards, and D. Scott. 1991. Existence and sport values for doubling the size of Columbia river basin salmon and steelhead runs. Rivers 2:4456.
  • Plous, S. 1993. Psychological mechanisms in the human use of animals. The Journal of Social Issues 49:1152.
  • Reaves, D. W., R. A. Kramer, and T. P. Holmes. 1999. Does question format matter? Valuing an endangered species. Environmental and Resource Economics 14:365383.
  • Rubin, J., G. Helfand, and J. Loomis. 1991. A benefit-cost analysis of the northern spotted owl. Journal of Forestry 89:2530.
  • Samples, K., J. Dixon, and M. Gowen. 1986. Information disclosure and endangered species valuation. Land Economics 62:306312.
  • Samples, K., and J. Hollyer. 1990. Contingent valuation of wildlife resources in the presence of substitutes and complements. Pages 177192 in R.Johnson and G.Johnson, editors. Economic valuation of natural resources: issues, theory and application. Westview Press, Boulder , Colorado .
  • Saunders, C. D., A. T. Brook, and O. Eugene Myers. 2006. Using psychology to save biodiversity and human well-being. Conservation Biology 20:702705.
  • Serpell, J. A. 1986. In the company of animals: a study of human-animal relationships. Basil Blackwell, Oxford , United Kingdom .
  • Serpell, J. A. 2004. Factors influencing human attitudes to animals and their welfare. Animal Welfare 13:145151.
  • Shogren, J. F., et al. 1999. Why economics matters for endangered species protection. Conservation Biology 13:12571261.
  • Stanley, D. L. 2005. Local perception of public goods: recent assessments of willingness to pay for endangered species. Contemporary Economic Policy 23:165179.
  • Stevens, T., J. Echeverría, R. Glass, T. Hager, and T. More. 1991. Measuring the existence value of wildlife: what do CVM estimates really show? Land Economics 67:390400.
  • Stevens, T. H., T. A. More, and R. J. Glass. 1994. Public attitudes about coyotes in New England. Society and Natural Resources 7:6784.
  • Swanson, C. 1993. Economics of non-game management: Bald Eagles on the Skagit River, Bald Eagle Natural Area, Washington . Department of Agricultural Economics, Ohio State University, Columbus .
  • Tanguay, M., W. Adamowicz, P. Boxall, W. Phillips, and W. White. 1993. A socio-economic valuation of woodland caribou in northwestern Saskatchewan. Project report 93–04. Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton .
  • Tanguay, M., W. Adamowicz, and P. Boxall. 1995. An economic evaluation of woodland caribou conservation programs in northwestern Saskatchewan. Project report 95–01. Department of Rural Economy, University of Alberta, Edmonton .
  • Tisdell, C., and C. Wilson. 2004. The public's knowledge of and support for conservation of Australia's tree-kangaroos and other animals. Biodiversity and Conservation 13:23392359.
  • Tisdell, C., and C. Wilson. 2006. Information, wildlife valuation, conservation: experiments and policy. Contemporary Economic Policy 24:144159.
  • Tisdell, C., C. Wilson, and H. Swarna Nantha. 2005a. Association of public support for survival of wildlife species with their likeability. Anthrozoös 18:160174.
  • Tisdell, C., C. Wilson, and H. Swarna Nantha. 2005b. Policies for saving a rare Australian glider: economics and ecology. Biological Conservation 123:237248.
  • Tisdell, C., C. Wilson, and H. Swarna Nantha. 2006. Public choice of species for the ‘Ark’: phylogenetic similarity and preferred wildlife species for survival. Journal for Nature Conservation 14:97105.
  • Tisdell, C., H. Swarna Nantha, and C. Wilson. 2007. Endangerment and likeability of wildlife species: how important are they for payments proposed for conservation? Ecological Economics 60:627633.
  • Tkac, J. 1998. The effects of information on willingness-to-pay values of endangered species. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 80:12141220.
  • USFWS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). 1994. The reintroduction of gray wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho. Final environmental impact statement. USFWS, Helena , Montana .
  • Venkatachalam, L. 2004. The contingent valuation method: a review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 24:89124.
  • Welsh, M. P., and R. C. Bishop. 1993. Multiple bounded discrete choice models. Pages 331352 in J.Bergstrom, editor. Benefits and costs transfer in natural resource planning western regional research. Sixth interim report W-133. Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Georgia, Athens .
  • Welsh, M. P., and G. L. Poe. 1998. Elicitation effects in contingent valuation: comparisons to a multiple bounded discrete choice approach. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 36:170185.
  • White, P. C. L., K. W. Gregory, P. J. Lindley, and G. Richards. 1997. Economic values of threatened mammals in Britain: a case study of the otter Lutra lutra and the water vole Arvicola terrestris. Biological Conservation 82:345354.
  • White, P. C. L., A. C. Bennett, and E. J. V. Hayes. 2001. The use of willingness-to-pay approaches in mammal conservation. Mammal Review 31:151167.
  • Whitehead, J. C. 1992. Ex ante willingness to pay with supply and demand uncertainty: implications for valuing a sea turtle protection programme. Applied Economics 24:981988.
  • Wilkie, D. S., and J. F. Carpenter. 1999. Can nature tourism help finance protected areas in the Congo basin? Oryx 33:332.
  • Wilson, C., and C. Tisdell. 2003. Conservation and economic benefits of wildlife-based marine tourism: sea turtles and whales as case studies. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 8:4958.