IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i10p6193-d819469.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resident Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services in Hillside Forests

Author

Listed:
  • Wan-Jiun Chen

    (Department of Economics, Chinese Culture University, No. 55, HawKang Rd., Taipei 111, Taiwan)

  • Jihn-Fa Jan

    (Department of Land Economics, National Chengchi University, No. 64, Section 2, Zhinan Rd., Taipei 116, Taiwan)

  • Chih-Hsin Chung

    (Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, National Ilan University, No. 1, Section 1, Shennong Rd., Yilan City 260, Yilan County, Taiwan)

  • Shyue-Cherng Liaw

    (Department of Geography, National Taiwan Normal University, No. 162, Section 1, Heping E. Rd., Taipei 106, Taiwan)

Abstract

This study investigated the willingness of residents to pay for ecosystem services in a hillside forest in the Lanyang River Basin, which is among the most vulnerable watersheds in Taiwan. The economic value of provisioning, regulating, cultural, and supporting ecosystem services was evaluated. The Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) was applied for economic analysis of public welfare. The determinants of the economic values were identified. A total of 444 respondents completed the questionnaire. The results revealed that the four ecosystem services had high economic value, indicating that conserving hillside forests can ensure the welfare of nearby residents. The findings of this study can serve as reference for regional land planning and social and economic system development policies. In addition, this study addressed policy implementation from the perspective of ecological economics to contribute to an improved Anthropocene.

Suggested Citation

  • Wan-Jiun Chen & Jihn-Fa Jan & Chih-Hsin Chung & Shyue-Cherng Liaw, 2022. "Resident Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Services in Hillside Forests," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-17, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:10:p:6193-:d:819469
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/10/6193/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/10/6193/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    2. Qiuming Chen & Faming Huang & Anran Cai, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Trends, Sources and Ecological Risks of Heavy Metals in the Surface Sediments of Weitou Bay, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-15, September.
    3. Bateman, Ian J. & Langford, Ian H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Kerr, Geoffrey N., 2001. "Bound and path effects in double and triple bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 191-213, July.
    4. Yanbo Qu & Haining Zong & Desheng Su & Zongli Ping & Mei Guan, 2021. "Land Use Change and Its Impact on Landscape Ecological Risk in Typical Areas of the Yellow River Basin in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-26, October.
    5. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 1988. "A new paradigm for valuing non-market goods using referendum data: Maximum likelihood estimation by censored logistic regression," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 355-379, September.
    6. Weimer,David L., 2017. "Behavioral Economics for Cost-Benefit Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781316647660.
    7. Seung-Hoon Yoo & Hee-Jong Yang, 2001. "Application of Sample Selection Model to Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(2), pages 147-163, October.
    8. Heru Susilo & Yoshifumi Takahashi & Mitsuyasu Yabe, 2017. "The Opportunity Cost of Labor for Valuing Mangrove Restoration in Mahakam Delta, Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-13, November.
    9. Diane Dupont, 2003. "CVM Embedding Effects When There Are Active, Potentially Active and Passive Users of Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 319-341, July.
    10. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    11. Paúl Carrión-Mero & Néstor Montalván-Burbano & Fernando Morante-Carballo & Adolfo Quesada-Román & Boris Apolo-Masache, 2021. "Worldwide Research Trends in Landslide Science," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-24, September.
    12. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    13. Creutzig, Felix, 2020. "Limits to Liberalism: Considerations for the Anthropocene," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    14. Alberini Anna, 1995. "Optimal Designs for Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Surveys: Single-Bound, Double-Bound, and Bivariate Models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 287-306, May.
    15. Li Ma & Yueting Qin & Han Zhang & Jie Zheng & Yilei Hou & Yali Wen, 2021. "Improving Well-Being of Farmers Using Ecological Awareness around Protected Areas: Evidence from Qinling Region, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-22, September.
    16. Barbara J. Kanninen, 1993. "Optimal Experimental Design for Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 69(2), pages 138-146.
    17. Simon L. Lewis & Mark A. Maslin, 2015. "Defining the Anthropocene," Nature, Nature, vol. 519(7542), pages 171-180, March.
    18. Trudy Ann Cameron, 1991. "Interval Estimates of Non-Market Resource Values from Referendum Contingent Valuation Surveys," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(4), pages 413-421.
    19. Kevin J. Boyle & Hugh F. MacDonald & Hsiang-tai Cheng & Daniel W. McCollum, 1998. "Bid Design and Yea Saying in Single-Bounded, Dichotomous-Choice Questions," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 74(1), pages 49-64.
    20. Jie Zheng & Guodong Chen & Tiantian Zhang & Mingjing Ding & Binglin Liu & Hao Wang, 2021. "Exploring Spatial Variations in the Relationships between Landscape Functions and Human Activities in Suburban Rural Communities: A Case Study in Jiangning District, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-19, September.
    21. Hamzeh Ahmadi & Gholamabbas Fallah Ghalhari & Mohammad Baaghideh, 2019. "Correction to: Impacts of climate change on apple tree cultivation areas in Iran," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 105-105, March.
    22. Hamzeh Ahmadi & Gholamabbas Fallah Ghalhari & Mohammad Baaghideh, 2019. "Impacts of climate change on apple tree cultivation areas in Iran," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 91-103, March.
    23. Cameron, Trudy Ann & James, Michelle D, 1987. "Efficient Estimation Methods for "Closed-ended' Contingent Valuation Surveys," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 69(2), pages 269-276, May.
    24. Ian Langford & Ian Bateman & Hugh Langford, 1996. "A multilevel modelling approach to triple-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 7(3), pages 197-211, April.
    25. Riccardo Scarpa & Ian Bateman, 2000. "Efficiency Gains Afforded by Improved Bid Design versus Follow-up Valuation Questions in Discrete-Choice CV Studies," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(2), pages 299-311.
    26. Min Liu & Jianpeng Fan & Yating Wang & Chanjuan Hu, 2021. "Study on Ecosystem Service Value (ESV) Spatial Transfer in the Central Plains Urban Agglomeration in the Yellow River Basin, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-27, September.
    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. Wan-Jiun Chen & Jihn-Fa Jan & Chih-Hsin Chung & Shyue-Cherng Liaw, 2023. "Agriculture Risks and Opportunities in a Climate-Vulnerable Watershed in Northeastern Taiwan—The Opinions of Leisure Agriculture Operators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(20), pages 1-22, October.
    2. Li Li & Yonghui Li & Lan Yang & Ying Liang & Wenliang Zhao & Guanyu Chen, 2022. "How Does Topography Affect the Value of Ecosystem Services? An Empirical Study from the Qihe Watershed," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-16, September.
    3. Ruikun An & Feng Wang & Jiro Sakurai & Hideki Kitagawa, 2024. "Willing or Not? Rural Residents’ Willingness to Pay for Ecosystem Conservation in Economically Underdeveloped Regions: A Case Study in China’s Qinling National Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-17, March.

