IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p4049-d180667.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors Affecting Inn Operators’ Willingness to Pay Resource Protection Fees: A Case of Erhai Lake in China

Author

Listed:
  • Peng Li

    (School of Business and Tourism Management, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, China)

  • Ming-Hsiang Chen

    (Tourism and Social Administration College, Nanjing Xiaozhuang University, Nanjing 211171, China
    School of Hospitality Business Management, Carson College of Business, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-4742, USA
    School of Business Administration, Anhui University of Finance and Economics, Bengbu 233030, China)

  • Ying Zou

    (School of Business and Tourism Management, Yunnan University, Kunming 650091, China)

  • Mark Beattie

    (School of Hospitality Business Management, Carson College of Business, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164-4742, USA)

  • Linsi He

    (School of Community Resources and Development, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA)

Abstract

Willingness to pay (WTP) is a foundation of payment for environmental services (PES) and varies according to different stakeholders. Because of its high-quality environment, numerous inns have appeared around Erhai Lake, which has become the inn sector leader in China. Declining water quality of the lake contrasts sharply with the increasing number of inns, thus a policy that balances economic development and water protection is needed desperately. The Erhai Lake Resource Protection Fee (ELRPF) is a form of PES, constructed on the basis of the contingent value method (CVM) involving the relationship between perceived benefits, institutional trust, awareness, and supportive attitude. Using relevant data obtained from a survey questionnaire, SmartPls 3.0 software was used to analyze the factors influencing inn operators’ WTP. The results of the analysis of 307 questionnaires showed that institutional trust, PES cognition, and attitudes toward support significantly affected inn operators’ WTP, while perceived benefit did not. This result differs from results of research on other tourism stakeholders. The reasons for this difference might be the specific identity of operators, their cultural and place identity, ability and professional education, and complexities of the broker of ecosystem services.

