ContentslistsavailableatScienceDirect
Data in Brief
journalhomepage:www.elsevier.com/locate/dib
Data Article
Stated preference data on the insurance value of forests in Switzerland
Christian Unterberger
∗, Roland Olschewski
∗WSL Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research, Zürcherstrasse 111, CH-8903, Birmensdorf, Switzerland
a rt i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 13 October 2020 Revised 22 October 2020 Accepted 23 October 2020 Available online 27 October 2020 Keywords:
Discrete choice Ecosystem services Climate change adaptation Resilience
a b s t r a c t
Wepresentstatedpreferencedataforimprovedforestman- agementfromseven SwissmunicipalitiesintheCantonsof Grisons and Valais. The data was collected between Octo- ber 2019andFebruary 2020usinganonlinequestionnaire.
Weinvited10289householdstoparticipateandreceived939 responses.The online questionnaire consistedof two main parts – (1) an online choiceexperiment and (2) questions on the sociodemographic characteristics of the responding households. The choice experiment confronted households withtwelveconsecutivechoicetasks.Eachchoicetaskcon- sistedof threeoptions with avarying degree ofavalanche androckfallriskreductionduetoimprovedforestmanage- ment.Theoptionsfurther differedwithrespecttothe way thechargesfortheimprovedforest managementaredeter- minedand assignedtothehouseholds. Weadditionally in- cludedacostattributetoestimatetherespondents’willing- nesstopay.Atthe endofthechoiceexperimentweasked fivede-briefingquestionsandeightattitudinalquestions.Ad- ditionally,weaskedtherespondinghouseholdstostatetheir willingnesstotakerisks.Thesociodemographiccharacteris- ticscollectedinthesecondpartofthequestionnaireallowed ustoanalysetheirimpactonthechoicesweobservedinthe firstpartofthequestionnaire.Ananalysisofthechoicedata andfurtherinterpretiveinsightsarepresentedinthearticle
“Determiningthe insurancevalueofecosystems: Adiscrete choicestudyonnaturalhazardprotectionbyforests”.
DOI of original article: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2020.106866
∗ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: christian.unterberger@wsl.ch (C. Unterberger),roland.olschewski@wsl.ch (R. Olschewski).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2020.106466
2352-3409/© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
© 2020TheAuthor(s).PublishedbyElsevierInc.
ThisisanopenaccessarticleundertheCCBYlicense (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
SpecificationsTable
Subject Economics and Econometrics Environmental Economics Specific subject
area
Valuation of ecosystem services
Type of data CSV data file
How data were acquired
Online questionnaire Sawtooth
Data format Raw data
Parameters for data collection
The questionnaire targeted households in seven Swiss municipalities in the Canton of Grisons and Valais, which are exposed to avalanche and rock fall risk.
Description of data
collection Around 10,300 invitation letters were sent to households in seven Swiss municipalities. Each letter contained login details to an online questionnaire, which we administered via Sawtooth. The questionnaire consisted of two parts, a choice experiment and questions on sociodemographic characteristics of the responding households.
Data source location
Davos/ Canton of Grisons/ Switzerland Bergün Filisur/ Canton of Grisons/ Switzerland Albula/Alvra/ Canton of Grisons/ Switzerland St.
Niklaus/ Canton of Valais/ Switzerland Grächen/ Canton of Valais/
Switzerland Täsch/ Canton of Valais/ Switzerland Zermatt/ Canton of Valais/ Switzerland
Data accessibility Data is accessible via EnviDat, the WSL data portal Repository name:
EnviDat ( https://www.envidat.ch/ ) Data identification number:
https:/doi.org/10.16904/envidat.175 Direct URL to data:
https://www.envidat.ch/dataset/
stated-preference-data-on-the-insurance-value-of-forests-in-switzerland Related research
article
Unterberger C, Olschewski R. Determining the insurance value of ecosystems: A discrete choice study on natural hazard protection by forests. Ecological Economics. in press
ValueoftheData
- The dataallowforelicitingpreferencesofhouseholdsforfundingimprovedforestmanage- ment that isgeared towardsreducing avalanche androckfall risk. Additionally,it helpsto see howvariationsin sociodemographiccharacteristics affectthesepreferences.Eventually, thedataprovideademandsideperspectiveontheinsurancevalueofecosystems.
- The datahelpstoinformpolicymakers aswell astheprivate sector(insurancecompanies) whenitcomes toincorporatingecosystemservicesintoclimatechangeadaptationanddis- asterriskmanagementagendas.
- Thedatacanbeusedtooperationalizetheinsurancevalue ofecosystems.Inparticular,this datasetenablesa demandsideperspective ontheinsurancevalueofecosystemsandhelps toanalyzepreferencesandthewillingnesstopaybasedonsociodemographiccharacteristic.
- Preferencesandwillingnesstopayestimatesonthedemandsidecanbelinkedwithinsights from the supplyside (the provisioningof ecosystem services) inorder to identify feasible strategiesandpolicies.
