What was the mean percentage for all sample means regarding Sanctuary Zones?
Click to see answer
50%.
Click to see question
What was the mean percentage for all sample means regarding Sanctuary Zones?
50%.
What is the average amount Western Australian households are willing to pay for 5% sanctuary zone coverage in Marmion Marine Park?
$56 per year.
What is the average willingness to pay for extensive shore access in Marmion Marine Park?
$32 per year.
What demographic factors were controlled for in the survey of Western Australian residents?
Age and gender representation.
What does ASC stand for in the context of the marine park alternative?
Alternative Specific Constant.
What percentage of respondents enjoy supporting environmental causes?
20%.
What is the marginal willingness to pay for a 5% Sanctuary Zone?
$70 [35 - 105].
What is the purpose of a multiple discrete choice question in the context of marine parks?
To choose a preferred option among alternatives like Marine Park A, Marine Park B, or No Change.
What does the utility function in the choice experiment represent?
It represents an individual's preferences and underlying utility, part of which is known and part unknown to the analyst.
What type of models are used to analyze single binary choice data?
Probit models.
What is essential for successful marine park planning?
Understanding the values and preferences of different community sectors.
How is the probability of a respondent voting in favor of the marine park modeled?
Using the standard normal cumulative density function.
What percentage of respondents agree that Sanctuary Zones protect the marine environment?
85%.
What was tested between the two marine park locations, Marmion and South Coast?
Mean preferences.
Which theory is applied to analyze choice experiment responses?
McFadden theory of random utility.
What is the average willingness to pay for marine parks with sanctuary zones according to the proposed South Coast Marine Park?
$116.
What are the average amounts Western Australian households are willing to pay for 5%, 15%, and 45% sanctuary zone coverage in the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
96, and $123 per year, respectively.
What distribution is assumed for the error in probit models?
Normally distributed.
Which model is preferred for estimating willingness to pay for sanctuary zones?
Model 4, as it has the lowest BIC and shows no modeling gains from including all levels of sanctuary zones.
What does the regression analysis suggest about preferences for sanctuary zones in marine parks?
There might be some heterogeneity in preferences among respondents.
What was the final sample size of the survey conducted among Western Australian residents?
1,054.
What is the formula for the utility from respondent n selecting alternative i?
U_nit = B'X_it + ε_nit, where B is a vector of estimated coefficients and X is a vector of attribute levels.
What is the mean score for the importance of fishing for local economies?
3.89
How much additional payment is estimated for moving from 5% to 45% sanctuary zones in the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
$52.
What is the mean score for the perception that fishing is damaging to local marine environments?
3.49
What type of models are used for multiple discrete choice data?
Multinomial logit models.
What is the estimated effect of being female on the optimum sanctuary zone percentage for Marmion Marine Park?
3.700*.
How many respondents answered the question about the optimum area for Sanctuary Zones before the discrete choice experiment?
746
Which model is preferred for Marmion Marine Park based on the single binary choice data?
Model 3, as it has the lowest BIC.
What is the estimated cost coefficient in the probit models for the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
-0.004*** (with standard error of 0.001)
What does the multiple discrete choice experiment encourage respondents to do?
Make trade-offs between different levels of sanctuary zones and additional features of marine park design.
What percentage of the sample exhibited protest responses in the choice experiment?
6%.
What percentage of respondents voted YES at the $50 tax bid level for South Coast?
56%.
What is the mean score for the perception that Sanctuary Zones protect the marine environment?
4.27
What is the estimated impact of cost on the multinomial logit model?
-0.005*** (consistent across all models).
What was the main reason most respondents chose 'YES' to pay for marine parks?
I think we should create marine sanctuaries no matter what the cost (68 respondents).
How does the representation of University graduates in the sample compare to the Western Australian average?
University graduates are slightly over-represented.
What is a potential bias in estimating population WTP?
Differences between the sample and the relevant population.
What does OLS regression analyze in this study?
The relationship between respondent covariates and the percent of marine park that respondents think is the optimum amount of sanctuary zone.
What is the estimated marginal sample willingness to pay for a 5% Sanctuary Zone?
$94 [47 - 141].
How do respondents with marine-related jobs view sanctuary zones in Marmion Marine Park?
They nominated higher sanctuary zones compared to those without marine-related jobs.
What was the most common reason for respondents selecting the status quo option?
I could not afford the cost (33%).
What concern might respondents have had when answering the single binary choice question?
They may have worried that selecting the no-pay option could be interpreted as not supporting sanctuary zones.
What is the significance level for the estimate of females in the South Coast Marine Park?
