Valuation of Biodiversity Benefits (OECD)

original studies. Section 4 concludes with the main challenges for benefit transfer and some policyimplications.Policy use of biodiversity valuation estimates in NorwayIn Norway about 30 empirical environmental valuation studies of biodiversity have beencarried out since the early 1980s. Many of these studies have been initiated and funded by the Ministryof Environment and its affiliated institutions: the State Pollution Control Authority (SFT) and theDirectorate of Nature Management (DN). Both Travel Cost (TC) and Contingent Valuation (CV)methods have been used to estimate the use value of freshwater fish (recreational fishing) and wildlife(hunting and viewing). There have also been CV studies of the non-use value (and some use value) ofendangered species, such as the three big carnivores in Norway (brown bear, wolverine, and wolf);insects, fungi and lichens growing in old growth coniferous forests; and the genetic diversity of localtrout and salmon stocks threatened by acidification.Benefit estimates from CV studies on the impacts from improved water and air quality havebeen utilised by SFT in a CBA of measures to reduce air and water pollution on the local, regional andnational level since the mid-80s. During the past 5 years SFT has funded new CV studies to create anupdated list of values to use in CBA evaluations. In the early 1990s the Directorate of Public Roads(DPR) also funded new CV studies on valuations for noise, local air pollution, and soiling from roadtraffic. The DPR has included these valuations in their new manual and software package forundertaking CBAs of road projects. A CBA is required for all new road projects in Norway. Both theSFT and DPR analyses plays an important administrative role. The SFT analyses have also had a largeinfluence on policy decisions, while the DPR analyses play a relatively minor role in the politicaldecision making on road projects.The administrative and political use of benefit estimates of biodiversity is much less regular.In most cases the economic estimates of biodiversity and a CBA are used to support decisions, butthey are seldom decisive. However, there are also examples where the valuation estimates have playedan important role in the decision making process.Three case studies are discussed [Navrud (1993)]:a) CBA of preservation of the brown bear, wolf, and wolverine;b) CBA of liming acidified lakes and rivers to preserve the genetic diversity of local salmonand trout stocks; andc) CBA of the preservation of biodiversity in old growth coniferous forestsIn case A the benefit estimate was used to support the policy decision, in case B the benefitestimate played a much more decisive role, while in case C the benefit estimates had little or no effecton the decision taken.Obstacles to the wider use of environmental valuationFive main categories of potential obstacles for wider use of environmental valuation can beidentified.65