[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i18p4852-d264433.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Community Participation and Preferences Regarding Conservation and Development Policies in China’s Giant Panda Nature Reserves

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Ma

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

  • Yali Wen

    (School of Economics and Management, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China)

Abstract
Community participation in conservation activities is an important mechanism to coordinate the conflicts between conservation and local development. Hence, it is necessary to understand farmers’ preferences for different conservation and development policies. By surveying households residing inside and outside the four giant panda nature reserves in the Qinling Mountains, China, in 2018, this study uses a choice experiment model to evaluate participation willingness and stated preferences regarding the establishment of national parks (NPs), ecotourism development, ecological public welfare forest compensation, and provision of ecological jobs. Our results suggest that these conservation and development policies all have a positive impact on community participation in conservation. Among the different conservation and development policies, farmers seem to prefer the government developing ecotourism most, followed by providing ecological jobs, establishing NPs, and finally the compensation amount and period of ecological public welfare forests. Moreover, farmers with different characteristics have different preferences regarding conservation and development policies. Age, education level, whether the respondent is a village cadre, family forestland area, family income, and whether the respondent lives in a nature reserve are relevant socio-economic characteristics of the affected farmers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Ma & Yali Wen, 2019. "Community Participation and Preferences Regarding Conservation and Development Policies in China’s Giant Panda Nature Reserves," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:4852-:d:264433
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/4852/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/4852/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    2. repec:oup:apecpp:v:37:y:2015:i:1:p:86-106 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Wang, Shuxian & Wu, Linhai & Zhu, Dian & Wang, Hongsha & Xu, Lingling, 2014. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food attributes: The case of pork," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 165639, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Chervier, Colas & Le Velly, Gwenolé & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2019. "When the Implementation of Payments for Biodiversity Conservation Leads to Motivation Crowding-out: A Case Study From the Cardamoms Forests, Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 499-510.
    5. Miranda, Juan José & Corral, Leonardo & Blackman, Allen & Asner, Gregory & Lima, Eirivelthon, 2016. "Effects of Protected Areas on Forest Cover Change and Local Communities: Evidence from the Peruvian Amazon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 288-307.
    6. Ma, Ben & Cai, Zhen & Zheng, Jie & Wen, Yali, 2019. "Conservation, ecotourism, poverty, and income inequality – A case study of nature reserves in Qinling, China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 236-244.
    7. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1999. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1j6814b3, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    8. Coria, Jessica & Calfucura, Enrique, 2012. "Ecotourism and the development of indigenous communities: The good, the bad, and the ugly," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 47-55.
    9. Ellen Verhofstadt & Miet Maertens, 2015. "Can Agricultural Cooperatives Reduce Poverty? Heterogeneous Impact of Cooperative Membership on Farmers' Welfare in Rwanda," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 37(1), pages 86-106.
    10. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1999. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt3tb6j874, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    11. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    12. Clements, Tom & Suon, Seng & Wilkie, David S. & Milner-Gulland, E.J., 2014. "Impacts of Protected Areas on Local Livelihoods in Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(S1), pages 125-134.
    13. Pienaar, Elizabeth F. & Jarvis, Lovell S. & Larson, Douglas M., 2014. "Using a choice experiment framework to value conservation-contingent development programs: An application to Botswana," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 39-48.
    14. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    15. Lee, Deborah E. & Du Preez, Mario, 2016. "Determining visitor preferences for rhinoceros conservation management at private, ecotourism game reserves in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: A choice modeling experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 106-116.
    16. Driss Ezzine-de-Blas & Sven Wunder & Manuel Ruiz-Pérez & Rocio del Pilar Moreno-Sanchez, 2016. "Global Patterns in the Implementation of Payments for Environmental Services," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-16, March.
    17. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
    18. Ben Ma & Zheng Zhao & Huimin Ding & Yali Wen, 2018. "Household costs and benefits of biodiversity conservation: case study of Sichuan giant panda reserves in China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 1665-1686, August.
    19. Brownstone, David & Train, Kenneth, 1998. "Forecasting new product penetration with flexible substitution patterns," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 109-129, November.
    20. Ferraro, Paul J., 2002. "The local costs of establishing protected areas in low-income nations: Ranomafana National Park, Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 261-275, December.
    21. Lybbert, Travis J. & Magnan, Nicholas & Spielman, David J. & Bhargava, Anil K. & Gulati, Kajal, 2012. "Farmers' Heterogeneous Valuation of Laser Land Leveling in Eastern Uttar Pradesh: An Experimental Auction Approach to Informing Segmentation & Subsidy Strategies," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126806, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    22. Mark Morrison & Jeff Bennett & Russell Blamey & Jordan Louviere, 2002. "Choice Modeling and Tests of Benefit Transfer," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 84(1), pages 161-170.