3.707* (p<0.10).
What are the benefits of a Large Sanctuary Zone (45%)?
Large conservation benefits, large science benefits, and wider ecosystem resilience.
What do Likelihood Ratio tests suggest about the levels of sanctuary zones?
Including all levels of sanctuary zone is statistically significant.
What does the constant policy estimate indicate in Model 1?
0.358*** (with standard error of 0.066)
What is the estimated marginal sample willingness to pay for shore access?
$53 [35 - 71].
What behavior did respondents indicate when they selected not to pay for the marine park option?
Exhibiting protest behavior.
What is the impact of Sanctuary Zones on recreational fishing?
Describes how many fishing sites inside the marine park are closed to fishing due to zoning.
What was the representation of households with children under 15 years in the sample compared to the Western Australia population average?
34% and 37% compared with 27%.
What is the impact on recreational fishing with a LOW rating according to the model?
0.216** (0.097).
What phenomenon is suggested by the preference for the 15% level over 5% and 40%?
Scope insensitivity.
What analysis techniques are planned for further understanding preferences for sanctuary zones?
Mixed logit and latent class models.
How is the cost for managing the marine park funded?
Through increased State and Federal taxes collected from all Western Australian households.
How were respondents assigned to the choice questions?
Each respondent was randomly assigned to one block of choice questions.
What is the highest tax payment level mentioned for household contributions?
$400.
What was the mean percentage of marine park area suggested for Sanctuary Zones before the SBCE?
53%.
What type of models were used to test the mean preferences?
Multinomial logit models.
How much more are households willing to pay to increase sanctuary zone coverage from 5% to 45% in Marmion Marine Park?
$56.
What was the average proportion of respondents voting YES for South Coast in the single binary choice experiment?
51%.
What is the main reason most respondents chose to pay for a marine park option?
The benefit is worth the cost to me (37%).
What is assumed about the choices made by respondents in the choice experiment?
Respondents are assumed to make choices that maximize their own utility.
How many respondents indicated that the benefit is worth the cost to them?
42 respondents.
How many choice questions did respondents see in the single binary choice experiment?
One choice question that placed sanctuary zones in each marine park (two questions in total).
What do the surveys conducted in WA reveal about public support for sanctuary zones?
There is broad support for increasing the size of sanctuary zones and ensuring good visitor access.
What are Sanctuary Zones?
Areas of the ocean for biodiversity conservation where public access is encouraged for education, tourism, and scientific research, with no fishing or disturbance allowed.
What is the estimated disutility associated with a marine park that has a high impact on commercial fishing?
-28 per household per year.
How many respondents ignored the cost when selecting 'YES'?
1 respondent.
What percentage of respondents have visited the Proposed South Coast Marine Park region in the past 5 years?
28%.
What does a negative impact on commercial fishing indicate in the model?
It suggests a decrease in commercial fishing viability at higher impact levels.
What is the estimated marginal sample willingness to pay for a 45% Sanctuary Zone?
$187 [125 - 249].
How many choice questions were created for the study?
48 choice questions.
What additional factors are considered in the multiple discrete choice experiment?
Accessibility to the sanctuary zone from the shore and impacts to both commercial and recreational fishers.
How many respondents selected 'Other' as a reason for not paying?
16 respondents (10%).
What does a negative coefficient for 'Cost' in the logit model indicate?
As cost increases, the likelihood of choosing that option decreases.
What behavior does a 'Protester' respondent exhibit?
Always selects NOT to pay and answers follow-up questions on motivation.
What is aggregated across households in Western Australia to estimate total value?
Willingness to pay for different marine park design features.
What does the coefficient for 'Shore access to sanctuary zones' indicate?
0.289*** (0.049), suggesting a positive impact.
What does the note about low correlations between covariates suggest?
There is minimal multicollinearity among the respondent characteristics.
What is the primary focus of the multiple discrete choice experiment data?
Mean values for changes in utility regarding marine park design.
What percentage of respondents reported having children under 15 in the household?
34%.
What percentage of respondents in the single binary choice data work in a marine-related industry?
3%.
What is the estimated aggregate willingness to pay for the 5% Sanctuary Zone in the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
30 million - $76.1 million].
What negative preferences did respondents show in the study?
Higher impacts to both recreation and commercial fishing.
What did the restriction tests on model interactions suggest?
There are no statistical differences in mean preferences between the two locations.
What was the average proportion of respondents voting YES for Marmion in the single binary choice experiment?
52%.
What is the mean score for the perception that Sanctuary Zones are annoying for local communities?
