{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.034722222222222224, 'fraction_numerical': 0.035493827160493825, 'mean_word_length': 4.976958525345622, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Large-Scale Ecosystem Restoration: Five Case Studies from the United States Mary Doyle and Cynthia A. Drew, editors. 2008. Washington DC: Island Press. Cloth, $70.00. ISBN: 978-1-59726-025-1. Paper, $35.00. ISBN: 978-1-59726-026-8. 344 pages.

Even though some uncertainty virtually always underlies the expected outcomes of environmental policies and interventions, especially when outcomes depend on stochastic events such as droughts or floods, most surveys of environmental preferences ignore the element of uncertainty. This paper challenges the assumption that uncertainty plays no role when people care only about final environmental states. In a careful statistical study, visitors to a recreation site in Oklahoma were asked about their preferences for various states of lake quality and their willingness to pay for the desired outcome. The answers differed, depending on whether interviewees were asked to choose between final states or between probabilities of final states. For example, people were less willing to pay when the likelihood of a favorable outcome without intervention was high, and a 70% chance of good outcome was considered about the same as 100%. The authors suggest that when faced with uncertainty, respondents are more critical in their evaluation of trade-offs.