Table 4 shows the results of restricted and unrestricted choice models for Old Saybrook sample. The unrestricted models allow for systematic variations in estimated mean parameter (mean marginal utility) for all attributes except the Cost that are associated with variations in perceived or actual risks of flooding to private homes. Since the econometric model used in the estimation of the utility function is a RPL model, allowing for the main effects interactions with measures of flood-caused risks to private homes would capture the heterogeneity around the means related to variations in the risk measures. Specification of the main effects parameters across all models is identical. Coefficients on the interaction terms in the unrestricted models are specified as fixed. All resulting models are statistically significant at p < 0.0001.
The signs on main effects coefficients across all models agree with prior expectations and are identical, with the exception of the estimated coefficients on Soft, where the sign is positive in the unrestricted models incorporating objective measures of flood risks to private homes. Mean estimates of marginal utility for all attributes are statistically significant across all models except for Soft and Seawalls. Mean marginal utility obtained from wetlands protection is statistically significant only in the unrestricted model adopting zone as a measure of risk to private property. Models results suggest the presence of significant heterogeneity around the mean for all attributes except for hard, which seems to be homogenously disfavored as a protection approach relative to an adaptation approach that emphasizes neither hard or soft techniques.
Coefficients of more relevance to the study’s investigat...
... middle of paper ...
...in perceived or actual flood-related risks to private homes. Across all measures of flood-related risks to private homes, the difference in WTP for Neither is statistically significant at least at 5%level. The annual WTP in support of the implementation of a coastal adaptation policy by a household is about $50 higher than a comparable household with ten percent lower perceived likelihood that their home will sustain damage due to flooding. A household whose home is located within a flood zone is willing to contribute $152 higher towards the implementation of an adaptation policy. It is worth mentioning that this difference may not be entirely attributable to differences in perceived risks or actual vulnerability levels, rather, there might be other confounding factors that simultaneously influence the welfare estimates and risk measures (e.g socioeconomic factors).
New Orleans, Louisiana lies at the second lowest elevation among major cities in the United States. It is a city surrounded by water, making it almost like an island. To counter this dangerous combination of the low elevation along with the lakes, rivers and swamps surrounding it, the Army Corps of Engineers built a series of levees around the city to foster its protection. It is these very same levees however that might doom the city should a Category 3 hurricane ever hit. Our statistical analyses examined the current belief that there is a 39% probability that New Orleans will be hit by a major hurricane and based on the resulting Z-score, rejected that belief. We did find however that the probability, while not 39%, was still in the 30th percentile range, which should still be a major cause for concern among the leaders and residences of the city of New Orleans.
Already scientists have observed that more than 75% of the recent economic losses are caused by natural hazards which can be attributed to wind storms, floods, droughts and other climate related hazards. In the year 2008, the U.S. state of Iowa was on the front pages of newspapers all around the world. Weeks of heavy rain in the Midwest caused rivers to swell and levees to break. Millions of acres of farmland are now underwater, their plantings most likely destroyed. By March, Iowa had tied its third-highest monthly snowfall in 121 years of record keeping, and then came the rain. April’s st...
Conservation banking was modeled after the U.S. wetland mitigation banking system and the two programs share many similarities. However, unlike the wetland mitigation system, conservation offsets do not have a stated ‘no net loss’ goal, but instead have a species recovery goal. Both conservation and wetlands mitigation banks are privately or publicly owned lands which are protected and managed for its ecological value. By doing this, the bank sponsor generates habitat or wetland or stream credits to sell to developers or transportation departments who need to offset their impacts and comply with the legal requirements for the permitting of development or roadway projects. Both types of banks offer benefits to both the landowner that owns the natural resource and the developer that needs to purchase the credits. The landowner can take portions of their property that may have been considered unusable and turn it into an asset. The developer can streamline their permitting process by purchasing credits instead of implementing a mitigation plan themselves.
The Midwestern United States has experienced flooding for a long time now, but recently the annual precipitation has been far greater than before. Precipitation has increased 37 percent since 1958 (Jeff Spross). However a few major floods have been recorded dating back to 1913. In 1913 torrential rainfall hit Indiana and Ohio. The ground was greatly damaged from the flood causing difficult agricultural years for many years after the flood. Another flood hit a large portion of the Midwest region including the eastern Dakotas, Wisconsin, Kansas, and Indiana in 1993. Recovery costs for the Great Flood exceeded $4.2 billion. Like the flood in 1913 agriculture was affected for many years hurting the economy of the Midwest. A more recent disastrous flood hit mainly Iowa in 2008. After the flood in 2008 agriculture again took a hard hit and since the government ...
In the late summer of 2005, a terrible tragedy occurred that changed the lives of many in the south-east region of the United States. A Category 3, named storm, named Hurricane Katrina, hit the Gulf Coast on the 29th of August and led to the death of 1,836 and millions of dollars’ worth of damage (Waple 2005). The majority of the damage occurred in New Orleans, Louisiana. Waple writes in her article that winds “gusted over 100 mph in New Orleans, just west of the eye” (Waple 2005). Not only was the majority of the damage due to the direct catastrophes of the storm but also city’s levees could no longer hold thus breaking and releasing great masses of water. Approximately, 80% of the city was submerged at sea level. Despite the vast amount of damage and danger all throughout the city, officials claimed that there was work being done to restore the city of New Orleans as a whole but many parts, and even the people, of the city were overlooked while areas of the city with higher economic value, and more tourist traffic, were prioritized along with those individuals.
