IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i11p6463-d823860.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research on Ecological Compensation of National Parks Based on Tourism Concession Mechanism

Author

Listed:
  • Didi Rao

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Jiaran Wang

    (Patent Examination Cooperation (Beijing) Center of the Patent Office, CNIPA, Beijing 100160, China)

  • Moucheng Liu

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China)

  • Nan Ma

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Zhidong Li

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Yunxiao Bai

    (Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, CAS, Beijing 100101, China
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

The Chinese government has already proposed to build a nature protected area system composed mainly of national parks and encourages the development of concession operations in national parks. The establishment of a long-term ecological compensation mechanism under the concession mode is of great significance to promoting the harmonious development of man and nature in national parks. This paper selects the Pilot Programs for Shennongjia National Park System (PPSNPS) as the research area and constructs a long-term ecological compensation mechanism under the concession model of tourism back-feeding communities in PPSNPS. Through the questionnaire survey (516 valid questionnaires in 2018), based on the Travel Cost Interval Analysis (TCIA) and Contingent Valuation Method (CVM), the landscape value of the study area is monetized. Combined with the investment cost of concession enterprises, we construct the quantitative distribution ratio of the ecological compensation standard and get the amount of ecological compensation. On this basis, a long-term ecological compensation scheme is constructed. This specific scheme content is as below: on the one hand, Shennongjia National Park Administration (SNPA) is the beneficiary of ecological compensation, and the Shennong Tourism Investment Group Co, Ltd. (STIC) is the provider of ecological compensation; on the other hand, the travel tickets income is the only source of ecological compensation funds (back-feeding funds). Specifically, the landscape value of PPSNPS in 2018 was 604,230.3 × 10 4 yuan, the input cost of STIC was 140,696 × 10 4 yuan, the income after deducting tax from tourism tickets was 15,200 × 10 4 yuan, and the distribution ratio of back-feeding funds is 1:4.29 with the back-feeding funds provided to SNPA from STIC of 12,326.65 × 10 4 yuan. Through this paper, we know that landscape value monetization can provide ideas for quantitative accounting of the ecological compensation standard for national park tourism concession. In the future, this subject needs more theoretical and practical research on multiple long-term ecological compensation mechanisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Didi Rao & Jiaran Wang & Moucheng Liu & Nan Ma & Zhidong Li & Yunxiao Bai, 2022. "Research on Ecological Compensation of National Parks Based on Tourism Concession Mechanism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-12, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:11:p:6463-:d:823860
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6463/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/11/6463/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meng-Tsung Lee & Jen-Ming Liu & Elaine Q. Borazon, 2020. "Evaluating the Effect of Perceived Value of Ecosystem Services on Tourists’ Behavioral Intentions for Aogu Coastal Wetland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Moucheng Liu & Qingwen Min & Lun Yang, 2018. "Rice Pricing during Organic Conversion of the Honghe Hani Rice Terrace System in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, January.
    3. Gamini Herath & John Kennedy, 2004. "Estimating the Economic Value of Mount Buffalo National Park with the Travel Cost and Contingent Valuation Models," Tourism Economics, , vol. 10(1), pages 63-78, March.
    4. Nick Hanley & Gary Koop & Begoña Álvarez‐Farizo & Robert E. Wright & Ceara Nevin, 2001. "Go climb a mountain: an application of recreation demand modelling to rock climbing in Scotland," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(1), pages 36-52, January.
    5. Kosoy, Nicolas & Martinez-Tuna, Miguel & Muradian, Roldan & Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2007. "Payments for environmental services in watersheds: Insights from a comparative study of three cases in Central America," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 446-455, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Carol Mansfield & Daniel J. Phaneuf & F. Reed Johnson & Jui-Chen Yang & Robert Beach, 2008. "Preferences for Public Lands Management under Competing Uses: The Case of Yellowstone National Park," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 84(2), pages 282-305.
    2. Mara Thiene & Riccardo Scarpa, 2008. "Hiking in the Alps: Exploring Substitution Patterns of Hiking Destinations," Tourism Economics, , vol. 14(2), pages 263-282, June.
    3. Hausknost, Daniel & Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron Jit, 2017. "The political dimensions of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES): Cascade or stairway?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 109-118.
    4. Stephen Hynes & Nick Hanley & Cathal O’Donoghue, 2006. "Using Continuous and Finite Mixture Models to Account for Preference Heterogeneity in a group of Outdoor Recreationalists," Working Papers 0602, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    5. Stephen Hynes & Nick Hanley & Eoghan Garvey, 2007. "Up the Proverbial Creek without a Paddle: Accounting for Variable Participant Skill Levels in Recreational Demand Modelling," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 36(4), pages 413-426, April.
    6. Jan Hanousek & Randall K. Filer, 2001. "Consumers' Opinion of Inflation Bias Due to Quality Improvements in Transition in the Czech Republic," Development and Comp Systems 0110009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. J. Shonkwiler & Nick Hanley, 2003. "A New Approach to Random Utility Modeling using the Dirichlet Multinomial Distribution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(3), pages 401-416, November.
    8. Lienhoop, Nele & Ansmann, Till, 2011. "Valuing water level changes in reservoirs using two stated preference approaches: An exploration of validity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(7), pages 1250-1258, May.
    9. Hanousek, Jan & Filer, Randall K, 2004. "Consumers' Opinion of Inflation Bias Due to Quality Improvements," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(1), pages 235-254, October.
    10. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    11. Locatelli, Bruno & Rojas, Varinia & Salinas, Zenia, 2008. "Impacts of payments for environmental services on local development in northern Costa Rica: A fuzzy multi-criteria analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(5), pages 275-285, April.
    12. Zhang, Jing & Brown, Colin & Qiao, Guanghua & Zhang, Bao, 2019. "Effect of Eco-compensation Schemes on Household Income Structures and Herder Satisfaction: Lessons From the Grassland Ecosystem Subsidy and Award Scheme in Inner Mongolia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 46-53.
    13. Bennett, Drew E. & Gosnell, Hannah & Lurie, Susan & Duncan, Sally, 2014. "Utility engagement with payments for watershed services in the United States," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 56-64.
    14. Ina, Porras & Bruce, Alyward & Jeff, Dengel, 2013. "Monitoring payments for watershed services schemes in developing countries," MPRA Paper 47185, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Kosoy, Nicolás & Corbera, Esteve, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1228-1236, April.
    16. Bösch, Matthias & Elsasser, Peter & Wunder, Sven, 2019. "Why do payments for watershed services emerge? A cross-country analysis of adoption contexts," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 111-119.
    17. Jones, Kelly W. & Muñoz Brenes, Carlos L. & Shinbrot, Xoco A. & López-Báez, Walter & Rivera-Castañeda, Andrómeda, 2018. "The influence of cash and technical assistance on household-level outcomes in payments for hydrological services programs in Chiapas, Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 208-218.
    18. Min Fan & Li Chen & Qing Wang, 2019. "Assessing the high impacts of land use change: spatial characteristics of land uses and ecological compensation based on payment for ecosystem services model in a mountainous area, China," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 24(8), pages 1431-1460, December.
    19. Legrand, Thomas & Froger, Géraldine & Le Coq, Jean-François, 2013. "Institutional performance of Payments for Environmental Services: An analysis of the Costa Rican Program," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 115-123.
    20. W. Bowman Cutter & Linwood Pendleton & J. R. DeShazo, 2007. "Activities in Models of Recreational Demand," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 83(3), pages 370-381.

    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:14:y:2022:i:11:p:6463-:d:823860. 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.