IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i9p5190-d549648.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Local Communities’ Willingness to Accept Compensation for Sustainable Ecosystem Management in Wadi Araba, South of Jordan

Author

Listed:
  • Amani Al-Assaf

    (Departments of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, School of Agriculture, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan)

  • Abeer Albalawneh

    (Environment and Climate Change Research Directorate, National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), Al-Balqah 19381, Jordan)

  • Mohammad Majdalawi

    (Departments of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, School of Agriculture, The University of Jordan, Amman 11942, Jordan)

  • Lana Abu Nowar

    (Economic and Social Studies Research Directorate, National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), Al-Balqah 19381, Jordan)

  • Rabab Kabariti

    (Economic and Social Studies Research Directorate, National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), Al-Balqah 19381, Jordan)

  • Amgad Hjazin

    (Environment and Climate Change Research Directorate, National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), Al-Balqah 19381, Jordan)

  • Safaa Aljaafreh

    (Environment and Climate Change Research Directorate, National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), Al-Balqah 19381, Jordan)

  • Wafa’a Abu Hammour

    (Environment and Climate Change Research Directorate, National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), Al-Balqah 19381, Jordan)

  • Mai Diab

    (Environment and Climate Change Research Directorate, National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), Al-Balqah 19381, Jordan)

  • Nizar Haddad

    (Bee Research Directorate, National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), Al-Balqah 19381, Jordan)

Abstract

In developing countries, like Jordan, climate change and population growth have prompted land-use and land-cover changes that have profoundly affected ESs, especially by poor people living in fragile ecosystems. This study aimed to analyze the attitudes towards ES among households living in Wadi Araba, a study area located in a dry ecosystem with limited natural resources, as well as to determine the value of ES and the main socio-economic and perceptions factors influencing households’ willingness to accept (WTA) compensation according to the families’ priorities. The face-to-face method was used to interview a random sample of 296 residents from the study sites, using a structured questionnaire to capture the accepted level of compensation for conservation by the local community. Additionally, multiple linear regression analysis was applied to determine the main socio-economic factors affecting WTA. More than 91% of the respondents were willing to accept compensation for three different conservation plans that reflect the resident’s priority. For the three priorities, the weighted average of the compensation levels was JOD 436, 339, 261 per household per year, respectively, and the aggregate values were about JOD (1,196,977.8, 930,601.2, and 719,411.8, respectively) (JOD 1 = USD 1.41). The residents’ gender, age, and income were among the most important factors that affect the compensation level. The main policy implications are that the government and non-governmental organizations should strengthen advocacy and education of arid ecological and natural resources protection, besides including the local community in any decisions in establishing differentiated compensation strategies and regulations. Eventually, the conservation and restoration activities will become self-initiated.

Suggested Citation

  • Amani Al-Assaf & Abeer Albalawneh & Mohammad Majdalawi & Lana Abu Nowar & Rabab Kabariti & Amgad Hjazin & Safaa Aljaafreh & Wafa’a Abu Hammour & Mai Diab & Nizar Haddad, 2021. "Local Communities’ Willingness to Accept Compensation for Sustainable Ecosystem Management in Wadi Araba, South of Jordan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-15, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5190-:d:549648
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5190/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/9/5190/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Puyang Li & Datu Buyung Agusdinata & Putu Hery Suditha & Yujia Zhang, 2021. "Ecosystem services and trade-offs: implications for land dynamics and sustainable livelihoods in Northern Lombok, Indonesia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 4321-4341, March.
    2. Dambala Gelo & Steven F. Koch, 2011. "Contingent Valuation of Community Forestry Programs in Ethiopia: Observing Preference Anomalies in Double-Bounded CVM," Working Papers 201124, University of Pretoria, Department of Economics.
    3. Jawad Taleb Al-Bakri & Mohammad Salahat & Ayman Suleiman & Marwan Suifan & Mohammad R. Hamdan & Saeb Khresat & Tarek Kandakji, 2013. "Impact of Climate and Land Use Changes on Water and Food Security in Jordan: Implications for Transcending “The Tragedy of the Commons”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-25, February.
    4. Hélène Rey-Valette & Synthia Mathe & Jean-Michel Salles, 2017. "An assessment method of ecosystem services based on stakeholders perceptions: the Rapid Ecosystem Services Participatory Appraisal (RESPA)," Post-Print hal-01579324, HAL.
    5. Fahad, Shah & Jing, Wang, 2018. "Evaluation of Pakistani farmers’ willingness to pay for crop insurance using contingent valuation method: The case of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 570-577.
    6. Zhongmin, Xu & Guodong, Cheng & Zhiqiang, Zhang & Zhiyong, Su & Loomis, John, 2003. "Applying contingent valuation in China to measure the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Ejina region," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 345-358, March.
    7. Kang, Moon Jeong & Siry, Jacek P. & Colson, Gregory & Ferreira, Susana, 2019. "Do forest property characteristics reveal landowners' willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services contracts in southeast Georgia, U.S.?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 144-152.
    8. Scheiter, Simon & Schulte, Judith & Pfeiffer, Mirjam & Martens, Carola & Erasmus, Barend F.N. & Twine, Wayne C., 2019. "How Does Climate Change Influence the Economic Value of Ecosystem Services in Savanna Rangelands?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 342-356.
    9. Hao Li & Xiaohui Yang & Xiao Zhang & Yuyan Liu & Kebin Zhang, 2018. "Estimation of Rural Households’ Willingness to Accept Two PES Programs and Their Service Valuation in the Miyun Reservoir Catchment, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    10. Ashebir Woldeyohannes & Marc Cotter & Wubneshe Dessalegn Biru & Girma Kelboro, 2020. "Assessing Changes in Ecosystem Service Values over 1985–2050 in Response to Land Use and Land Cover Dynamics in Abaya-Chamo Basin, Southern Ethiopia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-22, January.
    11. Gelo, Dambala & Koch, Steven F., 2015. "Contingent valuation of community forestry programs in Ethiopia: Controlling for preference anomalies in double-bounded CVM," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 79-89.
    12. Christie, Mike & Fazey, Ioan & Cooper, Rob & Hyde, Tony & Kenter, Jasper O., 2012. "An evaluation of monetary and non-monetary techniques for assessing the importance of biodiversity and ecosystem services to people in countries with developing economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 67-78.
    13. Loomis, John & Kent, Paula & Strange, Liz & Fausch, Kurt & Covich, Alan, 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 103-117, April.
    14. Haile, Kaleab K. & Tirivayi, Nyasha & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2019. "Farmers’ willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services on agricultural land: The case of climate-smart agroforestry in Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    15. García, Jorge H. & Cherry, Todd L. & Kallbekken, Steffen & Torvanger, Asbjørn, 2016. "Willingness to accept local wind energy development: Does the compensation mechanism matter?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 165-173.
    16. Lewis, David J. & Provencher, Bill & Beardmore, Ben, 2015. "Using an intervention framework to value salient ecosystem services in a stated preference experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 141-151.
    17. S. Fankhauser & R. Tol, 1997. "The social costs of climate change: The IPCC second assessment report and beyond," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 1(4), pages 385-403, December.
    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. Li Ma & Danbo Pang & Jie Gao & Wenbin Wang & Ruoxiu Sun, 2023. "Ecological Asset Assessment and Ecological Compensation Standards for Desert Nature Reserves: Evidence from Three Different Climate Zones in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-17, July.

