View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
© Natural Resources Institute Finland© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Eija PoutaHeini Ahtiainen, Christine Bertram, Jürgen Meyerhoff, Kristine Pakalniete, Katrin Rehdanz & Janne Artell
Collecting spatial data in an international valuation survey: experiences from the BONUS BALTICAPP project
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Background and objectives of BalticApp
• Benefits from marine ecosystem services • Cost-benefit analysis of nutrient abatement under climate
change• Citizen science• EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive, marine spatial
planning, ecosystem-based management
2
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Two approaches to collect spatial information
A) Internet survey with maps
B) Mobile application
3 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
A) Internet survey with maps Features of the survey
• Coordinated surveys in Finland, Germany and Latvia
• Pre-testing: expert reviews, focus groups, pilot
• Representative sample of the population
• Altogether 4800 respondents• Response rates: 15-35%• Valuation methods
– Travel cost method– Contingent behaviour
method– Choice experiment
4
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Actors in data collection
5 21.7.2017
Finland, Kantar TNS:
sampling and contact for CAWI
Germany, LightspeedResearch GmbH:
sampling and contactfor CAWI,
some data about the panel
Map-survey company, Mapita: survey platform and data
Latvia, Latvijas FaktiLtd:
sampling and contact for CAWI,
CAPI
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Aims for the mapping
• Spatial distribution of recreation
• Travel cost: computational distances and costs
• Contingent behavior: combining measured environmental quality with perceived on site
• Choice experiment: spatial dependencies
6 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Map questions in the survey
7 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
ZOOM!
8 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland9 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Comments from the respondents
• FIN: Approximately 20 respondents sent questions while responding the survey and open text box in the end of survey:
• Main problems– Random locations– Double locations
• -> data cleaning, decision by researcher: buffers, country rules, location rules
10 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Home locations, raw data
11 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Recreation sites at the Baltic Sea, raw data
12 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Success in numbers
13 21.7.2017
Home locations FIN GER LAT
Sample size (completed responses) 2048 2005 759
Home locations (all points) 2373 1866 861
Home locations (impossible removed) 2300 1822 825
Home locations (duplicates removed) 1653 1391 712
Success rate 0.81 0.69 0.94
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Success in numbers
Recreation sites FIN GER LAT
Sample size (completed responses) 2048 2005 759
Baltic Sea visitors 1563 1232 603
Recreation sites on Baltic (all points) 1542 851 619Recreation sites on Baltic (impossible removed) 1496 776 603Recreation sites on Baltic (duplicates removed) 1106 653 546
Success rate 0.71 0.53 0.91
14 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Problems associate with
• Problems identified by duplicates in the place of recidence– Higher age– Lower income– Male gender– Unemployed and retired people– Non-users
15 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Lessons learnt
• Focus group and interview testing for the mapping tool needed• International map survey is technically demanding: aim to as
local scale as possible• Create possibilities for double-checking locations• Aim to find a survey company that
– has a respondent panel– experience in choice experiments and other demanding
survey questions– develops actively flexible mapping tools
16 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
B) Mobile application Open-source application to collect data on the environment and visited places
Aims:• Information for travel cost studies on locations
• Spatially explicit• Words, feelings, photos
• Panel on Baltic Sea visitors (survey contacts)
• To provide a communication platform for • Citizen-to-citizen
(timely environmental information)• Authorities-to-citizens(-to-authorities)
(e.g. the bathing water directive)• Citizen-to-research(-to-citizen)
(citizen reports, surveys, env. Information)
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Challenges related to app building
• Gathering interest– The tool is not enough
Marketable purpose + the marketer!
• Technical challenges– Building a tender– App usability (intuitiveness and platform choice)– Bureaucracy and user security
• Budgeting– Asymmetric information – costs vs. possibilities– Project funding vs. continuity
18 21.7.2017
Keep things simple,
very simple
© Natural Resources Institute Finland19 21.7.2017
© Natural Resources Institute Finland
Thank you!
21.7.201720
© Natural Resources Institute Finland21 21.7.2017Teppo Tutkija
Recommended