Suggested Citation

  • Peng Li & Ming-Hsiang Chen & Ying Zou & Mark Beattie & Linsi He, 2018. "Factors Affecting Inn Operators’ Willingness to Pay Resource Protection Fees: A Case of Erhai Lake in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-23, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4049-:d:180667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4049/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/4049/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wunder, Sven, 2015. "Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 234-243.
    2. Muradian, Roldan & Corbera, Esteve & Pascual, Unai & Kosoy, Nicolás & May, Peter H., 2010. "Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1202-1208, April.
    3. Yadav, Lava Prakash & O'Neill, Stephen, 2013. "Is there agreement between beneficiaries on who should bear the costs of conserving farm landscapes?," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 62-70.
    4. Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron J. & Smetschka, Barbara & Ringhofer, Lisa, 2016. "Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) in Latin America: Analysing the performance of 40 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 24-32.
    5. Kaffashi, Sara & Yacob, Mohd Rusli & Clark, Maynard S. & Radam, Alias & Mamat, Mohd Farid, 2015. "Exploring visitors' willingness to pay to generate revenues for managing the National Elephant Conservation Center in Malaysia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 9-19.
    6. Tew, Christine & Barbieri, Carla, 2012. "The perceived benefits of agritourism: The provider’s perspective," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 215-224.
    7. Jones, Nikoleta & Clark, Julian R.A. & Malesios, Chrisovaladis, 2015. "Social capital and willingness-to-pay for coastal defences in south-east England," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 74-82.
    8. Per Åke Nilsson & Tage Petersen & Stephen Wanhill, 2005. "Public support for tourism SMEs in peripheral areas: The arjeplog project, northern sweden," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 579-599, June.
    9. Vatn, Arild, 2010. "An institutional analysis of payments for environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1245-1252, April.
    10. Wilson, Clevo Tis & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "Attitudes to Entry Fees to National Parks: Results and Policy Implications from a Queensland Case Study," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 79-102, March.
    11. Brown, Gardner M, Jr & Pollakowski, Henry O, 1977. "Economic Valuation of Shoreline," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 59(3), pages 272-278, August.
    12. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2011. "Community conservation and a two-stage approach to payments for ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 89-98.
    13. Rodríguez-Ortega, Tamara & Bernués, Alberto & Alfnes, Frode, 2016. "Psychographic profile affects willingness to pay for ecosystem services provided by Mediterranean high nature value farmland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 232-245.
    14. Sundbo, Jon & Orfila-Sintes, Francina & Sorensen, Flemming, 2007. "The innovative behaviour of tourism firms--Comparative studies of Denmark and Spain," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 88-106, February.
    15. Abdullah Al Mamun & Syed Ali Fazal & Ghazali Bin Ahmad & Mohd Rafi Bin Yaacob & Mohd. Rosli Mohamad, 2018. "Willingness to Pay for Environmentally Friendly Products among Low-Income Households along Coastal Peninsular Malaysia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, April.
    16. Rosenberger, Randall S. & Needham, Mark D. & Morzillo, Anita T. & Moehrke, Caitlin, 2012. "Attitudes, willingness to pay, and stated values for recreation use fees at an urban proximate forest," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 271-281.
    17. Kostakis, I. & Sardianou, E., 2012. "Which factors affect the willingness of tourists to pay for renewable energy?," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 169-172.
    18. Gerpott, Torsten J. & Paukert, Mathias, 2013. "Determinants of willingness to pay for smart meters: An empirical analysis of household customers in Germany," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 483-495.
    19. Ryan, Anthony M. & Spash, Clive L., 2011. "Is WTP an attitudinal measure? Empirical analysis of the psychological explanation for contingent values," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 674-687.
    20. Bing Yu & Yuying Cai & Laiqun Jin & Bisheng Du, 2018. "Effects on Willingness to Pay for Marine Conservation: Evidence from Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    21. Chung, Jin Young & Kyle, Gerard T. & Petrick, James F. & Absher, James D., 2011. "Fairness of prices, user fee policy and willingness to pay among visitors to a national forest," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 1038-1046.
    22. Togridou, Anatoli & Hovardas, Tasos & Pantis, John D., 2006. "Determinants of visitors' willingness to pay for the National Marine Park of Zakynthos, Greece," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 308-319, November.
    23. Husted, Bryan W. & Russo, Michael V. & Meza, Carlos E. Basurto & Tilleman, Suzanne G., 2014. "An exploratory study of environmental attitudes and the willingness to pay for environmental certification in Mexico," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 891-899.
    24. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clem, 2004. "The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 93-107, January.
    25. A M Williams & G Shaw & J Greenwood, 1989. "From Tourist to Tourism Entrepreneur, from Consumption to Production: Evidence from Cornwall, England," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 21(12), pages 1639-1653, December.
    26. Kotchen, Matthew J. & Reiling, Stephen D., 2000. "Environmental attitudes, motivations, and contingent valuation of nonuse values: a case study involving endangered species," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 93-107, January.
    27. Halkos, George & Matsiori, Steriani, 2014. "Exploring social attitude and willingness to pay for water resources conservation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 54-62.
    28. Mano, Haim & Oliver, Richard L, 1993. "Assessing the Dimensionality and Structure of the Consumption Experience: Evaluation, Feeling, and Satisfaction," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(3), pages 451-466, December.
    29. Reinartz, Werner & Haenlein, Michael & Henseler, Jörg, 2009. "An empirical comparison of the efficacy of covariance-based and variance-based SEM," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 332-344.
    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. Teo Dang Do & Anchana NaRanong, 2019. "Livelihood and Environmental Impacts of Payments for Forest Environmental Services: A Case Study in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-22, August.

