Do Individual Pes Buyers Care About Additionality and Free-Riding? A Choice Experiment

Based on a survey of the French population, this study investigates (a) differences in consumers' willingness to pay (WTP) for the provision of forest ecosystem services (FES) between a tax-based and a donation-based payment for ecosystem services (PES) scheme, and (b) their preferences regarding efficiency and equity in the context of additionality. We find no systematic difference in marginal WTP between the two payment mechanisms, but different WTP depending on how respondents perceive the aspect of free-riding: When respondents considered that non-contributors would also benefit from a PES scheme, a small group showed a lower WTP, while a larger proportion of respondents showed a distinctly higher WTP. Thus, we find a pronounced altruistic attitude in French society towards FES provision. Regarding additionality, we show that consumer preferences are heterogeneous and that although there is no clear preference for strict additionality or equity in the overall population, certain socio-economic groups clearly prefer one of the two options. Finally, we discuss (a) the role of altruism in PES, (b) the dilemma posed by the partial incompatibility of additionality and equity from both economic and legal perspectives, and (c) the environmental implications of environmental credits when credit buyers do not account for additionality