Economic value of ecosystem services in the eastern Ore mountains

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorVojáček, Ondřej
dc.contributor.authorLouda, Jiří
dc.contributor.otherEkonomická fakultacs
dc.date.accessioned2017-10-02
dc.date.available2017-10-02
dc.date.issued2017-10-02
dc.description.abstractThe paper presents the results of a research project aiming at determining the economic value of selected ecosystem services in the Eastern Ore Mountains. The use of the dynamically evolving concept of economic services, used to identify economically utilisable services provided by undamaged ecosystems, can thus contribute to dealing with the issues of optimum landscape management. The primary data collection took place in the summer of 2013; a total of 216 questionnaires were collected. The research focused on three ecosystems, namely montane meadows, clearance cairns and quasi-natural mountain streams. The paper presents and discusses primarily the results of a choice experiment that was used to determine the willingness to pay for defined changes in the ecosystems examined. The research showed that visitors to the Eastern Ore Mountains unambiguously prefer a natural (authentic) or quasi-natural condition of the landscape and that people are able to distinguish among the different situations well (e.g., different appearance of montane meadows, mountain streams, clearance cairns, etc.). People prefer montane meadows scythed without farm animals, clearance cairns not overgrown, and streams with a quasi-natural character. The authors point out the finding that the research results indicate a strong connection of the local population to the local landscape and ecosystems, the potential of which in relation to nature protection and landscape management is totally unutilised at the moment. Special attention is paid to a specific ecosystem, not studied yet in the Czech Republic – the clearance cairns, which showed (contrary to expectations) a noticeably higher willingness to pay for their good management compared to the other ecosystems examined.en
dc.formattext
dc.format.extent15 s.cs
dc.identifier.doi10.15240/tul/001/2017-3-001
dc.identifier.eissn2336-5604
dc.identifier.issn1212-3609
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.tul.cz/handle/15240/20911
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherTechnical university of Liberec, Czech Republicen
dc.publisherTechnická Univerzita v Libercics
dc.publisher.abbreviationTUL
dc.relation.isbasedonAgresti, A. (2013). Categorical Data Analysis. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
dc.relation.isbasedonAlbert, C., Galler, C., Hermes, J., Neuendorf, F., von Haaren, C., & Lovett, A. (2016), Applying ecosystem services indicators in landscape planning and management. Ecological Indicators, 61, 100-113. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.03.029.
dc.relation.isbasedonBateman I. et al. (2013). Bringing Ecosystem Services into Economic Decision-Making: Land Use in the United Kingdom. Science, 341(6141), 45-50. doi:10.1126/science.1234379.
dc.relation.isbasedonBateman, I. J., Carson, R. T., Hanemann, M., Hanley, N., Hett, T., Jones-Lee, M., Loomes, G., Mourato, S., Özdemiroğlu, E., Pearce, D. W., Sugden, R., & Swanson, J. (2002). Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques: A Manual. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
dc.relation.isbasedonBirol, E., Karousakis, K., & Koundari, P. (2006). Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: The case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece. Ecological Economics. 60(1), 145-156. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.06.002.
dc.relation.isbasedonBraat, L. C., & de Groot, R. S. (2012). The ecosystem services agenda: bridging the worlds of natural science and Economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy. Ecosystem Services, 1(1), 4-15. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.011.
dc.relation.isbasedonBryce, R., Irivne, K., Church, A., Fisch, R., Ranger, S., & Kenter, J. (2016). Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services. Ecosystem Services, 21, 258-269. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.07.015.
dc.relation.isbasedonCarlsson, F., Frykblom, P., & Liljenstolpe, C. (2003). Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments. Ecological Economics, 47(1), 95-103. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2002.09.003.
dc.relation.isbasedonChan, K., Satterfield, T., & Goldstein, J. (2012). Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics, 74, 8-18. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.11.011.
dc.relation.isbasedonChapman, J. C., Shiel, R. S., & Batović, Š. (1987). Settlement Patterns and Land Use in Neothermal Dalmatia, Yugoslavia: 1983-1984 Seasons. Journal of Field Archaeology, 14(2) 123-146. doi:10.1179/009346987792208484.
dc.relation.isbasedonDe Vreese, R., Leys, M., Fontaine, C. M., & Dendoncker, N. (2016). Social mapping of perceived ecosystem services supply – The role of social landscape metrics and social hotspots for integrated ecosystem services assessment, landscape planning and management. Ecological Indicators, 66, 517-533. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2016.01.048.
dc.relation.isbasedonDickinson, D., & Hobbs, R. (2017). Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research. Ecosystem Services, 25, 179-194. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.04.014.
dc.relation.isbasedonFarley, J. (2012). Ecosystem services: The economics debate. Ecosystem Services, 1(1), 40-49. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.002.
dc.relation.isbasedonFiala, P., & Šauer, P. (2011). Aplikace kombinatorických aukcí na alokaci veřejných podpor v oblasti životního prostředí: ekonomický laboratorní experiment. Politická ekonomie, 69(3), 379-392. doi:10.18267/j.polek.797.
