Valuation in the Anthropocene: Exploring options for alternative operations of the Glen Canyon Dam

Abstract

Abstract Amidst debates about what conservation and preservation mean for large coupled human and natural systems, survey-based non-market valuation approaches for eliciting non-use values also may confront the need for re-consideration. For example, proposed operational changes on highly-engineered river systems to implement environmental considerations (e.g., experimental flow regimes in a river stretch) may connect to social disruption and green-vs-green tradeoffs elsewhere in the larger connected system. Non-use value estimates for the same proposed operational changes may be sensitive to the presentation of multiple dimensions of effects in the coupled system, which may be perceived as either positive or negative by different population segments. Using an internet survey mode and a national sample, and essentially replicating a prominent prior contingent valuation study of non-use values (Welsh et al., 1995) [67] as the starting point, we illustrate such considerations within an exploratory setting involving operational changes altering both downstream environmental flows and hydroelectricity production from the Glen Canyon Dam on the Colorado River. We use a referendum-style voting format, and a set of split-sample information treatments including: (i) social disruption impacts to Native American and rural western communities that depend on hydroelectric production; and (ii) hypothetical increases in air pollution by switching to non-renewable fossil fuels in the electric power grid. Empirical results show respondents may make non-use value trade-offs, as preferences for or against operational changes are highly sensitive (e.g., reversing majority support) to information about additional value dimensions, beyond downstream environmental flow impacts.