Public Attitudes and Preferences for Upland Landscapes - Defra

7.2. Limitations of Contingent Valuations studies
As noted above, the high level of variation in results from the different studies is likely to arise as
a result of the range of methodology employed as well as the nature of respondents. However, it
is also possible that many of the WtP values given are reasonably conservative estimates. One
likely reason for this being that respondents exercise ‘protest bids’ which reflect an unwillingness
to pay for a good that they feel they have a right to benefit from (and so their WtP does not reflect
the true value which they derive from the goods or service). The effect of protest bids may be
particularly evident in studies where payment for entry into a park/area is the proposed payment
mechanism (Heyes and Heyes 1999). Although some of the studies took care to minimise
protest bids (e.g. by asking respondents to explain why they were/were not willing to pay or why
they were willing to pay a certain value) it may be difficult to completely eliminate the impact of
this kind of bias. Heyes and Heyes (1999) carried out a study where they asked respondents
both for their WtP to visit Dartmoor National Park and their ‘willingness to travel’ (WtT); the
distance individuals were willing to travel were then converted into monetary values. Although it
is difficult to accurately calculate WtT costs (given the difficult of incorporating opportunity costs)
WtT values calculated by the authors using three different methodological approaches were all
greater than the WtP values for the same sample (with the lowest WtT value based only on
transport costs and not incorporating opportunity costs at all).
Summary section 7
- Mean figures for the maintenance (or enhancement) of single national parks/SDA/ESA
areas ranged between £5.65/household/year and £73/person/year. This is likely to reflect
the methodology employed but variability in WtP across regions (despite consistent
methodology) implies that both demographic factors and current composition of different
upland landscapes influence WtP.
- Where stated between 46% and 82% of respondents were willing to pay in principle to
protect uplands National Parks
- The majority of samples consisted of local residents and visitors to National Parks and so
the results are likely to be biased. Where random members of the public have been sent
postal questionnaires it is also likely that a responder bias was introduced (with
individuals that have an existing interest being more likely to respond).
8. Conclusions and further research
This review summarises relevant evidence about the public’s attitude towards and
preferences for the uplands. Although not a full systematic review, the evidence suggests that
a proportion of the public value and would in principle be willing to pay to maintain the
landscape value of the uplands.
Key conclusions from the review:
- Upland landscapes have intense experiential qualities and can contribute to a sense of
heritage (historic man-made features contribute to cultural value) and identity (especially
the moorland context for residents) but understanding individual preferences is complex.
- Studies suggest broadleaved woodland and heather moorland are valued features of the
upland landscape, while an increase is grassland is often viewed negatively. When asked
about the landscape as a whole, a significant proportion of respondents favour the
maintenance of a landscape similar to today’s landscape with some features, such as
broadleaved woodland enhanced.
- Between 46% and 82% of respondents were willing to pay in principle to protect uplands
National Parks. The number of respondents willing to pay is likely to reflect the sample
23