dc.relation.isbasedonFreeman, A. M. (2003). The measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
dc.relation.isbasedonGee, K., & Burkhard, B. (2010). Cultural ecosystem services in the context of offshore wind farming: A case study from the west coast of Schleswig-Holstein. Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 349-358. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2010.02.008.
dc.relation.isbasedonGreene, W. H. (2007). Econometric Analysis. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
dc.relation.isbasedonGroot, R. S. De, Alkemade, R., Braat, L. C., Heina, L., & Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7(3), 260-272. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006.
dc.relation.isbasedonHaab, T. C., & Mcconnell, K. E. (2003). Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources: the econometrics of non-market valuation. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
dc.relation.isbasedonHanemann, M. W. (1984). Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses. American Journal of Agriculture Economics, 66(3), 332-341.
dc.relation.isbasedonHanley, N., Mourato, S., & Wright, R. (2001). Choice modelling approaches: a superior alternative for environmental valuation? Journal of Economic Surveys, 15(3), 433-460. doi:10.1111/1467-6419.00145.
dc.relation.isbasedonHanley, N., Wright, R., & Alvarez-Farizo, B. (2006). Estimating the economic value of improvements in river ecology using choice experiments: an application to the water framework directive. Journal of Environmental Management, 78(2), 183-193. doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.05.001.
dc.relation.isbasedonHenscher, D. (1994). Stated preference analysis of travel choices: the state of practice. Transportation, 21(2), 107-133. doi:10.1007/BF01098788.
dc.relation.isbasedonKačírek, P. (2015). Demographic ageing in the old industrial regions – specifics and links on the example of the Ústí nad Labem Region (N Czechia). GeoScape, 9(1), 24-32. doi:10.1515/geosc-2015-0003.
dc.relation.isbasedonKenter, J., Hyde, T., Christie, M., & Fazey, I. (2011). The importance of deliberation in valuing ecosystem services in developing countries - Evidence from the Solomon Islands. Global Environmental Change, 21(2), 505-521. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.01.001.
dc.relation.isbasedonKotíková, E. (2006). Ochrana životního prostředí v ekonomické teorii. Politická ekonomie, 54(2), 261-273. doi:10.18267/j.polek.557.
dc.relation.isbasedonKučera, L. (1994). Populace České republiky 1918-1991. Praha: Sociologický ústav Akademie věd České republiky.
dc.relation.isbasedonKvěton, V., Louda, J., Slavík, J., & Pělucha, M. (2014) Contribution of Local Agenda 21 to Practical Implementation of Sustainable Development: The case of the Czech Republic. European Planning Studies, 22(3), 515-536. doi:10.1080/09654313.2012.753994.
dc.relation.isbasedonLancaster, K. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), 132-157. doi:10.1086/259131.
dc.relation.isbasedonLayke, C., Mapendembe, A., Brown, C., Walpole, M., & Winn., J. (2012). Indicators from the global and sub-global Millennium Ecosystem Assessments: An analysis and next steps. Ecological Indicators, 17, 77-87. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.04.025.
dc.relation.isbasedonLupp, G., Förster, B., Kantelberg, V., Markmann, T., Neumann, J., Honert, C., Koch, M., & Pauleit, S. (2016). Assessing the Recreation Value of Urban Woodland Using the Ecosystem Service Approach in Two Forests in the Munich Metropolitan Region. Sustainability, 8(11), 1-14. doi:10.3390/su8111156.
dc.relation.isbasedonManski, C. F. (1977). The structure of random utility models. Theory and Decision, 8(3), 229-254. doi:10.1007/BF00133443.
dc.relation.isbasedonMcFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behaviour. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics. New York: Academic Press.
dc.relation.isbasedonMillenium Ecosystem Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: synthesis. Washington, D. C.: Island Press.
dc.relation.isbasedonMoravčík, P. (1994). Development of new forest stands after a large scale forest decline in the Krušné hory Mountains. Ecological Engineering, 3(1), 57-69. doi:10.1016/0925-8574(94)90012-4.
dc.relation.isbasedonPalacios-Agundez, I., Onaindia, M., Barragueta, P., & Madariaga, I. (2015). Provisioning ecosystem services supply and demand: The role of landscape management to reinforce supply and promote synergies with other ecosystem services. Land Use Policy, 47, 145-155. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.03.012.
dc.relation.isbasedonParsons, G. R. (1993). The Travel Cost Method. In P. A. Champ, K. J. Boyle, & T. C. Brown (Eds.), A Primer on Nonmarket Valuation. London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
dc.relation.isbasedonPhaneuf, D. J., & Smith, V. K. (2005). Recreation Demand Models. In K. G. Mäler, & J. R. Vincent (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Economics. Economywide and International Environmental Issues, 3 (pp. 1105-1618).
dc.relation.isbasedonPrimmer, E., & Furman, E. (2012). Operationalising ecosystem service approaches for governance: Do measuring, mapping and valuing integrate sector-specific knowledge systems? Ecosystem Services, 1(1), 85-92. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.008.
dc.relation.isbasedonPůlpánová, L., & Simová, J. (2012). Faktory spokojenosti zakazniku v cestovnim ruchu. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 15(4), 160-170.
