IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i8p3210-d1374225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring Landscape Values and Willingness to Pay for Perceived Ecosystem Services: The Case of Malampaya Sound, a Socio-Ecological Production Landscape and Seascape

Author

Listed:
  • Christmas Uchiyama

    (Research Institute for Humanity and Nature (RIHN), Kyoto 603-8047, Japan)

  • Kaoru Ichikawa

    (Faculty of Human Life Sciences, Jissen Women’s University, Tokyo 191-8510, Japan)

  • Osamu Saito

    (Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Hayama 240-0115, Japan)

Abstract

Since the 1990s, the Philippines has established numerous protected areas aimed at preserving regions with distinct biological and ecological characteristics. However, transitioning towards a more comprehensive approach to managing these protected areas, one that effectively conserves biodiversity while also supporting the welfare of local communities, remains a formidable task. Understanding the sources of the goods and services upon which communities rely, whether directly or indirectly, and their perceptions of ecosystem services (ESs) is a crucial aspect that can inform decision-making for both protected area managers and policymakers. This research specifically examines the mapping of landscape values as perceived by local communities within Malampaya Sound Protected Landscape and Seascape (MSPLS) in the Philippines. Using survey questionnaires administered to 114 randomly selected participants, the study identifies the ESs within MSPLS and maps the associated landscape values. The respondents were tasked with assigning values to the ESs using a typology of 14 landscape values, and their willingness to pay (WTP) to enhance the ESs within MSPLS was also investigated. Analysis of socio-demographic data, the identified ESs, and the perceived landscape values was conducted to uncover significant relationships between the variables. Our findings reveal that the respondents prioritize provisioning services, particularly fisheries, agriculture, and agroforestry. Regarding landscape value preferences, economic value is most prominently perceived (37.4%), followed by subsistence value (30.8%) and life-sustaining value (6.8%). This study further unveils the socio-economic factors influencing the ranking of ESs and trends in WTP for ES improvements in Malampaya. Additionally, a potential payment for ecosystem services scheme in MSPLS is estimated at PHP 532,000, approximately USD 10,600.

