IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i13p10001-d1178204.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pastoral Differentiations’ Effects on Willingness to Accept Valuation for Grassland Eco-Subsidy—Empirical Study of 410 Herder Households in Grass–Livestock Balance Sub-Policy Zones in Inner Mongolia, China

Author

Listed:
  • Jiayu Dong

    (College of Economics and Management, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010018, China)

  • Zimeng Ren

    (College of Economics and Management, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin 150030, China)

  • Xinling Zhang

    (College of Economics and Management, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Hohhot 010018, China)

  • Xiaoling Liu

    (Independent Researcher, Bixby, OK 74008, USA)

Abstract

China’s Grassland Eco-Subsidy Program has been implemented since 2011 to protect and sustain grassland resources and improve the economic situation of herders. In this case study, we aimed to evaluate the policy from the perspective of pastoral differentiations and their willingness to accept (WTA) the eco-subsidy. Using the contingent valuation method (CVM), we interviewed 410 herder households in the grass–livestock balance sub-policy zones across Inner Mongolia, and examined how their horizontal and vertical differentiation affected their WTA and compensation expectations in a sorted Logistic model and a Tobit model, respectively. Our findings suggest that horizontal differentiation of herders (variations of income sources and employment) promoted the WTA for the eco-subsidy and inhibited the increase in compensation expectations. A large vertical differentiation extent (income disparity) lowered the WTA but raised expectations for payment levels. Additionally, factors such as operating pasture area, precipitation, and supervision intensity had significant impacts. Grazing income remained the primary income source for most herder households, reflecting the characteristics of “the rational economic man”. Our results suggest a need for policy improvements to guide herders towards becoming “rational ecological men”. By considering this differentiation, policy makers can better tailor the program to meet the needs and expectations of diverse herder households.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiayu Dong & Zimeng Ren & Xinling Zhang & Xiaoling Liu, 2023. "Pastoral Differentiations’ Effects on Willingness to Accept Valuation for Grassland Eco-Subsidy—Empirical Study of 410 Herder Households in Grass–Livestock Balance Sub-Policy Zones in Inner Mongolia, ," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-20, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:13:p:10001-:d:1178204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/13/10001/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/13/10001/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Byrne, Anne T. & Hadrich, Joleen C. & Robinson, Brian E. & Han, Guodong, 2020. "A factor-income approach to estimating grassland protection subsidy payments to livestock herders in Inner Mongolia, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    2. Yan Yu & Ya Wu & Pan Wang & Yili Zhang & Liang Emlyn Yang & Xian Cheng & Jianzhong Yan, 2021. "Grassland Subsidies Increase the Number of Livestock on the Tibetan Plateau: Why Does the “Payment for Ecosystem Services” Policy Have the Opposite Outcome?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Lingling Hou & Fang Xia & Qihui Chen & Jikun Huang & Yong He & Nathan Rose & Scott Rozelle, 2021. "Grassland ecological compensation policy in China improves grassland quality and increases herders’ income," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Brown, Thomas C. & Gregory, Robin, 1999. "Why the WTA-WTP disparity matters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 323-335, March.
    5. 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.
    6. Yin, Yantin & Hou, Yulu & Langford, Colin & Bai, Haihua & Hou, Xianyang, 2019. "Herder stocking rate and household income under the Grassland Ecological Protection Award Policy in northern China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 120-129.
    7. Zhidong Li & Boru Su & Moucheng Liu, 2022. "Research Progress on the Theory and Practice of Grassland Eco-Compensation in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    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. Pan, Ying & Wu, Junxi & Zhang, Yanjie & Zhang, Xianzhou & Yu, Chengqun, 2021. "Simultaneous enhancement of ecosystem services and poverty reduction through adjustments to subsidy policies relating to grassland use in Tibet, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    2. Yiran Zhang & Wuriliga & Yong Ding & Fang Li & Yujuan Zhang & Min Su & Shuhui Li & Li Liu, 2022. "Effectiveness of Grassland Protection and Pastoral Area Development under the Grassland Ecological Conservation Subsidy and Reward Policy," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-15, August.
