IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v52y2021ics2212041621001297.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing the finance gap for nature-based solutions with time contributions

Author

Listed:
  • Hagedoorn, Liselotte C.
  • Koetse, Mark J.
  • van Beukering, Pieter J.H.
  • Brander, Luke M.

Abstract

Nature-based solutions (NBS) to climate change and other environmental challenges face a well-documented shortfall in financing and resource allocation. Economic evaluations of NBS that apply stated preference methods increasingly use time contributions instead of the traditionally used monetary contributions, especially in developing countries. These studies have focused on measuring the benefits of NBS and have not investigated the potential of freely provided community time contributions to reduce the financial needs of NBS. In this paper we investigate this potential through a systematic literature review and an analysis of four datasets from case studies in Ghana and Vietnam that apply similar questionnaires and discrete choice experiments with time contributions. We study a range of (de)motivating factors to contributing time to NBS and provide examples on the extent to which time contributions could reduce financial needs of NBS in developing countries. The results indicate that time contributions from households for the implementation and maintenance of NBS are motivated by social capital and coping appraisal. Time contribution schemes are therefore more likely to succeed in communities where social capital and coping appraisal are high and could be increased or maintained over time through the preservation and fostering of both these factors. The analysis also reveals that implementing time contributions would in general not lead to the exclusion of specific socio-demographic groups in society, such as lower income households. Finally, using two specific projects in Vietnam as examples, we calculate that time contributions can reduce 29% and 44% of the financial needs of NBS by covering the projects’ labour requirements. These results are of high importance to those working on NBS financing, awareness and behavior change campaigns, and practitioners that apply stated preference methods in developing countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Hagedoorn, Liselotte C. & Koetse, Mark J. & van Beukering, Pieter J.H. & Brander, Luke M., 2021. "Reducing the finance gap for nature-based solutions with time contributions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:52:y:2021:i:c:s2212041621001297
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101371
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041621001297
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2021.101371?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. Ando, Amy W. & Cadavid, Catalina Londoño & Netusil, Noelwah R. & Parthum, Bryan, 2020. "Willingness-to-volunteer and stability of preferences between cities: Estimating the benefits of stormwater management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Shibly Shahrier & Koji Kotani, 2019. "Natural disaster mitigation through voluntary donations in a developing country: the case of Bangladesh," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 21(1), pages 37-60, January.
    3. Lankia, Tuija & Neuvonen, Marjo & Pouta, Eija & Sievänen, Tuija, 2014. "Willingness to contribute to the management of recreational quality on private lands in Finland," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 141-160.
    4. Daniel Rondeau & John List, 2008. "Matching and challenge gifts to charity: evidence from laboratory and natural field experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 11(3), pages 253-267, September.
    5. Siddharth Narayan & Michael W Beck & Borja G Reguero & Iñigo J Losada & Bregje van Wesenbeeck & Nigel Pontee & James N Sanchirico & Jane Carter Ingram & Glenn-Marie Lange & Kelly A Burks-Copes, 2016. "The Effectiveness, Costs and Coastal Protection Benefits of Natural and Nature-Based Defences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, May.
    6. Kotani, Koji & Messer, Kent D. & Schulze, William D., 2010. "Matching Grants and Charitable Giving: Why People Sometimes Provide a Helping Hand to Fund Environmental Goods," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 324-343, April.
    7. Owuor, Margaret Awuor & Mulwa, Richard & Otieno, Philip & Icely, John & Newton, Alice, 2019. "Valuing mangrove biodiversity and ecosystem services: A deliberative choice experiment in Mida Creek, Kenya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    8. Hagedoorn, Liselotte C. & Koetse, Mark J. & van Beukering, Pieter J. H. & Brander, Luke M., 2020. "Time equals money? Valuing ecosystem-based adaptation in a developing country context," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(5), pages 482-508, October.
    9. Godwin Kofi Vondolia & Håkan Eggert & Ståle Navrud & Jesper Stage, 2014. "What do respondents bring to contingent valuation? A comparison of monetary and labour payment vehicles," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 253-267, November.
