Surf as a Driver for Sustainable Coastal Preservation – an Application of the Contingent Valuation Method in Portugal
Ecosystem services provided by coastal areas depend on natural conditions and anthropogenic actions. The shape, quality, and safety of the waves in particular depend on factors such as coastal erosion, coastal defense constructions, and urbanization, which in addition to environmental factors may determine the choice of a given area for surfing. We assess surfers’ willingness to pay to protect the environment in specific typologies of beaches (urban and non-urban) in Portugal using the contingent valuation method. Results show that environmental attributes, such as specific wave characteristics, and socio-demographic characteristics are important determinants of willingness to pay. Moreover, surfers’ willingness to pay is significantly lower for urban beaches.
KeywordsCoastal preservation Ecosystem services Surf Contingent valuation method Willingness to pay Portugal
The Research was developed with financial support from FCT – Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology within the project «UID/ECO/03182/2019».
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Participants in the survey were voluntary and their participation was anonymous, with tacit consent.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Carlsson, F., and Martinsson, P. (2006). Do Experience and Cheap Talk Influence Willingness to Pay in an Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Survey? Working Papers in Economics 190. Göteborg University, Department of Economics.Google Scholar
- Carson, R.T. (1999). Contingent valuation: a user’s guide. Discussion paper 99-26. December 1999. University of California, San Diego, Department of Economics.Google Scholar
- Desvousges, W. H., Smith, V. K., and McGivney, M. P. (1983). A Comparison of Alternative Approaches for Estimating Recreation and Related Benefits of Water Quality Improvements. Washington, D.C., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy Analysis, EPA-230-05-83-001.Google Scholar
- Dolnicar, S., and Fluker, M. (2003). Who’s riding the wave? An investigation into demographic and psychographic characteristics of surf tourists. CD Proceedings of the 13th International Research Conference for the Council for Australian University Tourism and Hospitality Education (CAUTHE 2003).Google Scholar
- Frank, F., Pintassilgo, P., and Pinto, P. (2015). Environmental Awareness of Surf Tourists: A Case Study in the Algarve. Journal of Spatial and Organizational Dynamics 3(2): 102–113.Google Scholar
- Global Industry Analysts, Inc. (2016). The global surfing market: Trends, drivers and projections, Author, San Jose, CA.Google Scholar
- Gurran, N., Hamin, E., and Norman, B. (2008). Planning for Climate Change: Leading Practice Principles and Models for Sea Change Communities in Coastal Australia, University of Sydney, Faculty of Architecture Design & Planning.Google Scholar
- Haines-Young, R., and Potschin, M. (2013). CICES V4.3-Report Prepared following Consultation 440 on CICES Version 4, august–December 2012. EEA framework contract no. 441 EEA/IEA/09/003.Google Scholar
- Honrado, J. P., Vieira, C., Soares, C., Monteiro, M. B., Marcos, B., Pereira, H. M., and Partidário, M. R. (2013). Can we Infer About Ecosystem Services from EIA and SEA Practice? A Framework for Analysis and Examples from Portugal. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 40: 14–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Johnston, R. J., Boyle, K. J., Adamowicz, W., Bennett, J., Brouwer, R., Cameron, T. A., and Tourangeau, R. (2017). Contemporary guidance for stated preference studies. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 4(2): 319–405.Google Scholar
- Knetsch, J. L., and Davis, R. K. (1966). Comparison of Methods for Recreation Evaluation. In Kneese, A. V., and Smith, S. C. (eds.), Water Research, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Google Scholar
- Lazarow, N. (2007). The value of coastal recreational resources: a case study approach to examine the value of recreational surfing to specific locales. Journal of Coastal Research 50.SI, 12-20.Google Scholar
- Lazarow, N., Miller, M., and Blackwell, B. (2009). The value of Recreational Surfing to Society. Tourism in Marine Environments. 5(2–3): 145–158.Google Scholar
- Long J.S. (1997). Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Advanced Quantitative Techniques in the Social Sciences Number 7. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.Google Scholar
- Loomis, J., Brown, T., Lucero, B., and Peterson, G. (1996). Improving Validity Experiments of Contingent Valuation Methods: Results of Efforts to Reduce the Disparity of Hypothetical and Actual Willingness to PAY. Land Economics, 450–461.Google Scholar
- Maes, J., Liquete, C., Teller, A., Erhard, M., Paracchini, M., Barredo, J., Grizzetti, B., Cardoso, A., Somma, F., Petersen, J., Meiner, A., Gelabert, E., Zal, N., Kristensen, P., Bastrup-Birk, A., Biala, K., Piroddi, C., Egoh, B., Degeorges, P., Fiorina, C., Santos-Martín, F., Naruševičius, V., Verboven, J., Pereira, H., Bengtsson, J., Gocheva, K., Marta-Pedroso, C., Snäll, T., Estreguil, C., San-Miguel-Ayanz, J., Pérez-Soba, M., Grêt-Regamey, A., Lillebø, A., Malak, D., Condé, S., Moen, J., Czúcz, B., Drakou, E., Zulian, G., and Lavalle, C. (2016). An Indicator Framework for Assessing Ecosystem Services in Support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Ecosystem Services. 17: 14–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- MEA (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-Being, 5, Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- Paracchini, M., Zulian, G., Kopperoinen, L., Maes, J., Schagner, J., Termansen, M., Zandersen, M., Perez-Soba, M., Scholefield, P., and Bidoglio, G. (2014). Mapping Cultural Ecosystem Services: A Framework to Assess the Potential for Outdoor Recreation Across the EU. Ecological Indicators. 45: 371–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pereira, H., Domingos, T., Vicente, L., Proença, V. (2009). Ecossistemas e Bem-Estar Humano. Avaliação para Portugal do Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Escolar Editora, Lisboa.Google Scholar
- Sukhdev, P. (2008). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: An Interim Report, European Communities. A Banson Production, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
- Turner, K. R. (2000). The place of economic values in environmental valuation. In Bateman, I. J., and Willis, K. G. (eds.), Valuing Environmental Preferences, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 19–41.Google Scholar