Assessing the trade-offs in more nature-friendly mosquito control in the Upper Rhine region

Figures & data

Figure 1. Study area. Numbers indicate areas surveyed; color coding: area treated with Bti (red), water areas (blue), forests (dark green), agricultural areas (light green), settlement areas (grey). Colour online.

Figure 2. Costs and benefits of mosquito control with Bti. The figure shows the effects of the current mosquito control with Bti. The effects of Bti on mosquitoes and midges are shown in blue, the resulting benefits for the population in green and the costs in red. The net added value of mosquito control for the society is shown in gray. The examples given are only a selection of important effects and do not claim to be exhaustive. Colour online.

Table 1. Results of the regression analysis.

	Variables	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3
	Bid	−0.01***	−0.02***	−0.02***
	Intercept	0.59	−1.37	−1.22
Sociodemographics	MALE	0.60**	0.74**	0.74**
	AGE	0.00	0.01	0.00
	INCOME	0.02**	0.03**	0.03**
	NO_INCOME	−0.74**	−0.60*	−0.69**
	EDUCATION	0.11	−0.01	0.03
	DURATION	−0.01	−0.01	−0.01
	CITY	−0.08	−0.07	0.00
Attitudes	PROTECT		1.54***	1.40**
	RECONSIDER		0.32	0.35
	TOLERATE		1.56***	1.60***
	MEASSURES		0.27**	0.21*
	NUISANCE		−0.27*	−0.26*
	SATISFACTION		−0.32	−0.49*
Activities	WALKING			0.01
	CYCLING			0.27*
	GARDENING			−0.54*
	PICNIC			0.16
	CAMP_SWIM			−0.40
	FISH_PADD			0.41
	Pseudo R^2	0.17	0.30	0.33
	log-likelihood	−149	−124	−120
	AIC	316	279	283
	BIC	348	332	358
	Mean	134(109-181)	121(103-151)	124(105-160)
	Median	117(93-152)	112(92-137)	114(96-144)

*Mean statistical significance at 10%.

**Mean statistical significance at 5%.

***Mean statistical significance at 1%.

Figure 3. Share of approval of bid.