[Ahlheim, M. 1998. Contingent valuation and the budget constraint. Ecological Economics, 27 (2), 25–211. Bartczak, A. 2006. Wartość funkcji rekreacyjnej lasów w Polsce. Ekonomia i Środowisko, 2 (30), 23–41.]Search in Google Scholar
[Bartczak, A., Lindhjem, H., Navrud, S., Zandersen, M., Żylicz, T. 2008. Valuing forest recreation on the national level in a transition economy. The Case of Poland. MPRA Paper No. 11483. http://mpra.ub.unimuenchen.de/11483/]Search in Google Scholar
[Bateman, I.J., Langford, I.H. 1997. Non-users’ Willingness to pay for a national park: an application and critique of contingent valuation method. Regional Studies, 31, 6, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0034340975013170310.1080/00343409750131703]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Constanza, R. et al. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/387253a010.1038/387253a0]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Costanza, R., Hart, M., Posner, S., Talberth, J. 2009. Beyond GDP: The need for new measures of progress. The Pardee Papers 4. Boston University Creative Services. Trustees of Boston University.]Search in Google Scholar
[Czajkowski, M., Buszko-Briggs, M., Hanley, N. 2009. Valuing changes in forest biodiversity. Ecological Economics, 68 (12), 2910–2917.10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.06.016]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Czajkowski, M. 2013. Metody wyboru warunkowego i wyceny warunkowej. www.polforex.wne.uw.edu.pl [07.09.2013].]Search in Google Scholar
[De Groot, R.S., Wilson, M.A., Boumans, R.M.J. 2002. A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics, 41, 393–408.10.1016/S0921-8009(02)00089-7]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Eckehard, G., Brockerhof, L., Castagneyrol, B., Forrester, D.I., Gardiner, B., González-Olabarria, J.R. Lyver, P., Meurisse, N., Oxbrough, A., Taki, H., Thompson, I.D. Van der Plas, F., Jactel, H. 2017. Forest biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the provision of ecosystem services. Biodiversity and Conservation, 26 (13), 3005–3035.]Search in Google Scholar
[EEA. 2010. Scaling up ecosystem benefits: A contribution to the Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) study Ecosystems goods and services. EEA Report No 4/2010. https://www.eea.europa.eu]Search in Google Scholar
[FOREST EUROPE. 2014. Expert Group and Workshop on pan-European approach to valuation of forest ecosystem services. Final report. Group of Experts (2012–2014) & Belgrade Workshop (Republic of Serbia), 24–25 September 2014. https://foresteurope.org/publications/]Search in Google Scholar
[Getzner, M. 2009. Economic and cultural values related to protected areas. Part A: Valuation of Ecosystem Services in Tatra (PL) and Slovensky Raj (SK), National Parks, Final report, WWF-DCP, Vienna.]Search in Google Scholar
[Getzner, M. 2010. Ecosystem services, financing, and the regional economy: A case study from Tatra National Park, Poland. Biodiversity, 11, 1/2, 55–61. DOI: 10.1080/14888386.2010.971264810.1080/14888386.2010.9712648]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Giergiczny, M. 2009. Rekreacyjna wartość Białowieskiego Parku Narodowego. Ekonomia i Środowisko, 2 (36), 116–128.]Search in Google Scholar
[Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M.B. 2017. Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) V5.1 and Guidance on the Application of the Revised Structure. Available from: www.cices.eu10.3897/oneeco.3.e27108]Search in Google Scholar