    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. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Nadia Palmieri & Alessandro Suardi & Luigi Pari, 2020. "Italian Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Eucalyptus Firewood," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-14, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Zhaoyi Shang & Yue Che & Kai Yang & Yu Jiang, 2012. "Assessing Local Communities’ Willingness to Pay for River Network Protection: A Contingent Valuation Study of Shanghai, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Ik-Chang Choi & Hyun No Kim & Hio-Jung Shin & John Tenhunen & Trung Thanh Nguyen, 2017. "Economic Valuation of the Aquatic Biodiversity Conservation in South Korea: Correcting for the Endogeneity Bias in Contingent Valuation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-20, June.
    6. Rongrong Zheng & Jiasui Zhan & Luxing Liu & Yanli Ma & Zishuai Wang & Lianhui Xie & Dunchun He, 2019. "Factors and Minimal Subsidy Associated with Tea Farmers’ Willingness to Adopt Ecological Pest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-12, November.
    7. Nabila Arfaoui & Amandine Gnonlonfin, 2019. "The economic value of NBS restoration measures and their benefits in a river basin context: A meta-analysis regression," Policy Papers 2019.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    8. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    9. Sahan T. M. Dissanayake & Amy W. Ando, 2014. "Valuing Grassland Restoration: Proximity to Substitutes and Trade-offs among Conservation Attributes," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(2), pages 237-259.
    10. Ojeda, Monica Ilija & Mayer, Alex S. & Solomon, Barry D., 2008. "Economic valuation of environmental services sustained by water flows in the Yaqui River Delta," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 155-166, March.
    11. Rodgers Makwinja & Ishmael Bobby Mphangwe Kosamu & Chikumbusko Chiziwa Kaonga, 2019. "Determinants and Values of Willingness to Pay for Water Quality Improvement: Insights from Chia Lagoon, Malawi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-26, August.
    12. Sheila M. Olmstead, 2010. "The Economics of Managing Scarce Water Resources," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(2), pages 179-198, Summer.
    13. Tan, Ruipeng & Lin, Boqiang, 2020. "Are people willing to support the construction of charging facilities in China?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    14. Awad, Ibrahim M., 2012. "Using econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay to investigate economic efficiency and equity of domestic water services in the West Bank," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 485-494.
    15. Hao Li & Xiaohui Yang & Xiao Zhang & Yuyan Liu & Kebin Zhang, 2018. "Estimation of Rural Households’ Willingness to Accept Two PES Programs and Their Service Valuation in the Miyun Reservoir Catchment, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    16. Holmes, Thomas P. & Bergstrom, John C. & Huszar, Eric & Kask, Susan B. & Orr, Fritz III, 2004. "Contingent valuation, net marginal benefits, and the scale of riparian ecosystem restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 19-30, May.
    17. Hao Hong Do & Oliver Frör, 2022. "River Ecosystem Resilience: Applying the Contingent Valuation Method in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-19, September.
    18. Lim, Seul-Ye & Kim, Hyo-Jin & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2018. "Household willingness to pay for expanding fuel cell power generation in Korea: A view from CO2 emissions reduction," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P1), pages 242-249.
    19. Imran Khan & Hongdou Lei & Gaffar Ali & Shahid Ali & Minjuan Zhao, 2019. "Public Attitudes, Preferences and Willingness to Pay for River Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-17, October.
    20. Halkos, George, 2013. "The relationship between people’s attitude and willingness to pay for river conservation," MPRA Paper 50560, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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:13:y:2021:i:9:p:5190-:d:549648. 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.