IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Estimating the public benefits of mitigating damages caused by invasive plant species in a subsistence economy

Author Info

  • Rai, Rajesh Kumar
  • Scarborough, Helen

Abstract

This paper presents analysis of a choice experiment (CE) designed to estimate willingness-topay (WTP) to mitigate damages caused by invasive plant species (IPS) in a rural community of Nepal. In order to address the cash constraints problem in a subsistence economy, two payment attributes, labor contribution and membership fee, were included in the choice sets. The results reveal that rural farmers have significant WTP for forest management activities, in terms of both cash and labor contributions. The results also suggest that rural farmers value their time in this context at a different rate to the current wage rate.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/124421
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society in its series 2012 Conference (56th), February 7-10, 2012, Freemantle, Australia with number 124421.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Feb 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ags:aare12:124421
Contact details of provider: Postal:
AARES Central Office Manager, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU, Canberra ACT 0200

Phone: 0409 032 338
Web page: http://www.aares.info/
Email:


More information through EDIRC

Keywords: Choice experiments; Invasive plant species; Rural communities; Developing countries.; Crop Production/Industries;

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Ferrini, Silvia & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2007. "Designs with a priori information for nonmarket valuation with choice experiments: A Monte Carlo study," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 342-363, May.
  2. Born, Wanda & Rauschmayer, Felix & Brauer, Ingo, 2005. "Economic evaluation of biological invasions--a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 321-336, November.
  3. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, November.
  4. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Liljenstolpe, Carolina, 2003. "Valuing wetland attributes: an application of choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 95-103, November.
  5. Mekonnen, Alemu, 2000. "Valuation of community forestry in Ethiopia: a contingent valuation study of rural households," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(03), pages 289-308, July.
  6. K. K. Lancaster, 2010. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Levine's Working Paper Archive 1385, David K. Levine.
  7. Paulo Nunes & Jeroen van den Bergh, 2004. "Can People Value Protection against Invasive Marine Species? Evidence from a Joint TC–CV Survey in the Netherlands," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 28(4), pages 517-532, August.
  8. Grosjean, Pauline & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2009. "How Sustainable are Sustainable Development Programs? The Case of the Sloping Land Conversion Program in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 268-285, January.
  9. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D., 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304, November.
  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. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Working Papers in Economics 52, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
  12. Nick Hanley & Robert Wright & Vic Adamowicz, 1998. "Using Choice Experiments to Value the Environment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 11(3), pages 413-428, April.
  13. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1986. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 68(4), pages 715-19, November.
  14. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
  15. Pimentel, David & Zuniga, Rodolfo & Morrison, Doug, 2005. "Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 273-288, February.
  16. Wang, Xuehong & Bennett, Jeff & Xie, Chen & Zhang, Zhitao & Liang, Dan, 2007. "Estimating non-market environmental benefits of the Conversion of Cropland to Forest and Grassland Program: A choice modeling approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 114-125, June.
  17. Bergmann, Ariel & Hanley, Nick & Wright, Robert, 2006. "Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1004-1014, June.
  18. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132.
  19. Adhikari, Bhim & Di Falco, Salvatore & Lovett, Jon C., 2004. "Household characteristics and forest dependency: evidence from common property forest management in Nepal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 245-257, February.
  20. Rolfe, John & Bennett, Jeff & Louviere, Jordan, 2000. "Choice modelling and its potential application to tropical rainforest preservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 289-302, November.
  21. Sukanya Das & Rabindra N. Bhattacharya & Ekin Birol, 2009. "Estimating the value of improved wastewater treatment: The case of River Ganga, India," Environmental Economy and Policy Research Working Papers 43.2009, University of Cambridge, Department of Land Economics, revised 2009.
  22. Mary Clare Ahearn & Penni Korb & Jet Yee, 2009. "Producer Dynamics in Agriculture: Empirical Evidence," NBER Chapters, in: Producer Dynamics: New Evidence from Micro Data, pages 369-391 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

The CitEc project has not yet found citations to this item.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aare12:124421. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.