    10. J. A. Bouma & M. J. Koetse, 2019. "Mind the Gap: Stated versus Revealed Donations and the Differential Role of Behavioral Factors," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 95(2), pages 225-245.
    11. Ahlheim, Michael & Frör, Oliver & Heinke, Antonia & Duc, Nguyen Minh & Dinh, Pham Van, 2010. "Labour as a utility measure in contingent valuation studies: how good is it really?," FZID Discussion Papers 13-2010, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    12. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Budziński, Wiktor, 2019. "Simulation error in maximum likelihood estimation of discrete choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 73-85.
    13. Le Trong Hung & John B. Loomis & Vu Tien Thinh, 2007. "Comparing money and labour payment in contingent valuation: the case of forest fire prevention in Vietnamese context," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(2), pages 173-185.
    14. repec:feb:natura:0053 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Lankia, Tuija & Neuvonen, Marjo & Pouta, Eija & Sievänen, Tuija, 2014. "Willingness to contribute to the management of recreational quality on private lands in Finland," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 182651, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    17. Bhattarai, Sushma & Regmi, Bimal Raj & Pant, Basant & Uprety, Dharam Raj & Maraseni, Tek, 2021. "Sustaining ecosystem based adaptation: The lessons from policy and practices in Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    18. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
    19. Sato, Masayuki & Aoshima, Ippei & Chang, Youngho, 2021. "Connectedness to nature and the conservation of the urban ecosystem: Perspectives from the valuation of urban forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    20. Meginnis, Keila & Hanley, Nick & Mujumbusi, Lazaaro & Lamberton, Poppy H.L., 2020. "Non-monetary numeraires: Varying the payment vehicle in a choice experiment for health interventions in Uganda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    21. J. M. Gibson & D. Rigby & D. A. Polya & N. Russell, 2016. "Discrete Choice Experiments in Developing Countries: Willingness to Pay Versus Willingness to Work," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 697-721, December.
    22. Rajesh K. Rai & Helen Scarborough, 2015. "Nonmarket valuation in developing countries: incorporating labour contributions in environmental benefits estimates," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(4), pages 479-498, October.
    23. Roy Brouwer, 2008. "The potential role of stated preference methods in the Water Framework Directive to assess disproportionate costs," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(5), pages 597-614.
    24. Kamuanga, Mulumba & Swallow, Brent M. & Sigue, Hamade & Bauer, Burkhard, 2001. "Evaluating contingent and actual contributions to a local public good: Tsetse control in the Yale agro-pastoral zone, Burkina Faso," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 115-130, October.
    25. K. A. Alfredo & T. O’Garra, 2020. "Preferences for water treatment provision in rural India: comparing communal, pay-per-use, and labour-for-water schemes," Water International, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 91-111, February.
    26. Borja G Reguero & Michael W Beck & David N Bresch & Juliano Calil & Imen Meliane, 2018. "Comparing the cost effectiveness of nature-based and coastal adaptation: A case study from the Gulf Coast of the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-24, April.
    27. Filippo Ferrario & Michael W. Beck & Curt D. Storlazzi & Fiorenza Micheli & Christine C. Shepard & Laura Airoldi, 2014. "The effectiveness of coral reefs for coastal hazard risk reduction and adaptation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 1-9, September.
    28. Godwin Kofi Vondolia & Håkan Eggert & Ståle Navrud & Jesper Stage, 2014. "What do respondents bring to contingent valuation? A comparison of monetary and labour payment vehicles," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(3), pages 253-267, November.
    29. Swallow, B. M. & Woudyalew, M., 1994. "Evaluating willingness to contribute to a local public good: Application of contingent valuation to tsetse control in Ethiopia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 153-161, November.
    30. Rai, Rajesh K. & Scarborough, Helen, 2015. "Nonmarket valuation in developing countries: incorporating labour contributions in environmental benefits estimates," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 59(4), October.
    31. Rai, Rajesh Kumar & Scarborough, Helen, 2013. "Economic value of mitigation of plant invaders in a subsistence economy: incorporating labour as a mode of payment," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 225-244, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Nicholson, Charles F., 2020. "Revisiting money and labor for valuing environmental goods and services in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    2. Kocsis, Tamás & Marjainé, Szerényi Zsuzsanna, 2018. "Gazdag szegények. Időráfordítási hajlandóság a környezeti javak értékelésében [The wealthy poor - "willingness to spend time" in evaluating environmental benefits]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(11), pages 1154-1171.
