Valuing harvest regulation changes in recreational fisheries with a discrete choice experiment study: What can we learn from a synthetic review?

Abstract

This study presents a synthetic review of the application of a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to investigate anglers’ valuation of harvest regulation schemes. From an initial search of 44 eligible primary studies published during the period from the beginning of 2000 to the end of 2021, 17 studies met the criteria for inclusion in this review and provided 255 estimates of willingness to pay (WTP) for an additional authorized fish. To identify which valuation scenarios, experiment design methodology, sampling and modeling approaches were developed, we conducted a qualitative overview of the 17 selected studies. We then synthesized the influence of study characteristics (including harvest regulation type, recreational fisheries settings, sampling strategy and data analysis) on the value of WTP estimates, using meta-regression models. Findings from both types of analysis seem to suggest that previous DCE studies have developed a wide range of methodological solutions, given the variety of fisheries contexts. The present review has its limitations because the number of studies investigated is too small to provide an overarching synthesis of existing evidence. However, the results do convey relevant information for fisheries management and threatened species conservation, notably on the continued preference for keeping catches, the larger welfare loss following a management shift from open-access to regulated fisheries, and the relative preference for migratory species. A further original survey would be needed to fill the existing gaps in the geographic distribution of information about harvest regulation values. This analysis also highlights the fact that little is known about the other economic values that anglers can express regarding species preservation and their motivations.