Multimethod valuation of peatland ecosystem services: Combining choice experiment, multicriteria decision analysis and deliberative valuation

This paper presents a multi-method valuation study using discrete choice experiment, participatory multi-criteria decision analysis and deliberative citizens’ panels to evaluate the value of peatland ecosystem services in southern Finland. All three valuation studies addressed the same scenarios and drew on the same biophysical assessment data to facilitate a comparison of the valuation processes as well as the results. The results indicate that people place high value on regulating and cultural ecosystem services, especially on biodiversity, and less value on energy peat. The experiences sustain the argument that learning is important as people rarely have ordered set of preferences for unfamiliar objects like regulating services. They also illustrate the scope of citizen and consumer preferences and support the assumptions that preferences may change as a result of well-informed group deliberation. In terms of integration, the lesson learned is that regardless of the preference elicitation method, all valuation studies would benefit from structured and participatory approach when defining the scenarios as well as attributes and their levels. Furthermore, full integration is not possible among different valuation methods, which can be conceptualized as value articulating institutions, operating under different rationalities. Highlights • People placed little value on energy peat, biodiversity was regarded as the most important ecosystem service. • Carbon storage was a difficult concept for discrete choice experiment respondents. • Participatory multi-criteria decision analysis was helpful in structuring the analysis. • Deliberative valuation contributed to leaning on ecosystem services. • Full integration between valuation methods based on different understanding of rationality is problematic