Hangt de niet-gebruikswaarde van biodiversiteitsverlies af van de oorzaak ?

Abstract

Biodiversity has declined dramatically over the years. This is caused by several drivers, such as natural causes or human activity. To find solutions to prevent or restore biodiversity losses, the non-use value needs to be determined and can be expressed by the willingness to pay (WTP). As there is limited information about the WTP and what it drives, this paper will explore the differences in WTP of respondents considering the prevention and/or restoration of a fire. That specific fire can be caused by a natural cause, natural and human unintentional climate change, a human unintentional and intentional cause. Using double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation, the impact of different variables on the WTP will be analyzed. The mean WTP values per scenario and cause were calculated by a double-bounded regression model and the differences between the WTP values were compared using an independent sample t-test with equal variances. Ten different regression models were established using data from 308 respondents from an online survey in order to obtain influential variables. Overall, there is no significant difference visible between the WTP values. In this way, no conclusion can be made regarding the WTP for different causes of a fire. We can conclude that human-induced losses are considered more serious in comparison with the same losses resulting from natural causes. Respondents feel most responsibility for a human unintentional cause due to climate change, followed by a human intentional cause.