IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v19y2016icp51-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the services of high mountain wetlands in tropical Andes: A case study of Caripe wetlands at Bolivian Altiplano

Author

Listed:
  • Gandarillas R., Vanessa
  • Jiang, Yong
  • Irvine, Kenneth

Abstract

High mountain wetlands in the tropical central Andes are a representative ecosystem critically important for both global biodiversity and local livelihoods of indigenous communities. This study was intended to characterize and highlight the socio-economic importance of high mountain wetlands in relation to the livelihood and indigenous culture of local human settlements. In this study, we focused on wetlands at Caripe in the Altiplano, a community located at the northeast edge of the Sajama National Park in central western Bolivia. We adopted the ecosystem serve framework combined with economic valuation to assess five major wetland services considered either benefiting local households or of global conservation value, including water supply, livestock grazing, recreation, cultural and natural heritage and aesthetics, and biodiversity. We conducted a field survey including household interviews to collect information needed for assessing considered wetland services that characterizes indigenous community residents, their livelihoods in relation to wetlands, local perceptions on wetlands and provided services, and household willingness to pay in labor time for protecting the cultural services of wetlands. The study found that: 1) the community was characterized by relatively young people of poor education, with most raising livestock and living in extreme poverty; 2) most community households valued local wetlands and were concerned about wetland degradation; 3) lack of awareness or knowledge about wetlands ecological complexity in relation to human impact could be the reason for wetland degradation; 4) the services of wetlands were not equally important to the community; 5) local perception and judgment on wetlands status were based much on the availability, stability, and quality of the services they can derive; 6) livestock grazing generated the highest economic benefit estimated at about US$ 323 per year per hectare of wetlands, followed by biodiversity with an economic benefit of US$200 per year per hectare; 7) the economic value of cultural and natural heritage and sense of aesthetics was estimated at US$ 55 per year per hectare; and 8) the services of recreation and water supply had the lowest economic value of about US$17 per year per hectare and US$9 per year per hectare, respectively. This study sheds some light on the importance of high Andean wetlands to indigenous communities in the Altiplano while identifying research needs for the future.

Suggested Citation

  • Gandarillas R., Vanessa & Jiang, Yong & Irvine, Kenneth, 2016. "Assessing the services of high mountain wetlands in tropical Andes: A case study of Caripe wetlands at Bolivian Altiplano," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 51-64.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:19:y:2016:i:c:p:51-64
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.04.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221204161630081X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.04.006?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adger, W. Neil & Luttrell, Cecilia, 2000. "Property rights and the utilisation of wetlands," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 75-89, October.
    2. Asah, Stanley T. & Guerry, Anne D. & Blahna, Dale J. & Lawler, Joshua J., 2014. "Perception, acquisition and use of ecosystem services: Human behavior, and ecosystem management and policy implications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 180-186.
    3. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    4. Treydte, A.C. & Salvatierra, A. & Sauerborn, J. & Lamers, M., 2011. "Modelling llama population development under environmental and market constraints in the Bolivian highlands," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(17), pages 3157-3165.
    5. Balvanera, Patricia & Uriarte, María & Almeida-Leñero, Lucía & Altesor, Alice & DeClerck, Fabrice & Gardner, Toby & Hall, Jefferson & Lara, Antonio & Laterra, Pedro & Peña-Claros, Marielos & Silva, 2012. "Ecosystem services research in Latin America: The state of the art," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 2(C), pages 56-70.
    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. István Egresi & Supun Lahiru Prakash & Buddhika Maduraperruma & Amila Withanage & Aruna Weerasingha & Ştefan Dezsi & Bianca Sorina Răcăşan, 2021. "What Affects Support for Wetland Tourism? A Case Study from Sri Lanka," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Wei Jiang & Rainer Marggraf, 2021. "Making Intangibles Tangible: Identifying Manifestations of Cultural Ecosystem Services in a Cultural Landscape," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Huping Hou & Zhongyi Ding & Shaoliang Zhang & Zanxu Chen & Xueqing Wang & Aibo Sun & Shi An & Jinting Xiong, 2022. "Targeting the Influences of Under-Lake Coal Mining Based on the Value of Wetland Ecosystem Services: What and How?," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, November.
    4. Domenico Pisani & Pasquale Pazienza & Enrico Vito Perrino & Diana Caporale & Caterina De Lucia, 2021. "The Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services of Biodiversity Components in Protected Areas: A Review for a Framework of Analysis for the Gargano National Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.

    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. Hao Wang & Sander Meijerink & Erwin van der Krabben, 2020. "Institutional Design and Performance of Markets for Watershed Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-26, August.
    2. van den Belt, Marjan & Blake, Daniella, 2014. "Ecosystem services in new Zealand agro-ecosystems: A literature review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 115-132.
    3. Delgado, Luisa E. & Marín, Víctor H., 2016. "Well-being and the use of ecosystem services by rural households of the Río Cruces watershed, southern Chile," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 81-91.
    4. Mahlalela, Linda Siphiwo & Jourdain, Damien & Mungatana, Eric Dada & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark, 2022. "Diverse stakeholder perspectives and ecosystem services ranking: Application of the Q-methodology to Hawane Dam and Nature Reserve in Eswatini," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    5. Mastrangelo, Matías Enrique & Weyland, Federico & Herrera, Lorena Paola & Villarino, Sebastián Horacio & Barral, María Paula & Auer, Alejandra Denise, 2015. "Ecosystem services research in contrasting socio-ecological contexts of Argentina: Critical assessment and future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 63-73.
    6. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    7. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    8. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    9. Qenani-Petrela, Eivis & Noel, Jay E. & Mastin, Thomas, 2007. "A Benefit Transfer Approach to the Estimation of Agro-Ecosystems Services Benefits: A Case Study of Kern County, California," Research Project Reports 121605, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California Institute for the Study of Specialty Crops.
    10. Gerner, Nadine V. & Nafo, Issa & Winking, Caroline & Wencki, Kristina & Strehl, Clemens & Wortberg, Timo & Niemann, André & Anzaldua, Gerardo & Lago, Manuel & Birk, Sebastian, 2018. "Large-scale river restoration pays off: A case study of ecosystem service valuation for the Emscher restoration generation project," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 327-338.
    11. Wang, Shifeng & Wang, Sicong & Smith, Pete, 2015. "Quantifying impacts of onshore wind farms on ecosystem services at local and global scales," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1424-1428.
    12. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    13. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    14. Diane P. Dupont, 2019. "Editorial: Special Issue in Honour of Dr. Steven Renzetti," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(02), pages 1-10, April.
    15. Chun-Chu Yeh & Cheng-Shen Lin & Chin-Huang Huang, 2018. "The Total Economic Value of Sport Tourism in Belt and Road Development—An Environmental Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    16. Pistorius, Till & Schaich, Harald & Winkel, Georg & Plieninger, Tobias & Bieling, Claudia & Konold, Werner & Volz, Karl-Reinhard, 2012. "Lessons for REDDplus: A comparative analysis of the German discourse on forest functions and the global ecosystem services debate," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 4-12.
    17. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    18. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    19. Matzek, Virginia & Wilson, Kerrie A. & Kragt, Marit, 2019. "Mainstreaming of ecosystem services as a rationale for ecological restoration in Australia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 79-86.
    20. McVittie, Alistair & Norton, Lisa & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Siameti, Ioanna & Glenk, Klaus & Aalders, Inge, 2015. "Operationalizing an ecosystem services-based approach using Bayesian Belief Networks: An application to riparian buffer strips," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 15-27.

    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:eee:ecoser:v:19:y:2016:i:c:p:51-64. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.