    3. J. M. Gibson & D. Rigby & D. A. Polya & N. Russell, 2016. "Discrete Choice Experiments in Developing Countries: Willingness to Pay Versus Willingness to Work," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 65(4), pages 697-721, December.
    4. Li, Liqing & Long, Dede, 2022. "Household Preference for Impure Public Goods - an Application of Community Gardens," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322142, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Vondolia, Godwin K. & Navrud, Ståle, 2019. "Are non-monetary payment modes more uncertain for stated preference elicitation in developing countries?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 73-87.
    6. Ahlheim, Michael & Frör, Oliver & Nguyen Minh Duc & Rehl, Antonia & Siepmann, Ute & Pham Van Dinh, 2017. "Labour as a utility measure reconsidered," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 03-2017, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    7. Andreas Pondorfer & Katrin Rehdanz, 2018. "Eliciting Preferences for Public Goods in Nonmonetized Communities: Accounting for Preference Uncertainty," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 94(1), pages 73-86.
    8. Diafas, Iason & Barkmann, Jan & Mburu, John, 2017. "Measurement of Bequest Value Using a Non-monetary Payment in a Choice Experiment—The Case of Improving Forest Ecosystem Services for the Benefit of Local Communities in Rural Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 157-165.
    9. Hagedoorn, L.C. & Bubeck, P. & Hudson, P. & Brander, L.M. & Pham, M. & Lasage, R., 2021. "Preferences of vulnerable social groups for ecosystem-based adaptation to flood risk in Central Vietnam," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    10. Meginnis, Keila & Hanley, Nick & Mujumbusi, Lazaaro & Lamberton, Poppy H.L., 2020. "Non-monetary numeraires: Varying the payment vehicle in a choice experiment for health interventions in Uganda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    11. Diriba Abdeta, 2022. "Households' willingness to pay for forest conservation in Ethiopia: A review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(11), pages 437-451.
    12. Heru Susilo & Yoshifumi Takahashi & Mitsuyasu Yabe, 2017. "The Opportunity Cost of Labor for Valuing Mangrove Restoration in Mahakam Delta, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-13, November.
    13. Tilahun, Mesfin & Vranken, Liesbet & Muys, Bart & Deckers, Jozef A. & Gebregziabher, Kidanemariam & Gebrehiwot, Kindeya & Bauer, Hans & Mathijs, Erik, 2012. "Rural Households’ Demand for Frankincense Forest Conservation in Tigray: A Continent Valuation Analysis," Working Papers 146520, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Centre for Agricultural and Food Economics.
    14. Reguero, Borja G. & Beck, Michael W. & Schmid, David & Stadtmüller, Daniel & Raepple, Justus & Schüssele, Stefan & Pfliegner, Kerstin, 2020. "Financing coastal resilience by combining nature-based risk reduction with insurance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    15. Perni, Ángel & Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús & Martínez-Paz, José Miguel, 2021. "Contingent valuation estimates for environmental goods: Validity and reliability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    16. Zawojska, Ewa & Gastineau, Pascal & Mahieu, Pierre-Alexandre & Cheze, Benoit & Paris, Anthony, 2021. "Measuring policy consequentiality perceptions in stated preference surveys," 2021 Annual Meeting, August 1-3, Austin, Texas 313977, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    17. Roshan Sherchan & Rajesh Kumar Rai & Roshani Rai & Arun Dhakal, 2022. "Designing a community-based insurance scheme to reduce human–wildlife conflict," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 5112-5130, April.
    18. A. K. M. Abdullah Al-Amin & Khorshed Alam & Uttam Babu Shrestha & Masudul Haque Prodhan & Mostafa A. R. Hossain & Nahid Sattar & M. J. Hossain & Tahmina Akhter, 2021. "Ecosystems, livelihood assets and willingness to pay for wetland conservation in Bangladesh," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(12), pages 17503-17534, December.
    19. Schaafsma, Marije & Ferrini, Silvia & Turner, R. Kerry, 2019. "Assessing smallholder preferences for incentivised climate-smart agriculture using a discrete choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    20. Rajesh K. Rai & Mani Nepal & Laxmi D. Bhatta & Saudamini Das & Madan S. Khadayat & E. Somanathan & Kedar Baral, 2019. "Ensuring Water Availability to Water Users through Incentive Payment for Ecosystem Services Scheme: A Case Study in a Small Hilly Town of Nepal," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(04), pages 1-26, October.

    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:52:y:2021:i:c:s2212041621001297. 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.