IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ajaees/367829.html

Contingent Valuation of Forest Produce in High Altitude Zone of Andhra Pradesh, India

Author

Listed:
  • Rao, V. Kamala Vasu Deva
  • Radha, Y.
  • Rao, I. V. Y. Rama
  • Reddy, P. Bala Hussain
  • Murthy, B. Ramana

Abstract

The present study aims at estimating compound annual growth rate of forest area in the high altitude zone of Andhra Pradesh state. The study was based on secondary data, which were collected from various published and unpublished sources. The data related to forest area was collected for the period of 1990-91 to 2020-21. For detailed analysis, the whole period was divided into two sub-periods i.e., period I (1990-91 to 2004-05), period II (2006-07 to 2020-21). The overall compound growth rate of forest area under high altitude zone of Andhra Pradesh was positive (0.54 per cent). But negative growth rate (-0.0048 per cent) was found in area for the HAT Zone in period-I (1990-91 to 2005-06) and positive growth rate (1.74 per cent) was found in area for the HAT Zone in period-II (2006-07 to 2020-21). Compound annual growth rate of forest area was found positive in overall period for the high altitude zone. Contingent Valuation (CV) and its two arms like Willingness To Pay (WTP) and Willingness To Accept (WTA) are survey methods that were supposed to measure the value of non-market goods mainly for minor forest products. Willingness To Accept usually consists of getting the information from the producers on how much they are willing to accept to avoid a negative or to accept a positive outcome. The results showed that willingness to accept was significant for all minor forest products like beedi leaves (Diospyros melanoxylon), soap nut (Sapindus trifoliatus), honey, bamboo (Bambusa vulgaris), tamarind (Tamarindus indica), firewood, vegetables, mushroom, fruits and cashew nut (Anacardium occidentale). The empirical results revealed that producers were willing to accept a premium for these forest products but lack of store availability, lack of credit facilities and middlemen exploitation were the major problems faced by the producers for which a reliable regulatory system is necessary to mitigate the quality constraint problem of forest products.

Suggested Citation

  • Rao, V. Kamala Vasu Deva & Radha, Y. & Rao, I. V. Y. Rama & Reddy, P. Bala Hussain & Murthy, B. Ramana, 2023. "Contingent Valuation of Forest Produce in High Altitude Zone of Andhra Pradesh, India," Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology, vol. 41(12), pages 1-5.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ajaees:367829
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/367829/files/Rao41122023AJAEES110072.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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, August.
    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. Pepermans, Guido, 2011. "The value of continuous power supply for Flemish households," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(12), pages 7853-7864.
    2. 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.
    3. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    4. 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.
    5. Björn Vollan & Karla Henning & Deniza Staewa, 2017. "Do campaigns featuring impact evaluations increase donations? Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(4), pages 500-518, October.
    6. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    7. Jose M. Martínez-Paz & Angel Perni & Federico Martínez-Carrasco, 2013. "Assessment of the Programme of Measures for Coastal Lagoon Environmental Restoration Using Cost--Benefit Analysis," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 131-148, February.
    8. Tanner, Michael K. & Moity, Nicolas & Costa, Matthew T. & Marin Jarrin, Jose R. & Aburto-Oropeza, Octavio & Salinas-de-León, Pelayo, 2019. "Mangroves in the Galapagos: Ecosystem services and their valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 12-24.
    9. Murphy, Geraldine & O’Donoghue, Cathal & Hynes, Stephen & Murphy, Eithne, 2014. "Modelling the Participation Decision in Agri-Environmental Schemes," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183069, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    10. Carol Vargas & RamÔøΩn Rosales, 2006. "Valoraci√Ìn Econ√Ìmica De La Prevenci√Ìn P√Öblica De La Malaria En Los Hogares Del Caquet√Å," Documentos CEDE 3749, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    11. Jin, Jianjun & He, Rui & Wang, Wenyu & Gong, Haozhou, 2018. "Valuing cultivated land protection: A contingent valuation and choice experiment study in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 214-219.
    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. Asinyaka Michael, 2019. "Willingness to Pay for Energy Efficient Refrigerating Appliances in Accra, Ghana: A Choice Experiment Approach," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 70(1), pages 15-39, April.
    14. Ivehammar, Pernilla, 2014. "Valuing environmental quality in actual travel time savings – The Haningeleden road project in Stockholm," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 349-356.
    15. Otrachshenko, Vladimir & Tyurina, Elena & Nagapetyan, Artur, 2022. "The economic value of the Glass Beach: Contingent valuation and life satisfaction approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    16. Tuan, Tran Huu & Navrud, Stale, 2009. "Applying the dissonance-minimising format to value cultural heritage in developing countries," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(3), pages 1-17.
    17. Thang Nam Do & Jeff Bennett, 2010. "Using Choice Experiments to Estimate Wetland Values in Viet Nam: Implementation and Practical Issues," Chapters, in: Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), Choice Experiments in Developing Countries, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Shokhrukh-Mirzo Jalilov, 2017. "Value of Clean Water Resources: Estimating the Water Quality Improvement in Metro Manila, Philippines," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-15, December.
    19. Pierre-Alexandre Mahieu & Henrik Andersson & Olivier Beaumais & Romain Crastes dit Sourd & Stephane Hess & François-Charles Wolf, 2017. "Stated preferences: a unique database composed of 1657recent published articles in journals relatedto agriculture, environment, or health," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 98(3), pages 201-220.
    20. Giacomo Pallante & Adam Drucker, 2014. "Niche Markets for Agrobiodiversity Conservation: Preference and Scale Heterogeneity Effects on Nepalese Consumers’ WTP for Finger Millet Products," SEEDS Working Papers 1414, SEEDS, Sustainability Environmental Economics and Dynamics Studies, revised May 2014.

    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:367829. 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.