IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/raf/wpaper/b15527.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A conjoint analysis of farmer preferences for community forestry contracts in the Sumber Jaya watershed, Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Arifin, B.
  • Swallow, B.
  • Suyanto
  • Coe, R.

Abstract

A wide range of policy instruments have been devised and applied to support the goals of sustainable forestry management. Community forestry programs can contain elements of several of those instruments. This paper considers the design of community forestry contracts in the Sumber Jaya area of Indonesia where community forestry contracts are agreements between the Forestry Department and community groups that provide group members with time-bound leasehold rights to protection forests, on the condition that farmers abide by specified land-use restrictions and pay any required fees. Farmers perceive that the contracts represent a bundle of restrictions and inducements, some of which are explicitly stated in the contract and others that are implied by the contract. Conjoint analysis was used to quantify farmers' tradeoffs among the explicit and implicit attributes of the contracts. The results of logit and ordered logit models show that farmers are most concerned about the length of the contract, and relatively unconcerned about requirements on tree density and species composition. An implicit attribute, greater access to forestry and agroforestry extension, emerges as an important implicit attribute. The results imply that farmers in this part of Indonesia would be willing to abide by fairly strict limitations on land use, provided that they can be assured of long-term rights to the planted trees.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Arifin, B. & Swallow, B. & Suyanto & Coe, R., 2008. "A conjoint analysis of farmer preferences for community forestry contracts in the Sumber Jaya watershed, Indonesia," Working Papers b15527, World Agroforestry Centre, Library Department.
    • Handle: RePEc:raf:wpaper:b15527
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldagroforestry.org/downloads/publications/PDFs/wp15527.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2008
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arifin, Bustanul, 2006. "Transaction Cost Analysis of Upstream-Downstream Relations in Watershed Services: Lessons from Community-Based Forestry Management in Sumatra, Indonesia," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25788, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Cubbage, Frederick & Harou, Patrice & Sills, Erin, 2007. "Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 833-851, April.
    3. Agrawal, Arun & Yadama, Gautam & Andrade, Raul & Bhattacharya, Ajoy, 2006. "Decentralization and environmental conservation: gender effects from participation in joint forest management," CAPRi working papers 53, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. John Mackenzie, 1993. "A Comparison of Contingent Preference Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 75(3), pages 593-603.
    5. Sayadi, Samir & Gonzalez Roa, M. Carmen & Calatrava Requena, Javier, 2005. "Ranking versus scale rating in conjoint analysis: Evaluating landscapes in mountainous regions in southeastern Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(4), pages 539-550, December.
    6. Verbist, Bruno & Dinata Putra, Andree Eka & Budidarsono, Suseno, 2005. "Factors driving land use change: Effects on watershed functions in a coffee agroforestry system in Lampung, Sumatra," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 254-270, September.
    7. Kevin J. Boyle & Thomas P. Holmes & Mario F. Teisl & Brian Roe, 2001. "A Comparison of Conjoint Analysis Response Formats," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 83(2), pages 441-454.
    8. Klosowski, R. & Stevens, T. & Kittredge, D. & Dennis, D., 2001. "Economic incentives for coordinated management of forest land: a case study of southern New England," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 29-38, April.
    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. Gelo, Dambala & Koch, Steven F., 2012. "Does one size fit all? Heterogeneity in the valuation of community forestry programs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 85-94.
    2. Rakatama, Ari & Pandit, Ram, 2020. "Reviewing social forestry schemes in Indonesia: Opportunities and challenges," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    3. Arifin, Bustanul, 2010. "Global Sustainability Regulation and Coffee Supply Chains in Lampung Province, Indonesia," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, December.
    4. Mohebalian, Phillip M. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2018. "Design of tropical forest conservation contracts considering risk of deforestation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 451-462.
    5. Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2010. "Performance payments: A new strategy to conserve large carnivores in the tropics?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 405-412, December.
    6. Nordén, Anna, 2014. "Payment Types and Participation in Payment for Ecosystem Services Programs: Stated Preferences of Landowners," Working Papers in Economics 591, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    7. Kaczan, David & Swallow, Brent M. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2011. "Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) scheme design in rural Tanzania: Famers’ preferences for enforcement and payment options," 2011 Annual Meeting, July 24-26, 2011, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 103673, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    8. Maldonado, Jorge H. & Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio & Henao-Henao, Juan P. & Bruner, Aaron, 2019. "Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    9. Kaczan, David & Swallow, Brent M. & Adamowicz, W.L. (Vic), 2013. "Designing a payments for ecosystem services (PES) program to reduce deforestation in Tanzania: An assessment of payment approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 20-30.
    10. Yost, Alexandra & An, Li & Bilsborrow, Richard & Shi, Lei & Chen, Xiaodong & Yang, Shuang & Zhang, Weiyong, 2020. "Mechanisms behind concurrent payments for ecosystem services in a Chinese nature reserve," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    11. Elzir Assy, Angela & Ribeiro, Tiago & Robalino, David A. & Rosati, Furio C. & Sanchez Puerta, Maria Laura & Weber, Michael, 2019. "The Jobs That Youth Want and the Support They Need to Get Them: Evidence from a Discrete Choice Experiment in Kenya," IZA Discussion Papers 12864, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Vorlaufer, Tobias & Falk, Thomas & Dufhues, Thomas & Kirk, Michael, 2017. "Payments for ecosystem services and agricultural intensification: Evidence from a choice experiment on deforestation in Zambia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 95-105.
    13. Mamine, Fateh & Fares, M'hand & Minviel, Jean Joseph, 2020. "Contract Design for Adoption of Agrienvironmental Practices: A Meta-analysis of Discrete Choice Experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    14. Kisaka, Lily & Obi, Ajuruchukwu, 2015. "Farmers’ Preferences for Management Options as Payment for Environmental Services Scheme," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 18(3), pages 1-22, September.
    15. Kalvis Kons & Boško Blagojević & Blas Mola-Yudego & Robert Prinz & Johanna Routa & Biljana Kulisic & Bruno Gagnon & Dan Bergström, 2022. "Industrial End-Users’ Preferred Characteristics for Wood Biomass Feedstocks," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-22, May.
    16. Marilyn A. Muñoz Mayorga & Eva Iglesias Martínez & Natalia Caldés Gómez, 2017. "Jatropha Suppliers as Contributors to the Sustainability of the Production of Bioelectricity in Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-13, October.
    17. Kondo, Takumi & Osanami, Fumio & Barmon, Basanta Kumar & Yamaguchi, Junichi, 2010. "Rice-prawn Farming System: Impacts on Soil Quality and Land Productivity of Modern Variety Paddy Production in Bangladesh," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 7(2), pages 1-18, December.
    18. Putraditama, Andika & Kim, Yeon-Su & Sánchez Meador, Andrew Joel, 2019. "Community forest management and forest cover change in Lampung, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Eugene E. Ezebilo, 2012. "Forest Stakeholder Participation in Improving Game Habitat in Swedish Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(7), pages 1-16, July.

    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. Oviedo, José L. & Caparrós, Alejandro & Ruiz-Gauna, Itziar & Campos, Pablo, 2016. "Testing convergent validity in choice experiments: Application to public recreation in Spanish stone pine and cork oak forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 130-148.
    2. Gorm Kipperberg & Douglas Larson, 2012. "Heterogeneous Preferences for Community Recycling Programs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 53(4), pages 577-604, December.
    3. Bustanul Arifin, 2010. "Global Sustainability Regulation and Coffee Supply Chains in Lampung Province, Indonesia," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 7(2), pages 67-89, December.
    4. Marloes de Graaf-Zijl, 2005. "The Attractiveness of Temporary Employment to Reduce Adjustment Costs," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 05-121/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Gruchy, Steven R. & Grebner, Donald L. & Munn, Ian A. & Joshi, Omkar & Hussain, Anwar, 2012. "An assessment of nonindustrial private forest landowner willingness to harvest woody biomass in support of bioenergy production in Mississippi: A contingent rating approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 140-145.
    6. Harrison, R. Wes & Gillespie, Jeffrey M. & Fields, Deacue, 2001. "Theoretical And Empirical Considerations Of Eliciting Preferences And Model Estimation In Conjoint Analysis," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20680, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    7. Willmarth, Blake & Turner, Robert, 2010. "Respondent Consistency in a Tournament-Style Contingent Choice Survey," Working Papers 2010-05, Department of Economics, Colgate University.
    8. Kondo, Takumi & Osanami, Fumio & Barmon, Basanta Kumar & Yamaguchi, Junichi, 2010. "Rice-prawn Farming System: Impacts on Soil Quality and Land Productivity of Modern Variety Paddy Production in Bangladesh," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 7(2), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Ficko, Andrej & Boncina, Andrej, 2013. "Probabilistic typology of management decision making in private forest properties," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 34-43.
    10. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    11. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Olza Donazar, Luis & Montero Eseverri, Eduardo & Marini Govigli, Valentino, 2019. "The challenges of coordinating forest owners for joint management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 100-109.
    12. Giles Atkinson & Sian Morse-Jones & Susana Mourato & Allan Provins, 2012. "‘When to Take “No” for an Answer’? Using Entreaties to Reduce Protests in Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(4), pages 497-523, April.
    13. Atallah, Shadi S. & Huang, Ju-Chin & Leahy, Jessica & Bennett, Karen, 2020. "Preference Heterogeneity and Neighborhood Effect in Invasive Species Control: The Case of Glossy Buckthorn in New Hampshire and Maine Forests," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304623, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    14. B Kelsey Jack, "undated". "Market Inefficiencies and the Adoption of Agricultural Technologies in Developing Countries," CID Working Papers 50, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    15. Dragicevic, Arnaud Z., 2020. "The economics of the Sylvo-Cynegetic equilibrium," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    16. Markowski-Lindsay, Marla & Borsuk, Mark E. & Butler, Brett J. & Duveneck, Matthew J. & Holt, Jonathan & Kittredge, David B. & Laflower, Danelle & MacLean, Meghan Graham & Orwig, David & Thompson, Jona, 2020. "Compounding the Disturbance: Family Forest Owner Reactions to Invasive Forest Insects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    17. Põllumäe, Priit & Lilleleht, Ando & Korjus, Henn, 2016. "Institutional barriers in forest owners' cooperation: The case of Estonia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 9-16.
    18. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Barbara Baarsma, 2003. "The Valuation of the IJmeer Nature Reserve using Conjoint Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 343-356, July.
    20. Caroline Roussy & Aude Ridier & Karim Chaïb, 2014. "Adoption d’innovations par les agriculteurs : rôle des perceptions et des préférences," Post-Print hal-01123427, HAL.

    More about this item

    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:raf:wpaper:b15527. 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: Humphrey Keah (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/icrafke.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.