1. DataDescription
Weconductedadiscrete choicestudyto elicitthepreferences ofSwisshouseholdsforfor- estmanagementthatisgearedtowardsthereductionofnaturalhazards.Wefocusedonseven
municipalitiesintheCantonsofGrisonsandValais.Ineachofthesemunicipalities,households faceavalanche androckfall risks.Thefirstpartofouronlinequestionnaireconsistedofadis- crete choicestudyinwhichrespondents face12 consecutivechoicetasks.In eachchoice task, respondents areaskedto choose oneamong threealternatives. Eachof thesealternatives had fiveattributeswithtwotosixattributelevels.Theattributesandtheirrespectivelevelsarepre- sentedinTable1inSection2.1.Afterthechoiceexperiment,weaskedfivede-briefingquestions asshowninTable2inSection2.1,followedby eightattitudinalquestionsasshowninTable3. In thesecond partofthe survey,weaskedrespondents abouttheir sociodemographiccharac- teristics,e.g.,age,gender,monthlydisposableincomeperhousehold,typeofresidence,property situation etc. The questions on the sociodemographiccharacteristics are shownin Table 4 in Section 2.2below.Following[1,2],we additionallyaskedrespondentstostatetheir willingness to takerisks ona scalerangingfrom0 to10,with0 referringto “completelyunwillingto take risks” and10 to “verywilling to take risks”.The herepresented data isthus a combination of thechoicesrespondentsmadewithinthechoiceexperimentandtheirstatedsociodemographic characteristics. For reasons of confidentiality we anonymized the data by removing all fields thatwouldenablepersonalidentification(IP-address,emailaddress,comments,password,user- name).Thecompletequestionnaire, thedatasetanddatadescriptionareavailableontheEnvi- ronmentalDataPlatformEnviDatoftheSwissFederalInstitute forForest,Snow andLandscape Research WSL(doi:10.16904/envidat.175).“DIVES_Questionnaire.pdf” shows the complete ques- tionnaire.“DIVES_choice_data.csv” is thedataset and “data_description.pdf” providesits detailed description.
2. ExperimentalDesign,MaterialsandMethods
InOctober2019wesentinvitation letterstoallhouseholdsinourseven casestudymunic- ipalitiesintheCantonsofGrisons,GR,andValais,VS(VS:St.Niklaus,Grächen,Täsch,Zermatt, GR:Davos,Albula/Alvra/BergünFilisur).ForthehouseholdsinGRandthemunicipalityofTäsch,
Table 1
Attributes and their respective attribute levels (readapted from [3] ).
Attribute Levels
Hazard zone Red / Blue / White
Protection extended to traffic infrastructure Yes / No
Costing method Risk based / Lump sum
Contribution mode Voluntary / Mandatory
Additional annual charge per household CHF 0 / 100 / 300 / 500 / 700 / 900
Table 2
De-briefing questions.
Strongly disagree
Rather not agree
Partly/
partly
Rather agree
Strongly agree
Do not know/ not
specified The questions were
phrased in an understandable way
O O O O O O
I felt safe making the
decisions O O O O O O
I felt urged to give certain answers
O O O O O O
The choice situations were realistic
O O O O O O
I consider the annual charge per household realistic
O O O O O O
Table 3
Attitudinal questions.
Doesn’t apply at all
Rather does not apply
Partly/
partly
Rather applies
Fully applies
Do not know/ not
specified I am well familiar with the
protective impact of the forest in my municipality.
O O O O O O
My own exposure to avalanches
and rock fall is low. O O O O O O
The current silvicultural measures for avalanche and rock fall protection in my
municipality are sufficient. O O O O O O
Over the next 50 years, climate change will increasingly contribute to wind throw and
pest infestation in forests. O O O O O O
Over the next 50 years, climate change will lead to a sharp decline in avalanches and
rock fall hazards. O O O O O O
Avalanche protection is the sole responsibility of the federal and cantonal authorities.
O O O O O O
Climate change is aggravating the natural hazard situation.
O O O O O O
I am generally concerned about the effects of climate change.
O O O O O O
wereceived theaddress dataofall registeredhouseholds fromthe municipalauthorities. Due tothelarge numberofhouseholdsin Davoswe onlyinvitedhouseholdswherethe mainper- son registered wasborn inan even year. Tocontact thehouseholds in Zermatt,Grächen and St.Niklaus we usedbulk mailing.Overall,we invited10,289households.The onlinequestion- naire wasopen betweenOctober 2019 andFebruary 2020. In thesefive months we received 939responses. Weadministeredtheonlinequestionnairewiththehosting serviceprovidedby Sawtooth.Forthe layoutof thequestionnaire weused Sawtooth’s survey softwareLighthouse Studio.
Thequestionnaireconsistedoftwomainparts:(1)Achoiceexperimentwithtwelveconsec- utivechoicetasksandtheassociatedde-briefingandattitudinalquestions.(2)Questionsonthe sociodemographiccharacteristicsofthehousehold.