    3. Cuizhen Xia & Lihua Zhou & Ya Wang & Xiaodong Pei, 2022. "Tibetan Herders’ Life Satisfaction and Determinants under the Pastureland Rehabilitation Program: A Case Study of Maduo County, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Yan Yu & Ya Wu & Pan Wang & Yili Zhang & Liang Emlyn Yang & Xian Cheng & Jianzhong Yan, 2021. "Grassland Subsidies Increase the Number of Livestock on the Tibetan Plateau: Why Does the “Payment for Ecosystem Services” Policy Have the Opposite Outcome?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, May.
    5. Zhidong Li & Boru Su & Moucheng Liu, 2022. "Research Progress on the Theory and Practice of Grassland Eco-Compensation in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Feng, Xiaolong & Qiu, Huanguang & Liu, Mingyue & Tang, Jianjun, 2024. "Innovation of grassland ecological governance systems: Synergy between government regulation and grassroots governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    7. Mengmeng Liu & Limin Bai & Hassan Saif Khan & Hua Li, 2023. "The Influence of the Grassland Ecological Compensation Policy on Regional Herdsmen’s Income and Its Gap: Evidence from Six Pastoralist Provinces in China," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, March.
    8. Li Yang & Guanghua Qiao, 2023. "Grassland Ecological Compensation, Income Level and Policy Satisfaction: An Empirical Analysis Based on a Survey of Herders in Ecological Protection Redline Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-17, January.
    9. Huilong Lin & Yuting Zhao & Ghulam Mujtaba Kalhoro, 2022. "Ecological Response of the Subsidy and Incentive System for Grassland Conservation in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-23, February.
    10. Byrne, Anne T. & Hadrich, Joleen C. & Robinson, Brian E. & Han, Guodong, 2020. "A factor-income approach to estimating grassland protection subsidy payments to livestock herders in Inner Mongolia, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    11. Zeng Tang & Shiqi Guan & Menglin Zhao & Lijia Wang & Ying Liu & Yubing Fan, 2022. "Grassland Transfer and Its Income Effect: Evidence from Pastoral Areas of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-20, November.
    12. Shi, Yuxing & Cai, Yu & Zhao, Minjuan, 2021. "Social interaction effect of rotational grazing and its policy implications for sustainable use of grassland: Evidence from pastoral areas in Inner Mongolia and Gansu, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    13. Mingyue Li & Pujie Zhao & Lianbei Wu & Kai Chen, 2021. "Effects of Value Perception, Environmental Regulation and Their Interaction on the Improvement of Herdsmen’s Grassland Ecological Policy Satisfaction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Behrendt, Karl & Brown, Colin & Qiao, Guanghua & Zhang, Bao, 2022. "Assessing the opportunity costs of Chinese herder compliance with a payment for environmental services scheme," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    15. Xin Nie & Jianxian Wu & Han Wang & Weijuan Li & Chengdao Huang & Lihua Li, 2022. "Contributing to carbon peak: Estimating the causal impact of eco‐industrial parks on low‐carbon development in China," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(4), pages 1578-1593, August.
    16. Tonin, Stefania, 2018. "Citizens’ perspectives on marine protected areas as a governance strategy to effectively preserve marine ecosystem services and biodiversity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 189-200.
    17. Shrestha, Ram K. & Seidl, Andrew F. & Moraes, Andre S., 2002. "Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 289-299, August.
    18. Gao, Yuan & Yu, Lu, 2024. "Understanding the impacts of ecological compensation policies on energy poverty: insights from forest communities in Zhejiang, China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    19. Rosalie Arendt & Till M. Bachmann & Masaharu Motoshita & Vanessa Bach & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2020. "Comparison of Different Monetization Methods in LCA: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-39, December.
    20. Qian, Qian & Wang, Junbang & Zhang, Xiujuan & Wang, Shaoqiang & Li, Yingnian & Wang, Qinxue & Watson, Alan E. & Zhao, Xinquan, 2022. "Improving herders’ income through alpine grassland husbandry on Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).

    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:15:y:2023:i:13:p:10001-:d:1178204. 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.