In search of forest resource values of indigenous peoples: Are nonmarket valuation techniques applicable?
Abstract
This article examines issues surrounding the potential applicability of nonmarket valuation techniques to indigenous peoples. A conceptual model examines relationships between natural and cultural environments and value systems. Problems of valuation identified include eliciting values for individuals, aggregating individual values into measures of social welfare, and comparisons of welfare across culturally different groups. The influence of sacred or taboo goods, the potential for satiation, and variations in property rights are factors to address in assessing individual values. Differences in political and property rights systems, and unique demographic structures are seen as limits to aggregating values for randomly selected individuals. Since valuation is endogenous to specific social environments, aggregations of indigenous and nonindigenous measures of social welfare may be inappropriate.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 34 · Cited by 77
- Authors
- Adamowicz, W., Beckley, T., Macdonald, D. H., Just, L., Luckert, M., Murray, E., & Phillips, W.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Canadian Forest Service (CA)
- Venue
- Society & Natural Resources
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1998-01
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 51-66
- ISSN
- 0894-1920 (ISSN-L)
- 1521-0723
- OpenAlex
- W1966640306
- Cited by
- 77
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 3.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Society & Natural Resources (publishedVersion)
- eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) (submittedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
- Keywords
- non-market valuation, indigenous peoples, forest resources, cultural values, satiation, property rights, political rights, value elicitation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
