Title |
Citizens' preferences for the conservation of agricultural genetic resources
|
---|---|
Published in |
Frontiers in Genetics, December 2014
|
DOI | 10.3389/fgene.2014.00440 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Eija Pouta, Annika Tienhaara, Heini Ahtiainen |
Abstract |
Evaluation of conservation policies for agricultural genetic resources (AgGR) requires information on the use and non-use values of plant varieties and animal breeds, as well as on the preferences for in situ and ex situ conservation. We conducted a choice experiment to estimate citizens' willingness to pay (WTP) for AgGR conservation programmes in Finland, and used a latent class model to identify heterogeneity in preferences among respondent groups. The findings indicate that citizens have a high interest in the conservation of native breeds and varieties, but also reveal the presence of preference heterogeneity. Five respondent groups could be identified based on latent class modeling: one implying lexicographic preferences, two with reasoned choices, one indicating uncertain support and one with a preference for the current status of conservation. The results emphasize the importance of in situ conservation of native cattle breeds and plant varieties in developing conservation policies. |
X Demographics
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Spain | 1 | 4% |
Unknown | 22 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Researcher | 5 | 22% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 17% |
Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
Professor | 1 | 4% |
Other | 3 | 13% |
Unknown | 3 | 13% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 48% |
Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 13% |
Social Sciences | 2 | 9% |
Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
Other | 0 | 0% |
Unknown | 5 | 22% |