2.47
What does the modeling suggest about people's sensitivity to the scope of sanctuary zones?
There is some choice insensitivity to scope for the level of sanctuary zones.
What is the focus of the single binary choice experiment?
Modeling stated preference results regarding sanctuary zones in marine parks.
Which group is often missing from marine park planning discussions?
The broader community.
What percentage of the sample goes recreational fishing at least once a year?
32%.
How does shore access to sanctuary zones affect the model estimates?
It has a positive estimate, ranging from 0.217*** to 0.288*** across models.
What might the observed scope insensitivity in the choice experiment indicate?
People may show general support for sanctuary zones without differentiating between levels.
What impacts are assessed in the context of sanctuary zones?
Impacts on recreational and commercial fishers.
What is the smallest Sanctuary Zone size level in the study?
Small (5%) with limited conservation and science benefits.
What is the average percentage respondents think should be designated as sanctuary zones in marine parks?
56%.
How many respondents answered the question about the optimum area for Sanctuary Zones after the discrete choice experiment?
1,054
How did recent visitors to Marmion Marine Park perceive the optimum percentage for sanctuary zones?
They thought the optimum percentage should be higher than those who had not visited in the last 5 years.
What is the estimated aggregate value for larger sanctuary zones in Marmion Marine Park?
A$84.3 million.
What can generate bias in respondents' answers when using stated preference methods?
The hypothetical nature of the described goods or policy changes.
What is the statistically significant willingness to pay increase for sanctuary zones?
From 5% to 15%.
What is the estimated impact on recreation fishing at a LOW baseline?
0.178*** to 0.255*** across models.
Was there a significant difference in the mean percentage of optimum zones between the two marine parks?
No, there was no significant difference.
What does the term 'dummy' refer to in the context of the models?
It refers to categorical variables used in the analysis.
What is the significance level for the estimate of 'Snorkeler' in the Marmion Marine Park?
5.672** (p<0.05).
What is the estimated willingness-to-pay for the park with a 15% Sanctuary Zone?
$147 [100 - 194].
What was the significant finding regarding the percentage areas respondents think should be sanctuary zones?
Respondents significantly reduced their percentage areas after completing the choice experiment.
What does the cost coefficient indicate in the probit models?
It shows a negative relationship, with an estimate of -0.004***.
What is the willingness-to-pay estimate for the park with a 15% Sanctuary Zone?
$102 [60 - 143]
What is the estimated willingness to pay for the 15% Sanctuary Zone in the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
53 - $138].
What type of models were used to analyze the data for marine parks?
Preference space multinomial models with no interactions on the attributes.
What percentage level of sanctuary zones is valued the highest by the WA public?
45%.
What was the public's preference regarding shore access to sanctuary zones?
Extensive shore access to the sanctuary zone was positively valued.
What does the estimate for a LARGE Sanctuary Zone (1.003) suggest?
It has a strong positive impact on the likelihood of choosing that option.
What is the average willingness to pay for extensive shore access in the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
$24 per year.
What is the mean score for the belief that we do not need to do more to protect the marine environment in Australia?
2.25
What percentage of respondents have visited the Marmion Marine Park in the past 5 years?
Around 64%.
What is the log likelihood value for Model 1?
-8584.
What is the estimated marginal sample willingness to pay for a 15% Sanctuary Zone?
$144 [80 - 208].
What percentage of respondents believed funding for marine sanctuaries should come from other sources?
23%.
What is the indicative response rate used in the study?
60%.
What was a common protest reason among respondents for not wanting to pay?
I do not trust that the funds will be used for the purpose specified (8%).
What is the AIC value for Model 4?
How does public valuation change when sanctuary zones include extensive shore protection?
It increases by between 19% and 57%.
What is the purpose of the multiple discrete choice experiment in the context of the WA community?
To confirm the structure of preferences for sanctuary zones.
What constraint was imposed regarding the level of sanctuary zones and impacts on fishing?
A marine park with a SMALL, 5% level of sanctuary zones could not have HIGH impacts on either recreation or commercial fishing.
How many observations were included in the models?
821 for Models 1 and 2; 760 for Models 3 and 4.
What was modified in the sanctuary zone attribute for the choice experiment?
The percentage of the LARGE network of marine sanctuaries was increased from 40% to 45%.
What were the three parts of the survey?
Perceptions of marine conservation, stated preferences choice experiment, and socio-demographic questions.
What is the estimated marginal sample willingness to pay for a 15% Sanctuary Zone?
$159 AUD/year for 10 years.
What demographic was targeted for the survey?
