Conference Agenda

Inspired by the discussions in Bateman et al. (1997), Knetsch (2010), and Whittington et al. (2017), we propose a new test of loss aversion that closely follows the logic of Tversky and Kahneman (1991) and is implemented through a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey. This test relies on two pairs of valence-based framing strategies to describe future changes in the St. Lawrence Estuary beluga whale population. It intentionally dissociates the current condition (status quo point) from the reference state perceived by respondents when answering our three-option choice sets.

More precisely, taking advantage of the fact that conservation policies often take years to become effective, both the opt-out and the two opt-in alternatives in each choice set are defined in terms of the beluga stock size at a distant future point (the year 2050). By describing future changes in the beluga stock either as gains (positive valence) or losses (negative valence), relative to either today’s population level (pair 1) or the projected population level in 2050 (pair 2), our framing strategy allows us to cover all four welfare measures for the same stock change: willingness to pay for compensating variation (WTPCV), willingness to pay for equivalent variation (WTPEV), willingness to accept for compensating variation (WTACV), and willingness to accept for equivalent variation (WTAEV).

Using an online survey (N = 1,491), we employed a split-sample design to collect approximately 300 complete responses for each of the four framing versions, as well as an additional 300 responses for a standard DCE format. Our results demonstrate that valence-based framing strategies significantly modify respondents’ perceptions of their reference state. These shifts in perceived reference states, in turn, affect preferences over the proposed scenarios. We find that decision-making in the DCE is jointly determined by respondents’ perceptions of their reference state and their sensitivity to future changes in the beluga stock. Because both factors are influenced by valence-based framing, this interaction may help explain why neither our study nor previous research has been able to fully confirm the hypothesis originally proposed in prospect theory. Finally, our results indicate that respondents in standard DCE treatments tend to interpret their reference state in a manner more consistent with equivalent variation than with compensating variation.

Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) are widely used to estimate willingness-to-pay (WTP) for environmental attributes, but derived welfare measures may be sensitive to experimental design when preferences are uncertain and therefore dependent on contextual cues. A prominent concern is the cost vector effect, whereby WTP increases with the range of the price attribute presented in choice tasks. We hypothesize that familiarity with the valuation context mitigates this bias by stabilizing preferences. To test this, we designed a 2 × 2 split-sample DCE valuing recreational access to temperate beaches with varying ecosystem condition, reef type, congestion, and travel time. An online sample of respondents was stratified into experienced users (divers/snorkelers) and non-experienced users (occasional beach visitors) and randomly assigned to one of two price vectors. After excluding protesters and speeders, data were analysed using an error-component mixed logit model in WTP space, estimated via weighted maximum likelihood to reflect individual exposure to coastal recreation. Results show strong evidence of a cost vector effect among non-experienced users, whose WTP estimates are systematically and significantly higher under the high-price treatment for most attributes, especially for high ecosystem quality, natural reefs, and low congestion. In contrast, experienced users’ WTP is statistically stable across price vectors for all attributes, indicating robust preferences. Alternative sorting of sub-groups and complementary models accounting for attribute non-attendance and income effects helped us to interpret results and test their robustness. The study concludes that welfare estimates from experienced respondents may be more reliable for complex environmental amenities and provides useful recommendations for experimental design.

The management of protected areas (PAs) involves multiple objectives and a wide range of actions and measures. These objectives include biodiversity conservation, ecosystem restoration, provision of nature-based recreation opportunities, and the supply of natural resources such as timber or agricultural products. Protected area management is increasingly challenged by growing societal demands, which may in some cases be conflicting—for example, between recreation and biodiversity protection. Furthermore, limited empirical evidence exists on the general population’s preferences for different approaches to nature conservation, such as traditional conservation strategies versus rewilding approaches. In this study, we conducted a nationally representative survey in Serbia (886 respondents) to elicit public preferences for protected area management and to examine trade-offs between nature protection, including rewilding measures, and other uses such as nature-based recreation and timber production. A core research objective was to identify population groups with potentially conflicting preferences regarding protected area management. Preferences were estimated using a discrete choice experiment. The results indicate that visitors to protected areas exhibit significantly different preferences for management measures compared to non-visitors. In general, visitors show stronger preferences for improvements in protected area management, particularly with respect to enhanced biodiversity conservation. Both visitors and non-visitors exhibit statistically significant and positive preferences for expanding areas under strict protection. However, preferences diverge with respect to specific rewilding measures, such as the reintroduction of European bison and the expansion of habitats for lynx and capercaillie, for which visitors express stronger support, indicating a greater appreciation of rewilding processes within protected areas. Despite differences in preferences between visitors and non-visitors, results reveal statistically significant and positive willingness to pay (WTP) values for both a biodiversity-oriented management strategy and a tourism- and resource-oriented strategy. Visitors display slightly higher WTP values for both strategies. In addition, socio-economic characteristics such as age, gender, and income significantly influence individual preferences for protected area management. While the PAs are partly financed by entrance fees our results show that non-recreational users have also a significant WTP pay for increased nature protection in the PAs and may justify a public tax-based funding of increased protection in PAs. Using WTP estimates to inform the level of such contributions can help align financing instruments with societal preferences, enhance the legitimacy and acceptability of policy measures, and reduce reliance on unstable public funding sources.

In light of the growing expansion of renewable energy capacity towards Net Zero goals, there is a necessity to quantify the societal and ecological trade-offs resulting from the construction and operation of new offshore wind farms. In this study, we use the UK case study and conduct a discrete choice experiment to elicit societal preferences regarding trade-offs between different potential effects on the delivery of ecosystem services resulting from offshore wind development. We operationalise the concept of ecosystem services by combining ecological and socio-economic modelling for three marine functions and services that can potentially be affected by offshore wind development: fish stock health, which determines fishing opportunities; seabed integrity, which relates to carbon and nutrient regulation; habitat and species maintenance, which describes biodiversity levels in terms of species abundance. Our results reveal that respondents have a propensity to choose the offshore wind development alternatives over business-as-usual. Respondents value habitat and species maintenance most of all, followed by seabed integrity and then fishing opportunities. The size of the wind farm developments does not, on average, have a substantial impact on respondent preferences. In contrast to the number of households supplied with clean offshore wind energy is positively associated with higher levels of respondents' favour. We find that, as the level of ecosystem service attributes increases (from low to moderate to good to excellent), the variability between respondent preferences increases as well. This suggests that, although the majority of respondents have some baseline appreciation for ecosystem services and offshore wind, there are significant differences in the degree to which different demographic segments value the natural environment and the renewable energy expansion offshore.