    23. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    24. Fredrik Carlsson & Peter Martinsson, 2003. "Design techniques for stated preference methods in health economics," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(4), pages 281-294, April.
    25. Allenby, Greg M. & Rossi, Peter E., 1998. "Marketing models of consumer heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1-2), pages 57-78, November.
    26. Wang, Ju-Han Zoe, 2019. "National parks in China: Parks for people or for the nation?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 825-833.
    27. Hall, Jane & Viney, Rosalie & Haas, Marion & Louviere, Jordan, 2004. "Using stated preference discrete choice modeling to evaluate health care programs," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(9), pages 1026-1032, September.
    28. Charles Palmer & Salvatore Di Falco, 2012. "Biodiversity, poverty, and development," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 48-68, Spring.
    29. Lonn, Pichdara & Mizoue, Nobuya & Ota, Tetsuji & Kajisa, Tsuyoshi & Yoshida, Shigejiro, 2018. "Evaluating the Contribution of Community-based Ecotourism (CBET) to Household Income and Livelihood Changes: A Case Study of the Chambok CBET Program in Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 62-69.
    30. Cernea, Michael M. & Schmidt-Soltau, Kai, 2006. "Poverty Risks and National Parks: Policy Issues in Conservation and Resettlement," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1808-1830, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ben Ma & Yuqian Zhang & Yilei Hou & Yali Wen, 2020. "Do Protected Areas Matter? A Systematic Review of the Social and Ecological Impacts of the Establishment of Protected Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-13, October.
    2. Inayat Ullah & Dong-Young Kim, 2021. "Inclusive Governance and Biodiversity Conservation: Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-27, March.
    3. Ma, Ben & Zhang, Yuqian & Huang, Yuan & Wen, Yali, 2020. "Socioeconomic and ecological direct and spillover effects of China's giant panda nature reserves," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    2. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    3. Wang, Shuxian & Wu, Linhai & Zhu, Dian & Wang, Hongsha & Xu, Lingling, 2014. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food attributes: The case of pork," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 165639, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Wu, Linhai & Wang, Shuxian & Zhu, Dian & Hu, Wuyang & Wang, Hongsha, 2015. "Chinese consumers’ preferences and willingness to pay for traceable food quality and safety attributes: The case of pork," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 121-136.
    5. Liu, Ruifeng & ,, 2021. "What We Can Learn from the Interactions of Food Traceable Attributes? a Case Study of Fuji Apple in China," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315916, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Norton, Daniel & Hynes, Stephen, 2014. "Valuing the non-market benefits arising from the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 84-96.
    7. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.
    8. Petrolia, Daniel R. & Walton, William C. & Sarah, Acquah, 2014. "A National Survey of Consumer Preferences for Branded Gulf Oysters and Risk Perceptions of Gulf Seafood," Research Reports 190586, Mississippi State University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    9. Erdem, Seda & Rigby, Dan & Wossink, Ada, 2012. "Using best–worst scaling to explore perceptions of relative responsibility for ensuring food safety," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 661-670.
    10. Joan L. Walker & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 2011. "Advances in Discrete Choice: Mixture Models," Chapters, in: André de Palma & Robin Lindsey & Emile Quinet & Roger Vickerman (ed.), A Handbook of Transport Economics, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Rungie, Cam & Scarpa, Riccardo & Thiene, Mara, 2014. "The influence of individuals in forming collective household preferences for water quality," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 161-174.
    12. Walker, Joan & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2002. "Generalized random utility model," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 303-343, July.
    13. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2001. "Logit Models For Pooled Contingent Valuation And Contingent Rating And Ranking Data: Valuing Benefits From Forest Biodiversity Conservation," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20616, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    14. Jane Hall & Patricia Kenny & Ishrat Hossain, 2007. "The provision of informal care in terminal illness: An analysis of carers? needs using a discrete choice experiment," Working Papers 2007/12, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    15. Hotaling, Chelsea & Bird, Stephen & Heintzelman, Martin D., 2021. "Willingness to pay for microgrids to enhance community resilience," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    16. Revelt, David & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "Customer-Specific Taste Parameters and Mixed Logit: Households' Choice of Electricity Supplier," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1900p96t, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    17. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2013. "Complements and substitutes in profiting from innovation—A choice experimental approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 326-339.
    18. Seda Erdem & Dan Rigby, 2013. "Investigating Heterogeneity in the Characterization of Risks Using Best Worst Scaling," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(9), pages 1728-1748, September.
    19. Timo Fischer & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2011. "Debt Financing of High-growth Startups," DRUID Working Papers 11-04, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    20. Ferrini, Silvia & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2007. "Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: A Monte Carlo study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 342-363, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:4852-:d:264433. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.