Western Australian residents over 18 years of age.
What is the significance level for the 'LARGE - 45% Sanctuary zone' estimate?
*** p<0.01.
What does the BIC value indicate for Model 4?
1014
What does a negative estimate for cost (-0.005) indicate in the logit model?
As cost increases, the likelihood of choosing the sanctuary zone decreases.
What is the impact on recreational fishing categorized as LOW in the model?
0.144 (not statistically significant).
What was the sample size for the Multiple Discrete Choice Experiment (MDCE) before it was conducted?
308 respondents.
What is the log likelihood value for Model 2?
-542.
What percentage of respondents aged 61-75 is represented in the multiple discrete choice data?
18%.
What reason did 22% of respondents give for supporting marine sanctuaries?
I think we should create marine sanctuaries no matter what the cost.
What cost level was used in the pilot only?
$200 AUD.
What percentage of respondents believe more should be done to protect Australia's marine environment?
70%.
What assumption is made about non-respondents in the survey?
They are assigned a WTP of zero.
What was the opinion of fishers regarding sanctuary zones in the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
Fishers suggested less sanctuary zone area compared to those who fish less than once a year or never.
How much are Western Australian households willing to pay for larger sanctuary zones?
A123 for the Proposed South Coast Marine Park.
How is willingness to pay estimated in this study?
As the inverse ratio between the marginal change in the attribute and the marginal utility of the cost attribute.
What is the R-squared value for the Marmion Marine Park model?
0.045.
What does shore access to Sanctuary Zones indicate?
Whether the Sanctuary Zones can be accessed from the shore without needing a boat, affecting opportunities for education and tourism.
What percentage of respondents support the creation of sanctuary zones across at least 30% of the Proposed South Coast and Marmion Marine Park areas?
75%.
What is the willingness-to-pay estimate for the park with a 5% Sanctuary Zone?
$76 [34 - 118]
What does the data suggest about respondents' willingness to pay for 40% coverage of sanctuary zones?
They are not willing to pay more than the 5% level.
What does a negative estimate for 'Fisher' indicate in the context of the South Coast Marine Park?
Fisher respondents tend to prefer a lower percentage of sanctuary zone (-4.964**).
What type of data was used in this study?
Survey data from online panels provided by reputable market research companies.
What does a 'Yae-say' respondent do?
Always selects YES to pay and answers follow-up questions on their reasons.
What is the AIC value for Model 3?
1006
What is the sample size for the single binary choice data?
N=821.
What does the constant value represent in the regression analysis?
The baseline percentage of marine park as sanctuary zone when all covariates are zero.
What percentage of respondents aged 18-30 is represented in the single binary choice data?
22%.
How many observations were included in Model 1?
What is the total number of observations in the model?
11,400.
What is the average willingness-to-pay for the park?
$97 [73 - 120]
What was the mean percentage suggested for Sanctuary Zones after the SBCE in the Marmion Marine Park?
49%.
What does the term 'SE' stand for in the context of the estimates?
Standard Error.
What is the percentage of respondents who have visited the Marmion Marine Park in the past 5 years?
64%.
What was the average willingness to pay for extensive shore access in Marmion Marine Park?
$53.
Was there a significant difference between the two marine parks regarding Sanctuary Zones?
No significant difference.
What approach is used to aggregate individual WTP estimates?
A straightforward aggregation of the marginal sample WTP estimates.
What percentage of sanctuary zones were respondents willing to pay for in Marmion Marine Park?
Between 5% and 40%.
What percentage of the general public supports no-take sanctuary zones in proposed marine parks?
75%.
What type of error distribution is assumed in multinomial logit models?
Type I extreme value distribution.
What method was used to design the choice questions for the study?
An efficient D-error design.
What percentage of respondents voted YES at the $10 tax bid level for Marmion?
71%.
What was the average percentage of sanctuary zones respondents nominated after the choice experiment?
49%.
How is mean household WTP calculated?
By multiplying willing to pay estimates by an indicative response rate.
What was the sample size for the pilot study used to revise the design?
102 respondents.
What was the completion rate for the survey?
60%, similar to another Australian study.
What methods are suggested for understanding community preferences in marine park planning?
Using economic non-market valuation and estimating willingness to pay.
What criteria are used to compare model specification and fit?
Likelihood Restriction tests, AIC, and BIC.
What was the sample size for the survey question regarding optimum area for Sanctuary Zones before the Single Binary Choice Experiment (SBCE)?
354 respondents.
What is the estimated marginal sample willingness to pay for a 45% Sanctuary Zone?