[Holland, D.N., Lilieholm, R.J., Roberts, D.W. 1994. Economic trade-offs of managing forests for timber production and vegetative diversity. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 24 (6), 1260–1265.10.1139/x94-165]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Hölzinger, O., Dench, D. 2011. The Economic Evaluation of Gwen Finch Wetland Reserve. Case Study for the Worcestershire Wildlife Trust, Worcester, November 2011.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hølleland, H., Skrede, J., Holmgaard, S.B. 2017. Cultural heritage and ecosystem services: A literature review. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites, 19 (3), 210–237. DOI: 10.1080/13505033.2017.134206910.1080/13505033.2017.1342069]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Johnston, R.J., Wainger, L.A. 2015. Benefit transfer for ecosystem service valuation: An introduction to theory and methods. In: The economics of non-market goods and resources. A guide for researchers and practitioners (eds.: J. Rolfe, R.J. Johnston, R.S. Rosenberger, R. Brouwer), 237–273. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-017-9930-0_1210.1007/978-94-017-9930-0_12]Search in Google Scholar
[Juutinen, A. 2008. Old-growth boreal forests: Worth protecting for biodiversity? Journal of Forestry Economics, 14 (4), 242–267.10.1016/j.jfe.2007.10.003]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Klocek, A., Płotkowski, L. 1997. Las i jego funkcje jako dobro publiczne. In: Kongres leśników polskich. Materiały i dokumenty, t. II, cz. 2 (ed.: T. Borecki). Agencja Reklamowo-Wydawnicza A. Grzegorczyk, Warszawa.]Search in Google Scholar
[Klocek, A. 2005. Wielofunkcyjność gospodarki leśnej – dylematy ekonomiczne. Sylwan, 6, 3–16.]Search in Google Scholar
[Klocek, A., Płotkowski, L. 2007. Wyzwania przyszłości polskiego leśnictwa. In: Wyzwania przyszłości polskiego leśnictwa. Polskie Towarzystwo Leśne, Kraków, Poland.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kostka, M.S. 2008. Las jako kategoria ekonomii. Ekonomia i Środowisko, 1 (33), 25–38.]Search in Google Scholar
[MacMillan, D.C., Hanley, N.D., Lienhoop, N. 2006. Contingent valuation: environmental polling or preference engine? Ecological Economics, 60 (1), 299–307.]Search in Google Scholar
[Maes, J., Liquete, C., Teller, A., Erhard, M., Paracchini, M.L., Barredo, J.I., Grizzetti, B., Somma, F.A., Petersen, J.E., Meiner, A., Royo, G.E., Zal, N., Kristensen, P., Bastrup-Birk, A., Biala, K., Piroddi, Ch., Egoh, B., Degeorges, P., Fiorin, C., Santos-Martín, F., Naruševičius, V., Verboven, J., Pereira, J.M., Bengtsson, J., Gocheva, K., Marta-Pedroso, C., Snäll, T., Estreguil, C., San-Miguel-Ayanz, J., Pérez-Soba, M., Grêt-Regameyn, A., Lillebøo, A.I., Abdul Malak, D., Condé, S., Moenr, J., Czúczs, B., Drakou, E.G., Zulian, G., Lavalle, C. 2016. An indicator framework for assessing ecosystem services in support of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Ecosystem Services, 17, 14–23.]Search in Google Scholar
[Maguire, J. 2009. Does mode matter? A comparison of telephone, mail and in-person treatments in contingent valuation survey. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 3528–3539.10.1016/j.jenvman.2009.06.00519647362]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Mandziuk, A., Janeczko, K. 2009. Turystyczne i rekreacyjne funkcje lasu w aspekcie marketingowym. Studia i Materiały Centrum Edukacji Przyrodniczo-Leśnej, 11, 4 (23), 65–66.]Search in Google Scholar
[Marks-Bielska, R., Zielińska, A. 2014. Ocena wybranych metod szacowania pozaprodukcyjnych funkcji lasów. Ekonomia i Środowisko, 1, 34–45.]Search in Google Scholar
[MEA. 2005. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. http://www.millenniumassessment.org/documents/document.356.aspx.pdf]Search in Google Scholar
[Meyerhoff, J., Liebe, V. 2006. Protest beliefs in contingent valuation: explaining their motivation. Ecological Economics, 57 (4), 583–594.10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.021]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Ninan, K.N., Inoue, M. 2013. Valuing forest ecosystem services: What we know and what we don’t. Ecological Economics, 93, 137–149.]Search in Google Scholar
[Ninan, K.N., Kontoleon, A. 2016. Valuing forest ecosystem services and disservices – Case study of a protected area in India. Ecosystem Services, 20, 1–14.]Search in Google Scholar