    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. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2008. "Do emotions matter? Coherent preferences under anchoring and emotional effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 700-711, July.
    2. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    3. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    4. Zapata, Samuel D. & Carpio, Carlos E., . "Distribution-Free Methods to Estimate Willingness to Pay Models Using Discrete Response Valuation Data," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 49(1).
    5. José L Oviedo & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2022. "Contingent valuation of landowner demand for forest amenities: application in Andalusia, Spain," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(3), pages 615-643.
    6. Talwar, Shagorika, 1995. "An evaluation of statistical efficiency and bias trade-off involved with the use of follow-up questioning in the contingent valuation of environmental amenities," ISU General Staff Papers 1995010108000018160, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. Jorge Araña & Carmelo León, 2007. "Repeated Dichotomous Choice Formats for Elicitation of Willingness to Pay: Simultaneous Estimation and Anchoring Effect," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 475-497, April.
    8. Ju-Hee Kim & Ga-Eun Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2018. "A Valuation of the Restoration of Hwangnyongsa Temple in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-7, January.
    9. Luchini, Stéphane & Watson, Verity, 2013. "Uncertainty and framing in a valuation task," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 204-214.
    10. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. W. George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa & Susan M. Chilton & T. McCallion, 2001. "Parametric and Non‐Parametric Estimates of Willingness to Pay for Forest Recreation in Northern Ireland: A Discrete Choice Contingent Valuation Study with Follow‐Ups," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 104-122, January.
    12. Armenak Markosyan & Jill J. McCluskey & Thomas I. Wahl, 2009. "Consumer Response to Information about a Functional Food Product: Apples Enriched with Antioxidants," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(3), pages 325-341, September.
    13. Tsigkou, Stavroula & Klonaris, Stathis, 2020. "Eliciting Farmers' Willingness to Pay for Innovative Fertilizer Against Soil Salinity: Comparison of Two Methods in a Field Survey," International Journal of Agricultural Management, Institute of Agricultural Management, vol. 9, December.
    14. Bateman, Ian J. & Langford, Ian H. & Jones, Andrew P. & Kerr, Geoffrey N., 2001. "Bound and path effects in double and triple bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 191-213, July.
    15. Huh, Sung-Yoon & Lee, Jongsu & Shin, Jungwoo, 2015. "The economic value of South Korea׳s renewable energy policies (RPS, RFS, and RHO): A contingent valuation study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 64-72.
    16. Hanemann, W. Michael & Kanninen, Barbara, 1996. "The Statistical Analysis Of Discrete-Response Cv Data," CUDARE Working Papers 25022, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    17. Luchini, Stéphane & Watson, Verity, 2013. "Uncertainty and framing in a valuation task," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 204-214.
    18. Pinuccia Calia & Elisabetta Strazzera, 2000. "Bias and efficiency of single versus double bound models for contingent valuation studies: a Monte Carlo analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(10), pages 1329-1336.
    19. Aravena, Claudia & Hutchinson, W. George & Longo, Alberto, 2012. "Environmental pricing of externalities from different sources of electricity generation in Chile," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 1214-1225.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:10:p:6193-:d:819469. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.