IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Low-income fishermen's willingness-to-pay for fisheries and watershed management: An application of choice experiment to Lake Tana, Ethiopia

  • Agimass, Fitalew
  • Mekonnen, Alemu
Registered author(s):

    In this paper, choice experiment was applied for valuation of Lake Tana's fishery and watershed. Two attributes — fishing control and lake side plantation — were identified as relevant attributes for the choice experiment. A monetary attribute — payment for fishing permit was also included. Multinomial and random parameter logit models were used for estimation. All the attributes included were significant factors in affecting the probability of choosing an alternative scenario. The results suggest that fishermen were more concerned about fishing control as reflected by the higher value they give to fishing control than lake side plantation. Household income, years of education, and family size were found to be significant. The economic welfare measures we calculated for two scenarios show that fishermen were willing to pay 57 birr (US$5.3)) per month for a moderate improvement scenario and 93 birr (US$8.6) per month for an aggressive scenario for the two attributes.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800911003582
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Ecological Economics.

    Volume (Year): 71 (2011)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 162-170

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:71:y:2011:i:c:p:162-170
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.08.025
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Ran, Shenghong, 2006. "Comparison of contingent valuation and choice experiment in solid waste management programs in Macao," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 430-441, May.
    2. Robert N. Stavins, 2010. "The Problem of the Commons: Still Unsettled After 100 Years," NBER Working Papers 16403, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    4. Dale Whittington, 1996. "Administering Contingent Valuation Surveys in Developing Countries," EEPSEA Special and Technical Paper sp199601t1, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Jan 1996.
    5. Wiktor Adamowicz & Peter Boxall & Michael Williams & Jordan Louviere, 1998. "Stated Preference Approaches for Measuring Passive Use Values: Choice Experiments and Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 80(1), pages 64-75.
    6. Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Louviere, J. & Willians, M., 1992. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Staff Paper Series 232531, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    7. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    8. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Liljenstolpe, Carolina, 2003. "Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 95-103, November.
    9. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62, pages 124.
    10. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132.
    11. John List & Paramita Sinha & Michael Taylor, 2006. "Using choice experiments to value non-market goods and services: Evidence from field experiments," Natural Field Experiments 00278, The Field Experiments Website.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:71:y:2011:i:c:p:162-170. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.