They found that various socio-demographic predictors of flood risk impact the difference across flood zone categories. The main residents in inland flood zones are non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic, while coastal flood zones have more higher median income and housing value residents. I considered the study a valuable reference for future flood hazard research and comprehensive public policy making. Social groups with higher vulnerability also tends to stay instead of moving away, for they do not have the affordability for moving to other neighborhood, giving up what they have and almost start from scratch. Thus, they are actually the group of people that suffers the most and paying the most towards natural events. It is also important for the government to create a official help system to improve their resilience.
When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans with its fierce intensity, the lives of its inhabitants was forever changed. The winds rose and the waves crashed upon the only security system this, below sea level, city had against the many water systems surrounding it. Most people think that the waves simply rose up over the banks and levees of the city; however, evidence proves this thought wrong. The actual reason New Orleans was flooded was due to poor engineering. According to experts, two thirds of the tragic flooding could have been prevented. Thousands of homes could have been saved if the engineers responsible for building New Orleans’s levees had followed regulatory guidelines.
Peculiar means odd, strange or unusual. So how could benefits be peculiar? It’s how we as people make it to be, as Roxane Gay emphasizes in her article “Peculiar Benefits,” published in 2012. Roxane Gay argues how we must move past the dispute as to why we must recognize privilege to get past societal problems and to not allow its meaning to continue to become diluted. Gay builds a strong argument mainly through audience adaptation, language and her choice of rhetoric was effective enough to affect my perception on her point of view.
...n, the Louisiana wetlands are an extremely valuable asset to the State of Louisiana and the United States. The continual loss of Louisiana wetlands has the potential to have an immensely negative effect on the economy at a state and national level. Over 2 million people live in the Louisiana coastal parishes (Field et al., 1991). The majority of people living on the Louisiana coast make their living from things that are directly related to the wetlands. The Louisiana wetlands make up the largest wetland community in America and is being lost at a rate greater than the other wetland communities in the country. The suggested strategies that are being taken into consideration could be helpful but it seems that the State of Louisiana is not as concerned as it should be given the future consequences and much like climate change coastal erosion is not being taken serious.
The Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment need the whole community to pass on information, account for population-specific factors, and acknowledge the effects of a threat or hazard. Communities have to be educated and updated on threats and hazards that they may specifically face in order to accurately plan and prepare. All situations are usually handled starting at the lowest level, however, they will also have to discuss on how the federal government will assist if needed. “By providing the necessary knowledge and skills, we seek to enable the whole community to contribute to and benefit from national preparedness.” (FEMA, 2015). Local communities recognize their risks and conclude on how they will handle the significant amount of risks. Local governments discover and address their greatest risks by finishing the Threat and Hazard
By applying consumer choice theory and marginal analysis to business problems all relate the income of the consumer as well the price of the product of service. When one considers the purchase for a pair of tickets to a sporting or cultural event one needs to consider family budget, timing, and availability of alternatives. Take for instance tickets to the Denver Broncos game. Substitutes do exist but not at this level of play (high school and college) and not on a Sunday. As a result, as there are alternatives available with the price elasticity of demand measures the responsiveness of quantity demanded to changes in price; it is calculated by dividing the percentage change in quantity demanded by the percentage change in price. (Rittenberg, L. &Tregarthen, T. , 2012). Pricing and consumer behavior rely on the performance of a football team and its overall record. As the team continues to win, demand increases. The opposite happens when the team registers a lower performing season where you would see a decline in
Utility is the satisfaction derived from consuming a good or service. For example, a person can satisfy his or her hunger by eating a hamburger or a bowl of noodles. In economic theory, the amount of satisfaction or utility derived is expressed in units called utils. This way, comparisons can be made more easily between different goods based on the amount of utility derived. This aids an individual in making consumption decisions including what to buy with the limited income he has and the relative amount much one is willing to pay for different goods. Thus the consumer will pay more for a hamburger worth 3 utils than a bowl of noodles worth 2 utils.
Both natural and man-made disasters are considered as events that can cause a large amount of losses and correlated with a small probability. It is rational for the population to have insurance against such events because most people are risk adverse: a risk adverse person means that the person will not prefer risk and will try to minimalize it. However, there is only a proportion of the population taking insurance against such events , without having insurance against such risk of losses banks were finding it a problem to issue loans and mortgages because they are exposed to the risk. To explain why there are only a small proportion of people insured (using the US as an example); the first step is to understand the insurance models, then to consider the behaviors of the demand side and supply side.
The principle of Utility is considered as the “greatest happiness principle”. Mill defines this principle as actions are right if they tend to promote the most happiness and wrong if they tend to produce the reverse of happiness (Utilitarianism, 7). There have been many arguments against the principle of utility. People who are against this principle argue that there is no time to calculate what generates the most happiness in a given situation. Mills responds to this objection by explaining how secondary moral reasoning and the fundamental principle of morality are taken into account when deciding what promotes the most overall happiness. After explaining his argument, I believe Mill succeeds in responding to the objection, he explains why it shouldn’t be a problem when weighing the best possible outcome by using the secondary moral rule as the first principle.
Land suitability is assessed and classified with respect to specified kinds of use: This principle is the most essential one of suitability evaluation. It embodies a recognition of the fact that each kind of land use has different requirements. As an example, an alluvial flood plain with impeded drainage might be highly suitable for cultivating rice plant, but not suitable for various forms of agriculture or for forestry. The concept of land suitability is only meaningful in terms of specific kinds of land use, each with their own requirements, e.g. for soil moisture, rooting depth etc. Each type of land qualities such as moisture availability or drainage condition is compared with each kind of land use requirements. Therefore, the land itself and the land use are similarly important to the evaluation of land suitability.