Background: The long-term evolution of preferences for nature is crucial to conservation projects, given their targeted long-term horizons. Neglecting to account for this evolution could lead to undesirable human-nature relationships. This study compares the willingness to pay (WTP) for three coastal conservation projects in the Seto Inland Sea, Japan, at two distant time points (1998 and 2015), and tests for temporal transferability. It also compares protest responses that are often overlooked in WTP practices, regardless of their utility for conservation projects.
Methods: Given the lack of a unanimous protocol for protest response analyses and their use in estimating WTP, we propose a comprehensive analytic framework that integrates the two.
Results: We show that, while preferences for coastal ecosystem services were overall stable and temporarily transferable, the preferences for certain aspects of conservation projects considerably changed.
Discussion: This suggests the need to reconsider the projects' scheme, not the ecosystem services themselves, along with the clarification of beneficiaries and those responsible for past destruction. We conclude by suggesting further studies with a focus on regions experiencing significant social-ecological changes, such as developing countries, by exploiting the rich asset of existing valuations. This could contribute to the database for more temporal-sensitive ecosystem service valuations utilized for benefit transfers.
Keywords: Benefit transfer; Coastal ecosystem services; Contingent valuation method; Protest responses; Willingness to pay.