Citizens’ preferences for policies to conserve agricultural genetic resources
Nyckelord:
maatiaislajikkeet, maatiaisrodut, valintakoe, kansalaisten heterogeenisyysAbstract
The intensification of agriculture has led to remarkable changes in the utilization of agricultural genetic resources and many previously common breeds and varieties have become rare or even endangered (FAO 2007, 2010, Drucker, Gomez & Anderson 2001). In Finland, Eastern and Northern Finncattle, the Kainuu Grey Sheep and the Åland Sheep are endangered according to the FAO classification (FAO 2003) and, for example, majority of the old Finnish crop varieties and Finnish landrace pig are already extinct. Making informed decisions on the appropriate focus and extent of conservation of agricultural genetic resources requires information on both the costs and benefits of conservation. Economic analyses involving the valuation of conservation benefits can guide resource allocation of various types of genetic resources and conservation methods (Artuso 1998). The value of genetic resources is not typically revealed by markets, as they are not directly traded in the markets or the prices of agricultural products do not completely indicate their value (Oldfield 1989, Brown 1990, Drucker et al. 2001). Although the importance of economic analyses has been recognized, the literature on the monetary value of genetic resources in agriculture is relatively limited (see e.g. Evenson et al. 1998 and Rege and Gibson 2003, Ahtiainen & Pouta 2011). Currently the conservation policy of farm agricultural genetic resources in Finland is based on international agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) and the Global Plan of Action for Animal Genetic resources (FAO 2007). National genetic resource programs were initiated for plants in 2003 and for farm animals in 2005 to strengthen the conservation of genetic resources in Finland. Although there has been some progress in the implementation of the programs, they have also suffered from shortage of funds and lack of political interest in conservation. To re-evaluate the conservation policy, there is a need to use valuation methods capable of estimating also the non-use value components of genetic resources, i.e. stated preference methods. The choice experiment (CE) method has been found suitable to valuing genetic resources due to its flexibility and ability to value the traits of breeds or varieties and their attributes. Choice experiment makes it possible to value benefits of both plant genetic resources (PGR) and animal genetic resources (AnGR). The terms refer to all cultivated plant species and varieties, as well as all animal species and breeds that are of interest in terms of food and agricultural production. The CE method can also be used to evaluate the means of conservation in situ (live animals and plants) and ex situ (as seeds, cryopreserved embryos and other genetic material). Previous choice experiments have focused on valuing breeds or varieties and their attributes, especially on attributes that are related to the use of the breed or variety in agriculture (Birol et al. 2006, Ouma et al. 2007). In this study we present the results of a choice experiment valuing the benefits of a genetic resource conservation program in Finland. We test the effect of in situ and ex situ conservation on citizen choices between programs. We also analyse whether the plant varieties and animal breeds are perceived equally valuable by citizen. As the conservation of agricultural genetic resources (AgGR) cannot be expected to be equally valuable to all citizens, we analyse the existence of citizen segments that value differently the conservation of genetic resources. We can assume that AgGR is a rather unknown good for some of the respondents of the valuation survey. However, in valuation surveys respondents are assumed to make “informed” choices when responding to value elicitation questions (e.g. Blomquist &Whitehead 1998). Therefore, we offered an opportunity for respondents to obtain further information on AgGR. In our case, the internet-based survey allowed us also to measure how much time respondents took in reading the information and responding to questions. Furthermore, we also measured response certainty and tested the effects of uncertainty and information as reasons for heterogeneity.
