IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i4p1100-d207412.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Estimating the Preservation Value of World Heritage Site Using Contingent Valuation Method: The Case of the Li River, China

Author

Listed:
  • Meilan Jin

    (School of International Business, Guilin Tourism University, Guilin 541006, China)

  • Yuxian Juan

    (School of Tourism Management, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 519000, China)

  • Youngjoon Choi

    (School of Hotel and Tourism Management, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China)

  • Choong-Ki Lee

    (College of Hotel and Tourism Management, Kyung Hee University; Seoul 02447, Korea)

Abstract

World Heritage Sites (WHSs) play an important role in sustaining community identity and enhancing local economic development through tourism. Although the Li River was designated as a WHS in 2014, severe damage to its ecosystem and environmental problems have been reported in recent years. Thus, the purpose of this study is to estimate residents’ willingness to pay (WTP) for the preservation of the Li River using a contingent valuation method. Moreover, a two-stage approach using hypothetical and real setting scenarios was utilized to reduce a hypothetical bias and overvaluation. Logit models were used to estimate the preservation value and compare factors influencing WTP between the hypothetical and real scenarios. The results of this study support the usefulness of a two-stage approach to avoid hypothetical bias and estimate a realistic preservation value. In the real setting scenario, WTP was 144.66–163.90 Yuan (USD 20.83–23.60) per capita per year, and the aggregate value was 721–818 million Yuan (USD 104–118 million) depending on mean WTP and truncated WTP. The study findings provide useful implication to support government’s fund and sustainable efforts to preserve the Li River.

Suggested Citation

  • Meilan Jin & Yuxian Juan & Youngjoon Choi & Choong-Ki Lee, 2019. "Estimating the Preservation Value of World Heritage Site Using Contingent Valuation Method: The Case of the Li River, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1100-:d:207412
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1100/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/4/1100/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Poria, Yaniv & Reichel, Arie & Cohen, Raviv, 2013. "Tourists perceptions of World Heritage Site and its designation," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 272-274.
    2. Chiu, Yen-Ting Helena & Lee, Wan-I. & Chen, Tsung-Hsiung, 2014. "Environmentally responsible behavior in ecotourism: Antecedents and implications," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 321-329.
    3. John W. Duffield & David A. Patterson, 1991. "Inference and Optimal Design for a Welfare Measure in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(2), pages 225-239.
    4. Lee, Choong-Ki & W. Mjelde, James, 2007. "Valuation of ecotourism resources using a contingent valuation method: The case of the Korean DMZ," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 511-520, August.
    5. Christine Seller & John R. Stoll & Jean-Paul Chavas, 1985. "Validation of Empirical Measures of Welfare Change: A Comparison of Nonmarket Techniques," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(2), pages 156-175.
    6. 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.
    7. Suntikul, Wantanee & Jachna, Timothy, 2013. "Contestation and negotiation of heritage conservation in Luang Prabang, Laos," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 57-68.
    8. Bishop, Richard C. & Heberlein, Thomas A., 1979. "Measuring Values Of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," 1979 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, Pullman, Washington 277818, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    9. J. R. Hicks, 1943. "The Four Consumer's Surpluses," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 11(1), pages 31-41.
    10. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    11. Choong-Ki Lee & Tae-Kyun Kim & James W. Mjelde, 2016. "Comparison of preservation values between Internet and interview survey modes: the case of Dokdo, South Korea," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 22-43, January.
    12. Youngjoon Choi & Won Seok Lee & Choong-Ki Lee & John Dattilo, 2015. "Valuation of Mudflats in Nature-Based Tourism: Inclusion of Perceived Value of Festival Experiences," Tourism Economics, , vol. 21(4), pages 833-851, August.
    13. Yi-Min Li, 2014. "Effects of Story Marketing and Travel Involvement on Tourist Behavioral Intention in the Tourism Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-11, December.
    14. Kim, Ju-Yeon & Mjelde, James W. & Kim, Tae-Kyun & Lee, Choong-Ki & Ahn, Kyung-Mo, 2012. "Comparing willingness-to-pay between residents and non-residents when correcting hypothetical bias: Case of endangered spotted seal in South Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 123-131.
    15. Richard C. Bishop & Thomas A. Heberlein, 1979. "Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 61(5), pages 926-930.
    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. Yae‐Na Park & Choong‐Ki Lee & James W. Mjelde & Yu‐Jin Kwon, 2022. "Policy implications of willingness to pay for sustainable development of a world agricultural heritage site: The role of stakeholders' sustainable intelligence, support, and behavioral intention," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(4), pages 636-646, August.
    2. Songhong Chen & Yuanshu Tian & Siyun Pei, 2024. "Technological Use from the Perspective of Cultural Heritage Environment: Augmented Reality Technology and Formation Mechanism of Heritage-Responsibility Behaviors of Tourists," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-23, September.
    3. Joana Gonçalves & Ricardo Mateus & José Dinis Silvestre & Ana Pereira Roders, 2020. "Going beyond Good Intentions for the Sustainable Conservation of Built Heritage: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-28, November.
    4. Nigora Baymuminova & Guljakhon Shermukhammedova & Jeong-Gil Choi, 2023. "Estimating the Economic Value of Ichan Kala Using the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, February.
    5. Zizhen Hong & Wentao Cao & Ying Chen & Sijia Zhu & Wenjun Zheng, 2024. "Identifying Rural Landscape Heritage Character Types and Areas: A Case Study of the Li River Basin in Guilin, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(4), pages 1-24, February.
    6. Manhong Shen & Di Mao & Huiming Xie & Chuanzhong Li, 2019. "The Social Costs of Marine Litter along the East China Sea: Evidence from Ten Coastal Scenic Spots of Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-15, March.
    7. Chang Liu & Mingshui Lin & Xinhua Qi & Wenjuan Zheng, 2021. "Estimating the Preservation Value of Wuyishan National Park from the Perspective of Bounded Rational Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-15, June.
    8. Moritz A. Drupp & Zachary M. Turk & Ben Groom & Jonas Heckenhahn, 2024. "Limited Substitutability, Relative Price Changes and the Uplifting of Public Natural Capital Values," CESifo Working Paper Series 11156, CESifo.
    9. Fatemeh Fadia Maghsood & Hamidreza Moradi & Ronny Berndtsson & Mostafa Panahi & Alireza Daneshi & Hossein Hashemi & Ali Reza Massah Bavani, 2019. "Social Acceptability of Flood Management Strategies under Climate Change Using Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.
    10. Chang-Young Jeon & Hee-Won Yang, 2021. "The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Tourists’ WTP: Using the Contingent Valuation Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-14, August.
    11. Changsok Yoo & Yelim Kim & Jee Hoon Sohn, 2021. "Evaluating the Social Cost of Conflict between New Media and Society: The Case of Gaming Disorder in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-13, July.
    12. Aikaterini Koumoutsea & Paraskevi Boufounou & George Mergos, 2023. "Evaluating the Creative Economy Applying the Contingent Valuation Method: A Case Study on the Greek Cultural Heritage Festival," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-19, November.