$204 AUD/year for 10 years.
What is the median household weekly income range reported?
1,999.
What is the AIC value for Model 3?
What is the significance level for the cost variable in the models?
*** p<0.01.
What percentage of respondents go fishing at least once a year?
32%.
What does the negative willingness to pay value indicate for the 45% Sanctuary Zone in Marmion Marine Park?
It indicates a negative perception or lack of support, with a value of -40.9 million - (-$3.02 million)].
What is the significance level for the SMALL Sanctuary Zone estimate?
*** (p<0.01).
Was there a significant difference in the percentage of area for the South Coast Marine Park Sanctuary Zone based on the order of SBCE?
No significant difference.
What percentage of fishers believe that at least 30% sanctuary zone would be optimal for the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
75%.
Which respondent characteristic has the highest positive estimate for the Marmion Marine Park?
Marine related job (11.529**).
What issues are identified in respondents' answers that can affect stated preferences data?
Protest and yea-say responses.
What are the levels of impact on commercial fishing income due to Sanctuary Zones?
None (0%), Low (-5%), Medium (-25%), High (-50%).
What is the estimated marginal sample willingness to pay for a 5% Sanctuary Zone?
$118 AUD/year for 10 years.
What is the impact on commercial fishing with a HIGH rating according to the model?
-0.264** (0.118).
What will be tested further in the multiple discrete choice experiment?
Scope insensitivity regarding optimal amounts of sanctuary zones.
What is the significance level for the estimates marked with ***?
p<0.01
What is the mean household willingness to pay for the 5% Sanctuary Zone in Marmion Marine Park?
28 - $85].
How many relevant households in WA were estimated for taxation purposes?
752,492 households.
What was the standard deviation (sd) for the mean percentage suggested before the SBCE?
What was the mean percentage suggested for Sanctuary Zones after the SBCE in the South Coast Marine Park?
48%.
What is the estimated willingness-to-pay for the park with a 5% Sanctuary Zone?
$85 [43 - 127].
What percentage of respondents have visited the proposed South Coast Marine Park in the past 5 years?
28%.
How much were respondents willing to pay for 45% coverage of sanctuary zones in Marmion Marine Park?
$187 on average.
What indicates that some impacts to recreational and commercial fishers are inevitable?
To achieve effective sanctuary zones, some impacts would be necessary for biodiversity conservation.
What is the estimated marginal sample willingness to pay for shore access?
$40 AUD/year for 10 years.
What is the aggregate willingness to pay for the 45% Sanctuary Zone in Marmion Marine Park?
56.3 million - $112 million].
What is the mean household willingness to pay for shore access in the Proposed South Coast Marine Park?
12 - $36].
What is the impact on commercial fishing categorized as HIGH in the model?
-0.226 (statistically significant at p<0.10).
What was the mean percentage suggested for Sanctuary Zones after the MDCE?
49%.
What is the estimated willingness-to-pay for the park with a 40% Sanctuary Zone?
$63 [21 - 106].
What is the percentage of respondents with a university degree in the single binary choice data?
35%.
How many respondents indicated they prefer not to pay for marine sanctuaries?
10 respondents indicated 'I prefer this option'.
What percentage of respondents believed funding for marine sanctuaries should come from other sources?
26 respondents selected 'I believe funding for marine sanctuaries should come from somewhere other than my own pocket' (protest).
What is the total number of respondents who participated in the survey?
119 respondents.
What limitation was noted regarding the experimental design?
Marginal utilities cannot be applied to certain situations, such as low sanctuary zones with high impacts.
What does the Likelihood Ratio test suggest about the model fit for sanctuary zone percentage?
Using dummy variables for sanctuary zone percentage is a better model fit than using a continuous variable.
How many respondents were identified as 'protest' voters?
63 respondents were identified as 'protest' voters.
What was the response of 54 respondents who always voted to pay for a cost option?
They were identified as 'yae-sayers' who suggested they were not considering the options as presented.
What was the main reason for respondents selecting 'NO' to pay for marine sanctuaries?
The most common reason was 'I could not afford the cost' with 47 respondents.
What model specification provided the best fit for the marine park study?
Model 4 provided the best fit with a lower AIC for the dummy specification.
What was the reason given by 16 respondents for not trusting the use of funds?
'I do not trust that the funds will be used for the purpose specified' (protest).
What percentage of the marine park is designated as a sanctuary zone in the proposed South Coast and extended Marmion Marine Parks?
45%.
What is one attribute considered in the sanctuary zone design?
Shore accessibility to sanctuary zones.
