Benefits of biodiversity enhancement of nature-oriented silviculture: Evidence from two choice experiments in Germany
Tài liệu tham khảo
Adamowicz, 1998, Stated preference approaches to measuring passive use values: choice experiments versus contingent valuation, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80, 64, 10.2307/3180269
Bennett, 2001, Some fundamentals of environmental choice modelling
Bennett, 2001, Remnant vegetation and wetlands protection: non-market valuation
Biénabe, 2006, Public preferences for biodiversity conservation and scenic beauty within the framework of environmental services payments, Forest Policy and Economics, 9, 335, 10.1016/j.forpol.2005.10.002
Birol, 2006, Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: the case of Cheimaditida Wetland in Greece, Ecological Economics, 60, 145, 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.06.002
Elsasser, P., Meyerhoff, J., 2007. A bibliography and data base on environmental benefit valuation studies in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. Part I: Forestry Studies. Arbeitsbericht des Instituts für Ökonomie 2007/01. Bundesforschungsanstalt für Forst- und Holzwirtschaft, Hamburg. 〈http://www.bfafh.de/bibl/pdf/iii_07_01.pdf〉.
European Environment Agency (EEA), 2007. European forest types. Categories and types for sustainable forest management reporting and policy, Copenhagen.
Garber-Yonts, 2004, Public values for biodiversity conservation policies in the Oregon coast range, Forest Science, 50, 589
Hensher, 2002, Specification and estimation of the nested logit model: alternative normalisations, Transportation Research Part B, 36, 1, 10.1016/S0191-2615(00)00035-7
Hensher, 2005
Holmes, T.P., Adamowicz, W.L., 2003. Attribute-based methods. In: Champ, P.A., Boyle, K.J., Brown, T.C., (Eds.), A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. Dordrecht.
Holmes, T.P., Boyle, K.J., 2003. Stated preference methods for valuation of forest attributes, In: Sills, E.O., Abt, K.L., (Eds.), Forests in a Market Economy. Dordrecht.
Horne, 2006, Forest owners’ acceptance of incentive based policy instruments in forest biodiversity conservation – a choice experiment based approach, Silva Fennica, 40, 169, 10.14214/sf.359
Horne, 2005, Multiple-use management of forest recreation sites: a spatially explicit choice experiment, Forest Ecology and Management, 207, 189, 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.026
Huber, 1996, The importance of utility balance in efficient choice designs, Journal of Marketing Research, 33, 307, 10.2307/3152127
Johnson, F.R., Kanninen, B., Bingham, M., Özdemir, S., 2006. Experimental design for stated choice. In: Kanninen, B., (Ed.), Valuing Environmental Amenities using Stated Choice Studies. Dordrecht, pp. 159–202.
Kanninen, B., 2006. Valuing Environmental Amenities using Stated Choice Studies, Dordrecht.
Kling, 1996, The implications of model specification for welfare estimation in nested logit models, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 78, 103, 10.2307/1243782
Krinsky, 1986, On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 68, 715, 10.2307/1924536
Kuhfeld, 2005
Küpker, M., Küppers, G., Elsasser, P., Thoroe, C., 2005. Sozioökonomische Bewertung von Maßnahmen zur Erhaltung und Förderung der biologischen Vielfalt der Wälder. Hamburg.
Lehtonen, 2003, Non-market benefits of forest conservation in Southern Finland, Environmental Science & Policy, 6, 195, 10.1016/S1462-9011(03)00035-2
Liebe, U., 2007. Zahlungsbereitschaft für kollektive Umweltgüter. Soziologische und ökonomische Analysen. Wiesbaden.
Liebe, 2007, A sociological perspective on stated willingness to pay
Liebe, 2006, Nutzen aus Biodiversitätsveränderungen
Louviere, 2000
Meyerhoff, J., Liebe, U., 2006. Status quo effect in choice modeling: protest beliefs, attitudes, and task complexity. Paper presented at the third World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists in Kyoto, July 2006.
2006
Ministerial conference on the protection of forests in Europe (MCPFE), 2003. State of Europe's Forests 2003. The MCPFE Report on Sustainable Forest Management in Europe. Austria.
Mogas, 2005, Accounting for afforestation externalities: a comparison of contingent valuation and choice modelling, European Environment, 15, 44, 10.1002/eet.372
Niedersächsische Landesregierung, 1991. Niedersächsisches Programm zur langfristigen ökologischen Waldentwicklung in den Landesforsten (Programme for Long-term Ecological Forest Development in the Lower Saxony State Forests). Hannover.
Nielsen, 2007, An economic valuation of the recreational benefits associated with nature-based forest management practices, Landscape and Urban Planning, 80, 63, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.06.003
Rolfe, 2000, Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation, Ecological Economics, 35, 289, 10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00201-9
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 2002. Review of the status and trends of, and major threats to, the forest biological diversity. CBD technical Series no. 7. Montreal.
Stewart, 2006, An introduction to choice modeling for non-market valuation
Train, 2003
Xu, 2003, Valuing biodiversity, aesthetics, and job losses associated with ecosystem management using stated preferences, Forest Science, 49, 247
Watson, 2004, Human dimensions of biodiversity conservation in the interior forests of British Columbia, BC Journal of Ecosystems and Management, 4, 1
Zerbe, 2002, Restoration of natural broad-leaved woodland in Central Europe on sites with coniferous forest plantations, Forest Ecology and Management, 167, 27, 10.1016/S0378-1127(01)00686-7
Zerbe, 2007, Influence of different forest conversion strategies on pine (Pinus sylvestris L) stands – a case study on permanent plots in NE Germany, European Journal of Forest Research, 126, 291, 10.1007/s10342-006-0148-0
Zerbe, 2007, Managing biological diversity in forests by applying different development objectives, Archiv für Naturschutz und Landschaftsforschung März, 3