IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/agy/dpaper/202010.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Capturing Urban Households' Benefits for Preserving Natural and Cultural Resources in a Neighboring Rural Area: A CVM Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Rosalina Palanca-Tan

    (Economics Department, Ateneo de Manila University)

Abstract

Koronadal households benefit from Lake Sebu's natural and cultural resources in terms of recreation, tourism income generation, supply of high quality tilapia, agricultural products supply, potential hydroelectric power source, cultural heritage, biodiversity, and climate change mitigation. These benefits encompass both use and non-use values which are integrated in a single estimate using the contingent valuation method. In the study, Koronadal households are asked for their willingness to pay (WTP) or contribute to natural and cultural resources rehabilitation and preservation efforts in the form of a lump-sum monthly amount collected together with their electricity bill payment. Household’s mean WTP is estimated to be between PhP52.42 (US$1.04) and PhP64.39 (US$1.27) per month. Multiplying the annualized WTP by the number of households in Koronadal, total potential annual contributions from Koronadal City would range from PhP29,244,533 (US$577,841) to PhP35,863,170 (US$708,618). Even just a fraction of this potential collection can support essential conservation efforts in Lake Sebu which up to the present have been inadequate due to financial constraints. Moreover, results of the regression analysis reveals that households are more likely to support the preservation program if the amount of required contribution is smaller and household income is higher. Older and more educated respondents are likewise more likely to support the program.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosalina Palanca-Tan, 2020. "Capturing Urban Households' Benefits for Preserving Natural and Cultural Resources in a Neighboring Rural Area: A CVM Approach," Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University, Working Paper Series 202010, Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University.
  • Handle: RePEc:agy:dpaper:202010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ateneo.edu/sites/default/files/2022-06/ADMU%20WP%202020-10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Whittington, Dale, 1998. "Administering contingent valuation surveys in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 21-30, January.
    2. Rosalina Palanca-Tan & Catherine Roween Chico-Almaden & Ma. Kresna Navarro & Marichu Melendez-Obedencio & Caroline Laarni Rubio-Sereñas, 2018. "Total economic value of the Cagayan de Oro river basin," Chapters, in: Mona Hymel & Larry Kreiser & Janet E. Milne & Hope Ashiabor (ed.), Innovation Addressing Climate Change Challenges, chapter 12, pages 169-184, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, 2002. "Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2427.
    4. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    5. Wright, William C.C. & Eppink, Florian V., 2016. "Drivers of heritage value: A meta-analysis of monetary valuation studies of cultural heritage," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 277-284.
    6. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639.
    7. Dale Whittington, 2002. "Improving the Performance of Contingent Valuation Studies in Developing Countries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 22(1), pages 323-367, June.
    8. Subade, Rodelio F., 2007. "Mechanisms to capture economic values of marine biodiversity: The case of Tubbataha Reefs UNESCO World Heritage Site, Philippines," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 135-142, March.
    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. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    2. Subade, Rodelio F. & Francisco, Herminia A., 2014. "Do non-users value coral reefs?: Economic valuation of conserving Tubbataha Reefs, Philippines," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 24-32.
    3. Vásquez-Lavín, Felipe & Carrasco, Moisés & Barrientos, Manuel & Gelcich, Stefan & Ponce Oliva, Roberto D., 2021. "Estimating discount rates for environmental goods: Are People’s responses inadequate to frequency of payments?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    4. Salvador Saz-Salazar & Ana Navarrete-Tudela & José Ramón Alcalá-Mellado & Daniel Carlos Saz-Salazar, 2019. "On the Use of Life Satisfaction Data for Valuing Cultural Goods: A First Attempt and a Comparison with the Contingent Valuation Method," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 119-140, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Verbic, Miroslav & Slabe-Erker, Renata, 2009. "An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1316-1328, March.
    7. Sung-Min Kim & Ju-Hee Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2020. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Substituting Natural Gas with Renewable Methane: A Contingent Valuation Experiment in South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    8. Kerstin K Zander & Gillian B Ainsworth & Jürgen Meyerhoff & Stephen T Garnett, 2014. "Threatened Bird Valuation in Australia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-9, June.
    9. Dale Whittington & Stefano Pagiola, 2012. "Using Contingent Valuation in the Design of Payments for Environmental Services Mechanisms: A Review and Assessment," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 27(2), pages 261-287, August.
    10. Tran Huu Tuan, 2007. "Valuing the Economic Benefits of Preserving Cultural Heritage: The My Son Sanctuary World Heritage Site in Vietnam," EEPSEA Research Report rr2007072, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Jul 2007.
    11. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2003. "Willingness of Sri Lankan Farmers to pay for a Scheme to Conserve Elephants: An Empirical Analysis," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48954, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    12. Hermann Donfouet & P. Jeanty & P.-A. Mahieu, 2014. "Dealing with internal inconsistency in double-bounded dichotomous choice: an application to community-based health insurance," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 317-328, February.
    13. Paul Mwebaze & Jeff Bennett & Nigel W. Beebe & Gregor J. Devine & Paul Barro, 2018. "Economic Valuation of the Threat Posed by the Establishment of the Asian Tiger Mosquito in Australia," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 357-379, October.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Niroomand, Naghmeh & Jenkins, Glenn P., 2018. "A comparison of stated preference methods for the valuation of improvement in road safety," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 138-149.
    17. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Gebretsadik, Kidanemariam Abreha & Romstad, Eirik, 2020. "Climate and farmers’ willingness to pay for improved irrigation water supply," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    19. Pappalardo, Gioacchino & West, Grant Howard & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Toscano, Sabrina & Pecorino, Biagio, 2022. "The effect of a UNESCO world heritage site designation on willingness to pay to preserve an agri-environmental good: The case of the dry stone walls in Mt. Etna," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    20. Nduka, Eleanya, 2021. "How to get rural households out of energy poverty in Nigeria: A contingent valuation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    benefit valuation; contingent valuation method; cultural heritage; natural environment; willingness to pay;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q26 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Recreational Aspects of Natural Resources
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:agy:dpaper:202010. 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: Jat Tancangco (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deadmph.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.