Existence values are values placed on something you know exists but which you have no direct contact and no direct use. The classic example is the spotted owl. I've never seen one, never plan to see one, and have no use for one, but I would still be willing to pay something to prevent the owl from going extinct. In other words, if I'm willing to give up my own resources to preserve the existence of an animal--or plant, or amoeba--then that thing has economic value. But, as someone who spends a lot of time estimating/measuring dollar values for things not typically valued in such terms, I sometimes find myself wondering how to conceptualize the value of something we don't yet know exists. Over the weekend, my wonderings got much more difficult:
Peering deep into the sea, scientists are finding creatures more mysterious than many could have imagined.
[...]
Ausubel said there are nearly 16,000 known species of marine fish and 70,000 kinds of marine mammals. A couple of thousand have been discovered during the census.
So here's my question. If I didn't know they existed yesterday, but I now know they exist today, am I worse off if they go extinct tomorrow? I know the answer is yes, but that leaves me wondering how to think about the values to place on yet to be discovered species.
