Evaluation of the environmental impacts of extreme floods in the Evros River basin using Contingent Valuation Method

Abstract

The current practice of flood risk assessment focuses mainly on damages that can be easily measured in monetary terms, i.e. the so-called tangible damages on assets that have market values. However, quite often flood events are causing damages on assets that have no market values, e.g. environmental impacts, which usually are neglected. In this context, the present paper explores the potential of Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) to estimate the environmental costs of floods. CVM is a method widely used in environmental economics valuating environmental goods and services that have no market prices. In this case, it is applied to estimate the environmental costs of the severe flooding event that emerged in the Evros River (Greece) during March/April 2006. The environmental costs are elicited by asking three groups of local stakeholders (local scientific and administration experts, farmers and hunters) for their willingness to pay (WTP) to avoid such impacts, particularly on the soil, the biodiversity and the aesthetic environment. Additionally, the experts are asked to state in their opinion, which part of the regional gross domestic product (GDP) should be allocated to avoid environmental flood impacts in the Evros River. The opinions of the three local stakeholders groups were considered in the survey since they are the most informed parts of the population on such a complex issue. Consequently, both the WTP and GDP estimations do not represent the preferences of the wider local population. The findings of this valuation approach have the potential to contribute to a more comprehensive assessment and thus to a more unbiased flood risk management.

Appendix

1.1 Questionnaire

• 1. Which of the following environmental assets were affected by the flooding events of March/April 2006?

• 2. In your opinion, how important are the following environmental assets for the local welfare?

• 3. ‘Would you be willing to pay an annual household fee for avoiding the floods in the Evros River, and hence minimizing the economic, environmental and social impacts?’ If no go to question 4. If yes go to question 5.

• 4. Which is the reason why you are not willing to pay?

  • 1. I don’t believe in this approach

  • 2. I don’t know how much I am willing to pay

  • 3. I can’t afford to pay

  • 4. It is an international issue and should be treated globally

  • 5. The state should pay for this

  • 6. I disagree in general and I’m not willing to pay

  • 7. Other

• 5. How much would you be willing to pay annually as a household for avoiding the floods in the Evros River?

  • 0,1–5€

  • 5–30€

  • 30–70€

  • 70–200€

• 6. ‘From the above selected interval value which percentage would you allocate for addressing the following potential environmental impacts emerging from the floods in the Evros River?’

  1. Soil degradation (erosion, contamination)	%	Experts, farmers
  2. Biodiversity impacts	%	Experts, farmers, hunters
  3. Aesthetic environment	%	Experts

• 7. ‘Which percentage of the Evros Prefecture’s gross domestic product (GDP) should be disposed for mitigating and avoiding the environmental impacts caused by the floods in the Evros River?’

  No contribution (%)
  0.01–0.05
  0.05–0.1
  0.1–0.5
  0.5–1
  1–2
  2–4
  4–6

• 8. In your opinion, how should the initial amount be allocated to each affected environmental asset?

  1. Soil degradation (erosion, contamination)	%
  2. Biodiversity impacts	%
  3. Aesthetic environment	%

• 9. In your opinion, what should be the funding source for the flood mitigation measures in the Evros River basin?

  • 1. The Greek state

  • 2. The Greek state and EU

  • 3. European Union

  • 4. New taxes imposed on all citizens

  • 5. National funds from Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria