IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ajaees/356971.html

Villagers Willingness to Pay for Forest Conservation in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • Ariyo, O. C.
  • Okojie, L. O.
  • Ariyo, M. O.

Abstract

The study was carried out to determine the willingness to pay for forest conservation among villagers living at the perimeter fence of International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. The multistage sampling procedure was adopted for the study. A total number of four hundred and eight respondents comprising of farmers, hunters, herbalists and herb sellers were randomly selected and interviewed using copies of well-structured questionnaires. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and Log it regression model. The study showed that the average age of farmers and hunters was 55 and 57 years while the average age of herb sellers was 43 and herbalist 63 years. Majority of the respondents pooled together are male, married with an average age of 55 years and household size of 7 members. The larger percentage of them were native of the study area, not educated, not employed, but having the monthly income between 12,000- 20,000 naira (US$33.38 to US$55.63) and closer to the forest by 1-9 km. The mean willingness to pay for forest conservation was N114.38 (US$0.32) per month per household and the total willingness to pay was N3, 461,024.42 (US$9, 627.32) per month. The study further revealed that there was significant relationship between the socio-economic characteristics of the respondents and their willingness to pay for forest conservation. Variables such as gender, educational level, occupation, income and bid amounts had significant effect on the willingness to pay for forest conservation. The study therefore recommends that monetary value should be placed on the social, cultural, ecological and economic services generated by the forests for the forests to continue to provide goods and services on a sustainable basis. Also, the willingness to pay for forest conservation can be used as an alternative measure of displeasure against the conversion of the forests to other uses and as a supportive argument for the invaluable roles the forests play in sustaining the livelihood of the people.

Suggested Citation

  • Ariyo, O. C. & Okojie, L. O. & Ariyo, M. O., 2018. "Villagers Willingness to Pay for Forest Conservation in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria," Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, vol. 23(4).
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ajaees:356971
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/356971/files/Ariyo2342018AJAEES40142.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loomis, John & Kent, Paula & Strange, Liz & Fausch, Kurt & Covich, Alan, 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 103-117, 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. Carson, Rebecca M. & Bergstrom, John C., 2003. "A Review Of Ecosystem Valuation Techniques," Faculty Series 16651, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    2. Holmes, Thomas P. & Bergstrom, John C. & Huszar, Eric & Kask, Susan B. & Orr, Fritz, III, 2002. "Estimating The Local Economic Benefits Of Riparian Ecosystem Restoration Using Iterated Contingent Valuation," Faculty Series 16696, University of Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    3. Halkos, George, 2013. "The relationship between people’s attitude and willingness to pay for river conservation," MPRA Paper 50560, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Anna Alberini & Paolo Rosato & Alberto Longo & Valentina Zanatta, 2005. "Information and Willingness to Pay in a Contingent Valuation Study: The Value of S. Erasmo in the Lagoon of Venice," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(2), pages 155-175.
    5. Richardson, Robert B., 2011. "Ecosystem Services and Food Security: Economic Perspectives on Environmental Sustainability," Food Security International Development Working Papers 98782, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    6. Ik-Chang Choi & Hyun No Kim & Hio-Jung Shin & John Tenhunen & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2017. "Economic Valuation of the Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation in South Korea: Correcting for the Endogeneity Bias in Contingent Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    7. Zhang, Hongjuan & Gao, Yan & Hua, Yawei & Zhang, Yue & Liu, Kang, 2019. "Assessing and mapping recreationists’ perceived social values for ecosystem services in the Qinling Mountains, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    8. Matta, Jagannadha & Alavalapati, Janaki & Tanner, George, 2007. "A framework for developing marked-based policies to further biodiversity on non-industrial private forests (NIPF)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 779-788, April.
    9. Choi, Dong Soon & Ready, Richard, 2021. "Measuring benefits from spatially-explicit surface water quality improvements: The roles of distance, scope, scale, and size," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    10. Ávila-García, Daniela & Morató, Jordi & Pérez-Maussán, Ana I. & Santillán-Carvantes, Patricia & Alvarado, Jannice & Comín, Francisco A., 2020. "Impacts of alternative land-use policies on water ecosystem services in the Río Grande de Comitán-Lagos de Montebello watershed, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    11. Chia-Chi Lee & Liang-Chun Chen, 2011. "Who are the resident stakeholders in a flood project? A spatial analysis of resident stakeholders," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 59(1), pages 107-128, October.
    12. Strong, Aaron & Flores, Nicholas E., 2008. "Estimating the economic benefits of acidic rock drainage clean up using cost shares," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 348-355, April.
    13. Ninan, K.N. & Inoue, Makoto, 2013. "Valuing forest ecosystem services: What we know and what we don't," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 137-149.
    14. Bandara, Ranjith & Tisdell, Clement A., 2003. "Use and non-use values of wild Asian elephants: A total economic valuation approach," Economics, Ecology and Environment Working Papers 48961, University of Queensland, School of Economics.
    15. Xiaoling Zhu & Hio-Jung Shin, 2021. "Financial Analysis for Improving River Water Quality through Introduction of Organic Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, March.
    16. Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija & Grebner, Donald L., 2016. "Integrating ecosystem service concepts into valuation and management decisions," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 61-62.
    17. Bostian, Moriah B. & Herlihy, Alan T., 2014. "Valuing tradeoffs between agricultural production and wetland condition in the U.S. Mid-Atlantic region," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 284-291.
    18. West, Grant H. & Snell, Heather & Kovacs, Kent & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2020. "Estimation of the preferences for the intertemporal services from groundwater," 2020 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, Kansas City, Missouri 304220, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Chin-Huang Huang & Chiung-Hsia Wang, 2015. "Estimating the Total Economic Value of Cultivated Flower Land in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-19, April.
    20. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:ags:ajaees:356971. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journalajaees.com/index.php/AJAEES/index .

    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.