2.1. Thechoiceexperiment
Thechoiceexperimentconsistedoftwelveconsecutivechoicetasks.Ineach choicetaskre- spondentshad to choose betweenthree alternatives. Options 1 and2 described situations in whichbetterforest management leadstoreducedavalanche androckfallrisk. The statusquo ineachchoicetaskdescribedasituationwithoutimprovedforestmanagement, hencethereis nochangeintheavalancheandrockfallriskfaced.Toidentifyrelevantattributesandcredible attribute levels we collaborated withinsurance andre-insurance professionals andacademics fromdifferentdisciplines. Inthe course ofworkshops andprojectmeetingswe identified five relevantattributesandtherespectivelevels.TheseareshowninTable1.
WeusedNgenetogenerateaD-efficientdesignthatvariestheattributelevelsinOptions1 and2andhasaconstantstatusquoacrosstwelvechoicetasks[4].Foradetaileddescriptionof theattributelevelsandthechoiceexperimentpleaserefertotheaccompanyingpublication[3].
Table 4
Questions on the sociodemographic characteristics of the responding households.
Sociodemographic characteristics Type of question Answer options
Gender Select - Male
- Female - Other
Year of birth Input field Numeric YYYY
Monthly household income Select - Less than CHF 20 0 0 - CHF 20 0 0 to below CHF 40 0 0 - CHF 40 0 0 to below CHF 60 0 0 - CHF 60 0 0 to below CHF 80 0 0 - CHF 80 0 0 to below CHF 10 0 0 0 - CHF 10 0 0 0 to below CHF 120 0 0 - CHF 120 0 0 to below CHF 140 0 0 - CHF 140 0 0 to below CHF 160 0 0 - CHF 160 0 0 to below CHF 180 0 0 - More than CHF 180 0 0 What kind of building do you live
in? Select - Single-family house
- Multi-family house - Other
Do you own or rent a house or apartment in this municipality?
Select - Owner
- Tenant How many people live in your
household?
Input filed Numeric How many children under 18 live
in your household?
Select - 0
- 1 - 2 - 3 and more For how many years have you been
living in your present house or apartment?
Input field Numeric
For how many years have you been living in this municipality?
Input field Numeric In which hazard zone do you
actually live?
Select - In the red hazard zone, - In the blue hazard zone, - In the white hazard zone, - I don’t know
What is your highest educational qualification?
Select - No graduation
- Primary, secondary, secondary modern, or district school
- Apprenticeship, vocational school or commercial school - A-levels, vocational school-leaving certificate, diploma
from an intermediate diploma, or teacher seminar - Swiss federal vocational diploma, degree from a higher
education institution,
- Master craftsman’s examination, or commercial college - University, ETH, or university of applied sciences Are you or a person in your
household a member of a non-profit club or association?
Select - Yes
- No
Subsequent to the choice experiment we asked the responding householdfive de-briefing questionsto understandwhetherthehouseholdsunderstoodtheexperimentandconsideredit realistic.For each questionthepossible response rangedfrom“strongly disagree” to“strongly agree” with the opportunity not tostate any answer.Table 2below shows the debriefing ques- tionsandthepossibleanswers.
Next,we askedeightattitudinal questionstogetan idea ofthesubjectiveriskexposure of the responding households as well as subjective valuationsand opinions on natural hazards, forestmanagementandtheirlinktoclimatechange.TheyareshowninTable3.
Finally,we askedtheresponding householdto indicatetheir willingnessto take risks.Fol- lowing[1,2],weusedascalerangingfrom0to10,with0referringto“absolutelynowillingness totakerisks”and10to“veryhighwillingnesstotakerisks”.
2.2.Sociodemographiccharacteristics
Inthesecond partofthequestionnaireweaskedtherespondinghouseholdstosharesome sociodemographiccharacteristics.Thequestionsandtherespectiveansweroptionsarepresented inTable4.
EthicsStatement
Theparticipationinthesurveywasvoluntaryandrespondentswereinformedthatthedata willbeanalyzed anonymously.Inparticipatinginthesurvey andsubmitting thequestionnaire eachrespondentgaveher/hisinformedconsent.
DeclarationofCompetingInterest
Theauthorsdeclarethattheyhavenoknowncompetingfinancialinterestsorpersonalrela- tionshipswhichhave,orcouldbeperceivedtohave,influencedtheworkreportedinthisarticle.
Acknowledgments
ThisworkwasfundedbytheSwissNationalScienceFoundation(SNSF)withintheframework ofthe NationalResearch Programme “Sustainable Economy:resource-friendly, future-oriented, innovative” (NRP 73 -http://www.nrp73.ch/en).
References
[1] A Falk, A Becker, T Dohmen, B Enke, D Huffman, U Sunde, Global evidence on economic preferences, Q. J. Econ. 133 (2018) 1645–1692, doi: 10.1093/qje/qjy013 .
[2] R Mata , R Frey , D Richter , J Schupp , R Hertwig , A view from psychology: a view from psychology, J. Econ. Perspect.
32 (2018) 155–172 .
[3] Unterberger C, Olschewski R. Determining the insurance value of ecosystems: a discrete choice study on natural hazard protection by forests. Ecol. Econ. in press
[4] ChoiceMetricsNgene 1.1.1 User Manual & Reference Guide, Australia, 2018 .