    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. Chang Liu & Mingshui Lin & Xinhua Qi & Wenjuan Zheng, 2021. "Estimating the Preservation Value of Wuyishan National Park from the Perspective of Bounded Rational Decision Making," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-15, June.
    2. Sunwoo Park & Namho Chung & Won Seok Lee, 2020. "Preserving the Culture of Jeju Haenyeo (Women Divers) as a Sustainable Tourism Resource," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-11, December.
    3. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Liu, Xuemin, 2008. "Valuing black-faced spoonbill conservation in Macao: A policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 328-335, December.
    4. Lee, Choong-Ki & W. Mjelde, James, 2007. "Valuation of ecotourism resources using a contingent valuation method: The case of the Korean DMZ," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 511-520, August.
    5. Amirnejad, Hamid & Khalilian, Sadegh & Assareh, Mohammad H. & Ahmadian, Majid, 2006. "Estimating the existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 665-675, July.
    6. Guo, Xiurui & Liu, Haifeng & Mao, Xianqiang & Jin, Jianjun & Chen, Dongsheng & Cheng, Shuiyuan, 2014. "Willingness to pay for renewable electricity: A contingent valuation study in Beijing, China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 340-347.
    7. Choong-Ki Lee & James W. Mjelde & Tae-Kyun Kim, 2013. "Estimating the Effects of Different Admission Fees on Revenues for a Mega-Event Using a Contingent Valuation Method," Tourism Economics, , vol. 19(1), pages 147-159, February.
    8. Won Seok Lee, 2020. "A Study on the Value of Preserving a Parasitic Volcanic Sieve as a Tourism Good for Sustainable Management: Using the Contingent Valuation Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-12, April.
    9. Lee, Dong-Kyu, 2024. "Analysis of the potential value of cultural ecosystem services: A case study of Busan City, Republic of Korea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    10. Nigora Baymuminova & Guljakhon Shermukhammedova & Jeong-Gil Choi, 2023. "Estimating the Economic Value of Ichan Kala Using the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, February.
    11. Timothy C. Haab & Kenneth E. McConnell, "undated". "Intuitive Bounds on Willingness to Pay," Working Papers 9609, East Carolina University, Department of Economics.
    12. Chang-Young Jeon & Hee-Won Yang, 2021. "The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Tourists’ WTP: Using the Contingent Valuation Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-14, August.
    13. Yae‐Na Park & Choong‐Ki Lee & James W. Mjelde & Yu‐Jin Kwon, 2022. "Policy implications of willingness to pay for sustainable development of a world agricultural heritage site: The role of stakeholders' sustainable intelligence, support, and behavioral intention," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(4), pages 636-646, August.
    14. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    15. Pere Riera & Raúl Brey & Guillermo Gándara, 2008. "Bid design for non-parametric contingent valuation with a single bounded dichotomous choice format," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 186(3), pages 43-60, October.
    16. Smith, V. Kerry & Mansfield, Carol, 1998. "Buying Time: Real and Hypothetical Offers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 209-224, November.
    17. Lucinio Júdez & de Rosario Andrés & Carlos Pérez Hugalde & Elvira Urzainqui & Miguel Ibáñez, 1998. "Évaluation contingente de l’usage récréatif d’une réserve naturelle humide," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 48, pages 37-60.
    18. Lucinio Júdez & Rosario de Andrés & Carlos Pérez Hugalde & Elvira Urzainqui & Miguel Ibáñez, 1998. "Évaluation contingente de l’usage récréatif d’une réserve naturelle humide," Post-Print hal-01200908, HAL.
    19. Ndebele, Tom & Forgie, Vicky, 2017. "Estimating the economic benefits of a wetland restoration programme in New Zealand: A contingent valuation approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 75-89.
    20. García De La Fuente, L. & Colina Vuelta, A., 2004. "Métodos directos e indirectos en la valoración económica de bienes ambientales, aplicación al valor de uso recreativo del Parque Natural de Somiedo," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 22, pages 1-26, Diciembre.

    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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:4:p:1100-:d:207412. 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.