    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. Authelet, Manon & Subervie, Julie & Meyfroidt, Patrick & Asquith, Nigel & Ezzine-de-Blas, Driss, 2021. "Economic, pro-social and pro-environmental factors influencing participation in an incentive-based conservation program in Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    2. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    3. Campanhão, Ligia Maria Barrios & Ranieri, Victor Eduardo Lima, 2019. "Guideline framework for effective targeting of payments for watershed services," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 93-109.
    4. Bottazzi, Patrick & Wiik, Emma & Crespo, David & Jones, Julia P.G., 2018. "Payment for Environmental “Self-Service”: Exploring the Links Between Farmers' Motivation and Additionality in a Conservation Incentive Programme in the Bolivian Andes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 11-23.
    5. Shengli Dai & Weimin Zhang & Linshan Lan, 2022. "Quantitative Evaluation of China’s Ecological Protection Compensation Policy Based on PMC Index Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-24, August.
    6. Raes, Leander & Loft, Lasse & Le Coq, Jean François & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido & Van Damme, Patrick, 2016. "Towards market- or command-based governance? The evolution of payments for environmental service schemes in Andean and Mesoamerican countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 20-32.
    7. Martin-Ortega, Julia & Dekker, Thijs & Ojea, Elena & Lorenzo-Arribas, Altea, 2019. "Dissecting price setting efficiency in Payments for Ecosystem Services: A meta-analysis of payments for watershed services in Latin America," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    8. Rodríguez-Robayo, Karla Juliana & Merino-Perez, Leticia, 2017. "Contextualizing context in the analysis of payment for ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 259-267.
    9. Bauchet, Jonathan & Asquith, Nigel & Ma, Zhao & Radel, Claudia & Godoy, Ricardo & Zanotti, Laura & Steele, Diana & Gramig, Benjamin M. & Chong, Andrea Estrella, 2020. "The practice of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) in the Tropical Andes: Evidence from program administrators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    10. Ma, Zhao & Bauchet, Jonathan & Steele, Diana & Godoy, Ricardo & Radel, Claudia & Zanotti, Laura, 2017. "Comparison of Direct Transfers for Human Capital Development and Environmental Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 498-517.
    11. Rodríguez-Ortega, T. & Olaizola, A.M. & Bernués, A., 2018. "A novel management-based system of payments for ecosystem services for targeted agri-environmental policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 74-84.
    12. Trædal, Leif Tore & Vedeld, Pål Olav & Pétursson, Jón Geir, 2016. "Analyzing the transformations of forest PES in Vietnam: Implications for REDD+," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 109-117.
    13. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 503-520.
    14. Pham, Thu Thuy & Loft, Lasse & Bennett, Karen & Phuong, Vu Tan & Dung, Le Ngoc & Brunner, Jake, 2015. "Monitoring and evaluation of Payment for Forest Environmental Services in Vietnam: From myth to reality," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 220-229.
    15. Lin, Yongsheng & Dong, Zhanfeng & Zhang, Wei & Zhang, Hongyu, 2020. "Estimating inter-regional payments for ecosystem services: Taking China’s Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region as an example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    16. Brathwaite, Angelique & Pascal, Nicolas & Clua, Eric, 2021. "When are payment for ecosystems services suitable for coral reef derived coastal protection?: A review of scientific requirements," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    17. Rodríguez-Robayo, Karla Juliana & à vila-Foucat, V. Sophie & Maldonado, Jorge H., 2016. "Indigenous communities’ perception regarding payments for environmental services programme in Oaxaca Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 163-171.
    18. Báliková, Klára & Šálka, Jaroslav, 2022. "Are silvicultural subsidies an effective payment for ecosystem services in Slovakia?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    19. Brian Witt, 2019. "Evaluating the Effects of a Minimalist Deliberative Framework on the Willingness to Participate in a Payment for Ecosystem Services Program," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-26, June.
    20. Ito, Junichi & Feuer, Hart N. & Kitano, Shinichi & Komiyama, Midori, 2018. "A Policy Evaluation of the Direct Payment Scheme for Collective Stewardship of Common Property Resources in Japan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 141-151.

    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:10:y:2018:i:11:p:4049-:d:180667. 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.