Cultural bequest values for ecosystem service flows
among indigenous fishers: a discrete choice
experiment validated with mixed methods
KLL Oleson1,2, M Barnes-Mauthe1*, L Brander3, T Oliver1, I van Beek4,
B Zafindrasilivonona2 and P van Beukering3
1U.
of Hawaii, 2Blue Ventures Conservation, 3VU Amsterdam, 4Wageningen U.
IIFET 2014, Brisbane Australia
Bequest Value
Photos (clockwise): national geographic, fotokanal.com, fineartamerica.com, wallsev.com
Photos (clockwise): national geographic, fotokanal.com, fineartamerica.com, wallsev.com
Photo: tropicsmag.overblog.com
Bequest Value
Total Economic Value
NON-USE
VALUE
USE VALUE
DIRECT
INDIRECT
OPTION
BEQUEST
EXISTENCE
(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005)
Total Economic Value
NON-USE
VALUE
USE VALUE
DIRECT
INDIRECT
OPTION
BEQUEST
EXISTENCE
(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005)
Bequest Values in Indigenous
Communities
(O’Garra 2009, Garibaldi and Turner 2004)
Photos (clockwise): Garth Brooks, Jody Macdonald, Frans Lanting
Study Goals
1. Quantify bequest
values for indigenous
fishers using a discrete
choice experiment
(DCE)
2. Use DCE to estimate
discount rates
3. Validate DCE
Locally Managed
Marine Area
“To Live With The Sea”
N
50 Km
S
24 Villages
7,563 People
The Vezo
olo mitolo rano sy olo mipetsaky andriaky
people who ‘struggle with the sea and live by the coast’
- Astuti (1995)
Severe Poverty and Resource
Dependence
Severe Poverty and Resource
Dependence
o Average per capita income – $1 USD/day
o 90% of income from resource-dependent
activities (82% from fishing/gleaning)
o 87% of adults are fisher or gleaners
Threats to Vezo Culture
Threats to Vezo Culture
o Chronic political instability
o Population growth
o Increased migration to coast
o Escalation of extreme weather events
o Habitat degradation
o Declining fisheries
Data
Key Informant Interviews
N = 26
DCE
N = 301
16 villages (of 21)
stratified (geographic & habitat)
random household
representative respondents (age, sex)
Focus Groups
N=7
(Applying DCEs in Developing Countries: Bennet and Birol 2010)
Discrete Choice Experiment
o Stated choice method
o Willingness to pay for a marginal change
– e.g., $1 for 10 extra minutes of sleep
o Hypothetical Scenario: Strengthened Management
Measures
– e.g., strict enforcement of destructive fishing methods ban,
expansion of no-take zones, increasing # of octopus reserves,
limiting destruction of mangroves and coral reefs
(Louviere 1982, 1983)
Discrete Choice Experiment
Short-term Income
$ per spring tide in year 1
Choice model
Select ES
(Pearce 2006)
Social Cohesion
# people attending meetings
Shoreline Protection
Years without home damage
Commercial Fisheries
$ per spring tide in year 2 -10
Bequest
Generations able to live as Vezo
Discrete Choice Experiment
Short-term Income
$ per spring tide in year 1
Choice model
Select ES
Assign levels
(Pearce 2006)
Social Cohesion
# people attending meetings
Shoreline Protection
Years without home damage
Commercial Fisheries
$ per spring tide in year 2 -10
Bequest
Generations able to live as Vezo
Discrete Choice Experiment
Choice model
Select ES
Assign levels
(Pearce 2006)
Discrete Choice Experiment
Choice model
Select ES
Assign levels
(Pearce 2006)
Verifying Results
o Multi-method comparison
– Preference statements
– Ranking and rating game
Photo: reefdoctor.org
• Beans as weights, rate services using 5 beans in 4 rounds
Results?
Willingness to Pay
WTP [$000 MGA]
For…
3.07
…2 additional people from each
village attending meetings
4.13
…1 additional year without storm
damage
6.18
…moderate increase in long-term
commercial fisheries
24.42
…1 additional generation Vezo
Willingness to Pay
WTP [$000 MGA]
For…
3.07
…2 additional people from each
village attending meetings
4.13
…1 additional year without storm
damage
6.18
…moderate increase in long-term
commercial fisheries
24.42
…1 additional
generation
Vezo
= 624/yr,
or 75-95%
of income
Willingness to Pay
WTP [$000 MGA]
For…
3.07
…2 additional people from each
village attending meetings
4.13
…1 additional year without storm
damage
6.18
…moderate increase in long-term
commercial fisheries
24.42
…1 additional
generation
Vezo
= 624/yr,
or 75-95%
of income
Discount rate = 38%
Rating and Ranking
Preference Statements
70%
Primary motivation:
Bequest
20%
9%
1%
Storm
Cohesion
Income
Preference Statements
“I do not want my income from seafood sales this year to
decline, even if it means my sales next year would increase”
Short-term
Long-term
73%
disagree or
strongly
disagree
(n=259)
Significance
Bequest was prioritized, despite poverty and
difficult tradeoffs
Significance
Bequest values can play a crucial role in policy &
management
Vezo aho – ‘I am Vezo’
the sea is my heritage and that of my descendants
(Adriamalala et al. 2013)
Misaotra bevata!
(Thank you very much)
KLL Oleson: koleson@hawaii.edu
M Barnes-Mauthe: barnesm@hawaii.edu
For more information: Oleson et al.
in review – Ecological Economics
Funding for this project was provided by NSF
grant #0853086, Blue Ventures Conservation, The
Waterloo Foundation, The MacArthur Foundation,
and Network for Social Change
A special thanks to Garth Cripps for all the
wonderful photos (all those without a citation)