[Norgaard, R.B. 2009. Ecosystem services: From eyeopening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecological Economics, 69, 1219–1227. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.00910.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.009]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Pearce, D.W., Turner, R.K. 1990. Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment. JHU Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Pearce, D.W., Atkinson, G., Mourato, S. 2006. Cost-benefit analysis and the environment. Recent developments. OECD, Paris.]Search in Google Scholar
[Pearse, P.H. 1990. Introduction to Forestry Economics. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver.10.5962/bhl.title.51893]Search in Google Scholar
[Płotkowski, L. 1996. Ekonomiczne aspekty ochrony różnorodności biologicznej lasu. In: Ochrona i zrównoważone użytkowanie lasów w Polsce. Fundacja IUCN, Warszawa, Poland.]Search in Google Scholar
[Płotkowski, L. 2008. Ekonomiczne aspekty oceny funkcji lasu, czyli gospodarka leśna w koncepcji zrównoważonego rozwoju. Studia i Materiały Centrum Edukacji Przyrodniczo-Leśnej, 10, 3, (19), 252–272.]Search in Google Scholar
[Poskrobko, B. 2012. Metodyczne aspekty ekonomii zrównoważonego rozwoju. Ekonomia i Środowisko, 3 (43), 10–27.]Search in Google Scholar
[Smith, R.I., Dick, J.McP., Scott, E.M. 2011. The role of statistics in the analysis of ecosystem services. Evironmetrics, 22 (5), 608–617. DOI:10.1002/env.110710.1002/env.1107]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[TEEB. 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/]Search in Google Scholar
[Tisdell, C.A. 2007. Knowledge and the valuation of public goods and experiential commodities: information provision and acquisition. Global Business and Economics Review, 9 (2/3), 170–182.]Search in Google Scholar
[Turner, K. 2010. A pluralistic approach to ecosystem services Evaluation. CSERGE Working Paper EDM No 10–07 CSERGE, School of Environmental Sciences, UEA, Norwich, https://www.econstor.eu/obit-stream/10419/48825/1/626009499.pdfhttps://www.econstor.eu/obitstream/10419/48825/1/626009499.pdf]Search in Google Scholar
[Ward, F.A., Beal, D. 2000. Valuing nature with travel cost models. A manual. New Horizons in Environmental Economics series, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.10.4337/9781840647778]Search in Google Scholar
[Venkatachalam, L. 2004. The contingent valuation method. A review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 24 (1), 89–124.]Search in Google Scholar
[Wróblewska, A. 2014. Wartościowanie dóbr środowiskowych w świetle badań ankietowych według metody wyceny warunkowej. Woda-Środowisko-Obszary Wiejskie, 14, 2 (46), 155–171.]Search in Google Scholar
[Welsh, H., Kuhling, J. 2008. Using happiness data for environmental valuation: issues and applications, Journal of Economic Surveys, 23, 385–406.10.1111/j.1467-6419.2008.00566.x]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Welsh, H. 2009. Implications of happiness research for environmental economics. Ecological Economics, 68, 2735–2742.10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.06.003]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Van der Plas, F. et al. 2017. Continental mapping of forest ecosystem functions reveals a high but unrealised potential for forest multifunctionality. Ecology Letters, 21 (1), 1–150. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ele.2018.21.issue-1/issuetoc10.1111/ele.2018.21.issue-1/issuetoc]Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
[Zawilińska, B. 2015. Ekonomiczna wartość obszarów chronionych. Zarys problematyki i metodyka badań. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie, 12 (936), 113–129.]Search in Google Scholar
[Żylicz, T. 2010. Wycena usług ekosystemów. Przegląd wyników badań światowych. Ekonomia i Środowisko, 1 (37), 31–45.]Search in Google Scholar
[Żylicz, T. Giergiczny, M. 2013, Wycena pozaprodukcyjnych funkcji lasu. Raport końcowy. Uniwersytet Warszawski Wydział Nauk Ekonomicznych, Warszawa, Poland.]Search in Google Scholar
[Żylicz, T. 2013. Wycena usług ekosystemów leśnych. Panel Ekspertów: Wartość. Lasy jako czynnik rozwoju cywilizacji: współczesna i przyszła wartość lasów. Instytut Badawczy Leśnictwa, Sękocin Stary.]Search in Google Scholar
[http://ec.europa.eu/environment/beyond_gdp/index_en.html]Search in Google Scholar