Suggested Citation

  • Christmas Uchiyama & Kaoru Ichikawa & Osamu Saito, 2024. "Exploring Landscape Values and Willingness to Pay for Perceived Ecosystem Services: The Case of Malampaya Sound, a Socio-Ecological Production Landscape and Seascape," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-21, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3210-:d:1374225
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3210/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/8/3210/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick Reed & Gregory Brown, 2003. "Values Suitability Analysis: A Methodology for Identifying and Integrating Public Perceptions of Ecosystem Values in Forest Planning," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(5), pages 643-658.
    2. Ariane Amin & Julie G. Zaehringer & Gudrun Schwilch & Inza Koné, 2015. "People, protected areas and ecosystem services: a qualitative and quantitative analysis of local people's perception and preferences in Côte d'Ivoire," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(2), pages 97-109, May.
    3. Yang, Y.C. Ethan & Passarelli, Simone & Lovell, Robin J. & Ringler, Claudia, 2018. "Gendered perspectives of ecosystem services: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 58-67.
    4. Ariane Amin & Julie G. Zaehringer & Gudrun Schwilch & Inza Koné, 2015. "People, protected areas and ecosystem services: a qualitative and quantitative analysis of local people's perception and preferences in Côte d'Ivoire," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 0(2), pages 97-109, May.
    5. Liqing Li & Amy W. Ando, 2023. "Early Exposure to Nature and Willingness to Pay for It: The Value of Tallgrass Prairie Grassland Restoration," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 99(4), pages 509-527.
    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. Anastasija Novikova & Lucia Rocchi & Bernardas Vaznonis, 2019. "Valuing Agricultural Landscape: Lithuanian Case Study Using a Contingent Valuation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, May.
    2. Chatterjee, Ira & Cornelissen, Joep & Wincent, Joakim, 2021. "Social entrepreneurship and values work: The role of practices in shaping values and negotiating change," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(1).
    3. Bradley S Jorgensen & Richard C Stedman, 2011. "Measuring the Spatial Component of Sense of Place: A Methodology for Research on the Spatial Dynamics of Psychological Experiences of Places," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(5), pages 795-813, October.
    4. Ron Janssen & Gustavo A Arciniegas & Jos T A Verhoeven, 2013. "Spatial Evaluation of Ecological Qualities to Support Interactive Land-Use Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 40(3), pages 427-446, June.
    5. Eleanor K.K. Jew & Oliver J. Burdekin & Andrew J. Dougill & Susannah M. Sallu, 2019. "Rapid land use change threatens provisioning ecosystem services in miombo woodlands," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(1), pages 56-70, February.
    6. Spence, Danielle S. & Schuster-Wallace, Corinne J. & Lloyd-Smith, Patrick, 2023. "Disparities in economic values for nature-based activities in Canada," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    7. Schmitt, Thomas M. & Martín-López, Berta & Kaim, Andrea & Früh-Müller, Andrea & Koellner, Thomas, 2021. "Ecosystem services from (pre-)Alpine grasslands: Matches and mismatches between citizens’ perceived suitability and farmers’ management considerations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    8. Labeyrie, Vanesse & Friedman, Rachel S. & Donnet, Sophie & Faye, Ndeye Fatou & Cobelli, Océane & Baggio, Jacopo & Felipe-Lucia, María R. & Raimond, Christine, 2023. "Linking seed networks and crop diversity contributions to people: A case study in small-scale farming systems in Sahelian Senegal," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    9. Junga Lee & Byoung-Suk Kweon & Christopher D. Ellis & Sang-Woo Lee, 2020. "Assessing the Social Value of Ecosystem Services for Resilient Riparian Greenway Planning and Management in an Urban Community," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-14, May.
    10. Wangchuk, Jigme & Choden, Kinley & Sears, Robin R. & Baral, Himlal & Yoezer, Dawa & Tamang, Kelly Tobden Dorji & Choden, Thinley & Wangdi, Norbu & Dorji, Shacha & Dukpa, Dorji & Tshering, Kaka & Thinl, 2021. "Community perception of ecosystem services from commercially managed forests in Bhutan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    11. Fortnam, M. & Brown, K. & Chaigneau, T. & Crona, B. & Daw, T.M. & Gonçalves, D. & Hicks, C. & Revmatas, M. & Sandbrook, C. & Schulte-Herbruggen, B., 2019. "The Gendered Nature of Ecosystem Services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 312-325.
    12. Cuni-Sanchez, Aida & Ngute, Alain Senghor K. & Sonké, Bonaventure & Sainge, Moses Nsanyi & Burgess, Neil D. & Klein, Julia A. & Marchant, Rob, 2019. "The importance of livelihood strategy and ethnicity in forest ecosystem services’ perceptions by local communities in north-western Cameroon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    13. Jarmila MAKOVNÍKOVÁ & Jozef KOBZA & Boris PÁLKA & Jozef MALIŠ & Radoslava KANIANSKA & Miriam KIZEKOVÁ, 2016. "An approach to mapping the potential of cultural agroecosystem services," Soil and Water Research, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 11(1), pages 44-52.
    14. Brown, Greg & Fagerholm, Nora, 2015. "Empirical PPGIS/PGIS mapping of ecosystem services: A review and evaluation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 119-133.
    15. Brown, Greg, 2013. "The relationship between social values for ecosystem services and global land cover: An empirical analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 58-68.
    16. Gebregziabher, Dawit & Soltani, Arezoo, 2019. "Exclosures in people’s minds: perceptions and attitudes in the Tigray region, Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 1-14.
    17. Shoyama, Kikuko & Yamagata, Yoshiki, 2016. "Local perception of ecosystem service bundles in the Kushiro watershed, Northern Japan – Application of a public participation GIS tool," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 139-149.
    18. Xuesong Xi & Haiyun Xu & Qiang Zhao & Guohan Zhao, 2021. "Making Rural Micro-Regeneration Strategies Based on Resident Perceptions and Preferences for Traditional Village Conservation and Development: The Case of Huangshan Village, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.
    19. David W. Martin, 2019. "Gender Concerns When Noah the Economist Ranks Biodiversity Protection Policies," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-13, October.
    20. Johannes Rüdisser & Georg Leitinger & Uta Schirpke, 2020. "Application of the Ecosystem Service Concept in Social–Ecological Systems—from Theory to Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-6, April.

    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:16:y:2024:i:8:p:3210-:d:1374225. 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.