“Adapted” Habitat Evaluation Procedure and Choice Experiment: Substitutes or Complements?

Abstract

In this paper, we assess the environmental benefits derived from a wetland restoration plan. We assume that some of these benefits are “familiar” and thus fully perceived by the population; whereas those with more complex origins are “unfamiliar” and thus poorly perceived and valued. Well perceived benefits can often be assessed from carefully constructed conventional economic approaches based on preferences. However, the biases of these approaches become too significant for poorly perceived benefits which require alternative valuation methods. The “adapted” Habitat Evaluation Procedure (HEPa) “benefit” seeks to value environmental benefits through a non-monetary metric, the habitat unit. It evaluates marginal environmental changes using ecological indicators instead of preferences. Our aim is to test the possibility of combining a conventional monetary valuation method (choice experiment) with a non-monetary alternative valuation method (HEPa) to see whether such a combination could improve the assessment of benefits stemming from positive impacts of environmental policies. By so doing, we seek to contribute to a better integration of ecosystem services into the processes of planning, management, and decision-making regarding natural areas.