IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/agrerw/v52y2023i2p422-449_11.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing ecosystem services from restoring ancient irrigation systems: An application comparing labor vs. monetary payments for choice experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Dissanayake, Sahan T. M.
  • Vidanage, Shamen

Abstract

The use of stated preference methods with monetary payments in developing countries can be problematic as barter and paying with labor are common in rural areas. In response, a growing number of stated preference studies explore using monetary and nonmonetary payment options. We contribute to this literature by exploring the impact of monetary vs. labor payment options on values elicited from choice experiment studies conducted in rural developing country settings. We also contribute to the literature by comparing data-gathering methods, specifically individual surveys vs. group information sessions. Our application is the restoration of an ancient irrigation system known as cascading tank systems in Sri Lanka. We conduct a choice experiment to understand the willingness to pay/willingness to contribute of rural households to restore these irrigation systems. We find that in the individual survey setting, there are no significant differences between monetary and labor payments. We also find that there is no difference between the group and individual survey settings for the monetary payment treatment. For the labor payment treatment, the group setting results in a positive payment coefficient for the labor payment attribute. This highlights that labor payments should be used cautiously in group evaluation settings.

Suggested Citation

  • Dissanayake, Sahan T. M. & Vidanage, Shamen, 2023. "Valuing ecosystem services from restoring ancient irrigation systems: An application comparing labor vs. monetary payments for choice experiments," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 422-449, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:agrerw:v:52:y:2023:i:2:p:422-449_11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1068280523000242/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:agrerw:v:52:y:2023:i:2:p:422-449_11. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/age .

    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.