dc.relation.isbasedonRadvanovský, Z. (1993). Zur Vertreibung und Aussiedlung der Sudetendeutschen aus dem Grenzgebiet Nordwestböhmens in die sowjetische Besatzungszone Deutschlands in den Jahren 1945-1946. Ústi nad Labem: Albis International.
dc.relation.isbasedonRewitzer, S., Huber, R., Gert-Regamey, A., & Barkmann, J. (2017). Economic valuation of cultural ecosystem service changes to a landscape in the Swiss Alps. Ecosystem services, 26, 197-208. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.06.014.
dc.relation.isbasedonRuijs, A., Wossink, A., Kortelainen, M., Alkemade, R., & Schulp., C. J. E. (2013). Trade-off analysis of ecosystem services in Eastern Europe. Ecosystem Services, 2(4), 82-94. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2013.04.002.
dc.relation.isbasedonSlavík, J. (2007). Neoklasická ekonomie a ochrana životního prostředí. Politická ekonomie, 55(4), 526-537. doi:10.18267/j.polek.612.
dc.relation.isbasedonSlavíková, L., Syrbe, R.-U., Slavík, J., & Berens, A. (2017). Local environmental NGO roles in biodiversity governance: a Czech-German comparison. GeoScape, 11(1), 1-15. doi:10.1515/geosc-2017-0001.
dc.relation.isbasedonSlavíková, L. (2013). Na institucích záleží! Ale proč? Politická ekonomie, 61(1), 121-127. doi:10.18267/j.polek.887.
dc.relation.isbasedonSlavíková, L., Šímová, T., & Slavík, J. (2011). Kvalitativně orientované metody socioekonomického výzkumu a jejich využití v ekonomii životního prostředí. Ekonomický časopis, 59(8), 823-840.
dc.relation.isbasedonSlavíková, L., Kluvánková-Oravská, T., & Jílková, J. (2010). Bridging theories on environmental governance: Insights from free-market approaches and institutional ecological economics perspectives. Ecological Economics, 69(7), 1368-1372. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.02.015.
dc.relation.isbasedonSlezák, L. (2007). Pohraničí českých zemí na pokračování (Dosídlování v padesátých letech 20. st.). Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, 15(7), 383-394. doi:10.18267/j.aop.222.
dc.relation.isbasedonSmall, N., Munday, M., & Durance, I. (2017). The challenge of valuating ecosystem servivces that have no material benefits. Global Environmental Change, 44, 57-67. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.03.005.
dc.relation.isbasedonStalhammar, S., & Pedersen, E. (2017). Recreational cultural ecosystem services: How do people describe the value? Ecosystem Services, 26, 1-9. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.05.010.
dc.relation.isbasedonSteer Davies Gleave. (2000). London Underground Customer Priorities Research. Report for London Underground.
dc.relation.isbasedonŠauer, P., Dvořák, A., & Fiala, P. (1998) Vyjednávání mezi autoritou a znečišťovateli jako model pro podporu rozhodování v ekologické politice. Politická ekonomie, 46(6), 772-787. doi:10.18267/j.polek.258.
dc.relation.isbasedonŠimková, E. (2008). Udržitelný rozvoj venkova a role venkovské turistiky. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 11(1), 26-32.
dc.relation.isbasedonŠimková, E. (2007). The Potential of Rural Tourism and the Sustainable Development of Rural Areas. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 10(4), 57-62.
dc.relation.isbasedonTengberg, A., Fredholm, S., Eliasson, I., Knez, I., Saltzman, K., & Wetterberg, O. (2012). Cultural ecosystem services provided by landscapes: Assessment of heritage values and identity. Ecosystem Services, 1(2), 14-26. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.006.
dc.relation.isbasedonTrain, K. (2009). Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
dc.relation.isbasedonVejchodská, E. (2015). Cost-benefit analysis: Too often biased. E&M Ekonomie a Management, 18(4), 68-77. doi:10.15240/tul/001/2015-4-005.
dc.relation.isbasedonVojáček, O., & Pecáková, I. (2010). Comparison of discrete choice models for environmental research. Prague Economic Papers, 19(1), 35-53. doi:10.18267/j.pep.363.
dc.relation.ispartofEkonomie a Managementcs
dc.relation.ispartofEconomics and Managementen
dc.relation.isrefereedtrue
dc.rightsCC BY-NC
dc.subjectecosystem servicesen
dc.subjecteconomic valuationen
dc.subjectchoice experiment methoden
dc.subjectrandom utility theoryen
dc.subjectlocal ecosystemsen
dc.subject.classificationC93
dc.subject.classificationQ51
dc.subject.classificationQ57
dc.titleEconomic value of ecosystem services in the eastern Ore mountainsen
dc.typeArticleen
local.accessopen
local.citation.epage18
local.citation.spage4
local.facultyFaculty of Economics
local.fulltextyes
local.relation.abbreviationE+Mcs
local.relation.abbreviationE&Men
local.relation.issue3
local.relation.volume20
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
EM_3_2017_01.pdf
Size:
1.16 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Článek
Download
Collections
Číslo 3