[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae06/25681.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Differential Influence of Relative Poverty on Preferences for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from Rural Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Glenk, Klaus
  • Barkmann, Jan
  • Schwarze, Stefan
  • Zeller, Manfred
  • Marggraf, Rainer
Abstract
Ecosystem services generate benefits that enter human consumption either directly or indirectly via their contribution to human production activities. In this contribution, we provide evidence that (i) the demand of peasants for ecosystem services in rural Indonesia depends on relative poverty; and that (ii) the type of reaction to poverty depends on the specific relation of the ecosystem services to peasant production and consumption. In early 2005 a representative choice experiment study was conducted in the Lore Lindu area in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, to quantify regional economic preferences (marginal willingessto- pay: MWTP) for four different ecosystem services (n=249; rattan and water availability, shading in cacao agroforestry, population size of the endemic forest dwelling dwarf buffalo "anoa"). Relative poverty was calculated with the 2005 data using a 0,1-normally distributed relative poverty index developed from a socio-demographic household survey administered to the same sample in 2004. For shading in cocoa, a linearly decreasing trend is observed indicating a stronger preference for "sun-grown" cocoa in the less poor farmers indicating a constant poverty elasticity of WTP. The empirical poverty elasticity for anoa supports its luxury good characteristic only in part. For rattan and water, we find an inverted U-shape relation between MWTP for ecosystem services and relative poverty - probably due to serious restrictions in the ability to pay in the poorest households and a smaller resource dependency in the less poor households. In sum, the relationship between relative poverty and MWTP for ecosystem services appears more complex than classical micro-economic theory admits.

Suggested Citation

  • Glenk, Klaus & Barkmann, Jan & Schwarze, Stefan & Zeller, Manfred & Marggraf, Rainer, 2006. "Differential Influence of Relative Poverty on Preferences for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from Rural Indonesia," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25681, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae06:25681
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.25681
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/25681/files/cp060781.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.25681?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Urvashi Narain & Shreekant Gupta & Klaas van ’t Veld, 2008. "Poverty and the Environment: Exploring the Relationship Between Household Incomes, Private Assets, and Natural Assets," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(1), pages 148-167.
    2. Sharma, Manohar, 2000. "Microfinance," MP05 briefs 0, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    3. Carla Henry & Manohar Sharma & Cecile Lapenu & Manfred Zeller, 2003. "Microfinance Poverty Assessment Tool," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 15065.
    4. Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984. "Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-1240, September.
    5. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-719, November.
    6. Hensher,David A. & Rose,John M. & Greene,William H., 2015. "Applied Choice Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107465923, September.
    7. Bengt Kristrom & Pere Riera, 1996. "Is the income elasticity of environmental improvements less than one?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(1), pages 45-55, January.
    8. Barkmann, J. & Glenk, K. & Keil, A. & Leemhuis, C. & Dietrich, N. & Gerold, G. & Marggraf, R., 2008. "Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 48-62, March.
    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. Barkmann, J. & Glenk, K. & Keil, A. & Leemhuis, C. & Dietrich, N. & Gerold, G. & Marggraf, R., 2008. "Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 48-62, March.

    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. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese E. & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Incentives, Rewards or Both in Payments for Ecosystem Services: Drawing a Link Between Farmers' Preferences and Biodiversity Levels," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    3. Roy Brouwer & Solomon Tarfasa, 2020. "Testing hypothetical bias in a framed field experiment," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 343-357, September.
    4. Oyakhilomen Oyinbo & Jordan Chamberlin & Miet Maertens, 2020. "Design of Digital Agricultural Extension Tools: Perspectives from Extension Agents in Nigeria," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 798-815, September.
    5. Joachim Marti, 2012. "Assessing preferences for improved smoking cessation medications: a discrete choice experiment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(5), pages 533-548, October.
    6. Kallas, Z. & Gómez-Limón, J.A., 2007. "Valoración De La Multifuncionalidad Agraria: Una Aplicación A Través Del Método De Los Experimentos De Elección/Agricultural Multifunctionality Valuation: A Case Study Using The Choice Experiment," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 25, pages 107-144, Abril.
    7. Sheng Gong & Jason.S. Bergtold & Elizabeth Yeager, 2021. "Assessing the joint adoption and complementarity between in-field conservation practices of Kansas farmers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, December.
    8. Anastassiadis, Friederike & Liebe, Ulf & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2015. "Financial Flexibility in agricultural investment decisions: A discrete choice experiment," Agricultural Economics Review, Greek Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(1), pages 1-12.
    9. Domínguez-Torreiro, Marcos & Soliño, Mario, 2011. "Provided and perceived status quo in choice experiments: Implications for valuing the outputs of multifunctional rural areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(12), pages 2523-2531.
    10. Dufhues, Thomas & Buchenrieder, Gertrud, 2005. "Outreach of credit institutes and households' access constraints to formal credit in Northern Vietnam," Research in Development Economics and Policy (Discussion Paper Series) 8535, Universitaet Hohenheim, Department of Agricultural Economics and Social Sciences in the Tropics and Subtropics.
    11. Muriithi, Beatrice W. & Matz, Julia Anna, 2014. "Smallholder Participation in the Commercialisation of Vegetables: Evidence from Kenyan Panel Data," Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Humboldt-Universitaat zu Berlin, vol. 53(2), pages 1-28, May.
    12. Liesivaara, Petri & Myyrä, Sami, 2014. "Government policies in changing climate and the demand for crop insurance," 88th Annual Conference, April 9-11, 2014, AgroParisTech, Paris, France 170520, Agricultural Economics Society.
    13. Muriithi, Beatrice W. & Matz, Julia Anna, 2015. "Welfare effects of vegetable commercialization: Evidence from smallholder producers in Kenya," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 80-91.
    14. Kountouris, Yiannis & Nakic, Zoran & Sauer, Johannes, 2015. "Political instability and non-market valuation: Evidence from Croatia," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 19-39.
    15. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Ahtiainen, Heini & Artell, Janne & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Choosing a Functional Form for an International Benefit Transfer: Evidence from a Nine-country Valuation Experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 104-113.
    16. Jing Xie & Zhifeng Gao & Marilyn Swisher & Xin Zhao, 2016. "Consumers’ preferences for fresh broccolis: interactive effects between country of origin and organic labels," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 47(2), pages 181-191, March.
    17. Edward B. Barbier & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley, 2017. "Is the Income Elasticity of the Willingness to Pay for Pollution Control Constant?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 663-682, November.
    18. R. Karina Gallardo & Huixin Li & Vicki McCracken & Chengyan Yue & James Luby & James R. McFerson, 2015. "Market Intermediaries’ Willingness to Pay for Apple, Peach, Cherry, and Strawberry Quality Attributes," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(2), pages 259-280, April.
    19. Carson, Richard T. & Czajkowski, Mikołaj, 2019. "A new baseline model for estimating willingness to pay from discrete choice models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 57-61.
    20. Anastassiadis, Friederike & Liebe, Ulf & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Finanzielle Flexibilität In Landwirtschaftlichen Investitionsentscheidungen: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 137142, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Resource /Energy Economics and Policy;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ags:iaae06:25681. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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.