Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering

ISSN 2095-2201

ISSN 2095-221X(Online)

CN 10-1013/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-973

2018 Impact Factor: 3.883

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.    2015, Vol. 9 Issue (1) : 58-65    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-014-0688-3
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Ecological compensation based on willingness to accept for conservation of drinking water sources
Linyu XU(), Bing YU, Yang LI
State Key Laboratory of Water Environment Simulation, School of Environment, Beijing Normal University, Beijing 100875, China
 Download: PDF(136 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Ecological compensation is a powerful environmental economic tool for environmental protection in areas where drinking water sources are located. We established an ecological compensation accounting system based on respondents’ willingness to accept (WTA). In this system, stakeholder preferences and the factors that influence them can be gauged effectively using logit and tobit models. We applied this accounting system to ecological compensation for the Miyun Reservoir, Beijing, China. The average WTA value for Miyun Reservoir residents was approximately 1186 CNY per family in 2012, which could be set as a suitable compensation standard, since it is slightly higher than the local protection cost. Thus, the annual total ecological compensation could be 58.73 million CNY. Distance from the reservoir, job types, and attitude to environmental protection were variables with significant effects on WTA. In addition, trends for individual preferences were identified via an analysis of key influential factors. The results suggest some useful information for establishing ecological compensation mechanisms for conservation of drinking water sources. Suggestions include popularizing the concept and meaning of ecological compensation among residents, setting different compensation levels based on distance from the reservoir, considering the requirements of farmers, and taking various in-kind and out-of-kind compensation approaches.
Keywords contingent valuation method      questionnaire survey      Miyun Reservoir     
Corresponding Author(s): Linyu XU   
Online First Date: 28 March 2014    Issue Date: 31 December 2014
 Cite this article:   
Linyu XU,Bing YU,Yang LI. Ecological compensation based on willingness to accept for conservation of drinking water sources[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(1): 58-65.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-014-0688-3
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2015/V9/I1/58
Fig.1  Flow chart of contingent valuation method (CVM)
location town sample number proportion
level I conservation area Shicheng 44 29.73%
level II conservation area Bulaotun 41 27.70%
level III conservation area Fengjiayu 63 42.57%
Tab.1  Statistics data of WTA field survey
Fig.2  Responses to questions 6–8 in the questionnaire (Part II): (a) Q6. What are you most concerned about in your daily life? (a. Local social economic development, b. Local environmental protection, c. personal work and life); (b) Q7. How about your attention to local ecological or environmental issues? (a. Careless, b. Occasionally concern it, c. Know the important environmental events, d. Pay more attention and understand it well); (c) Q8. What do you think about current living conditions and local social development? (a. Do not care, b. Falling behind the other regions, c. Satisfied with the current status, d. Lack of development opportunities and finance)
coefficient marginal effect
know 0.23 (0.156) 0.048
job −0.33*** (0.003) −0.069
att 0.49 ** (0.020) 0.10
edu 0.41* (0.063) 0.086
constant 436.28*** (0.000)
number of observations 148
Log-likelihood −81.66
LR χ2 (4) 23.18 y = 0.70
Tab.2  Results for logit model analysis of participation in ecological compensation
variables dy/dx Std. Err. z P>|z| [ 95% C.I. ] X
job −0.05187 0.02143 −2.42 0.015 [−0.09387, −0.00987] 1.77703
att 0.101779 0.04358 2.34 0.02 [0.016357, 0.187201] 1.72973
know-eco 0.183813 0.07812 2.35 0.019 [0.030694, 0.336931] 0.540541
Tab.3  Marginal effects for the logit model
coefficient marginal effect
dis −329.33** (0.027) −246.76
job −183.91*** (0.007) −137.80
att 300.02 *** (0.007) 224.80
constant 1425.45*** (0.001)
number of observations 148
Log-likelihood −927.45
LR χ2 (3) 19.91 y = 1130.00
Tab.4  Results for tobit model estimation of WTA
variables dy/dx Std. Err. z P>|z| [ 95% C.I ] X
dis −265.3577 113.73 −2.33 0.02 [−488.268, −42.4478] 2.11034
farmer* 429.454 206.31 2.08 0.037 [25.0985, 833.81] 0.793103
att 221.3896 82.353 2.69 0.007 [59.9812, 382.798] 1.74483
Tab.5  Marginal effects for the tobit model
item input︰ output/(104CNY) evaluation method
water source protection (direct input) 1500 10% fiscal revenue
non-point-source pollution (management input) 234 V = P×Q,
where P is the price per unit grain, Q is the grain yield reduction due to chemical fertilizers limitation
economic loss due to the “Grain to Green” project 1662.4 V= P×Q×A,
where A is the area of farmland returned to forest
total 3396.4
Tab.6  Costs for water source protection in the Miyun Reservoir conservation area
1 S Engel, S Pagiola, S Wunder. Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: an overview of the issues. Ecological Economics, 2008, 65(4): 663–674
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.03.011
2 L Y Xu, Z X Li, Y Li. Research on water ecological services value and eco-compensation. In: the 3rd International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering, iCBBE, Beijing. Lancaster: DES tech Publications, 2009, 1–4
3 Z F Yang, X Han, L Y Xu, B Yu. An accounting model for watershed ecological compensation to address water management conflicts. Journal of Environmental Accounting and Management, 2013, 1(3): 229–247
4 L S Pereira, I Cordery, I Iacovides. Improved indicators of water use performance and productivity for sustainable water conservation and saving. Agricultural Water Management, 2012, 108(6): 39–51
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2011.08.022
5 M L Thieme, J Rudulph, J Higgins, J A Takats. Protected areas and freshwater conservation: a survey of protected area managers in the Tennessee and Cumberland River Basins, USA. Journal of Environmental Management, 2012, 109(17): 189–199
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.06.021 pmid: 22819600
6 S Pagiola, G Platais. Payments for Environmental Services: From Theory to Practice. Washington, D C: World Bank, 2007
7 N M Asquith, M T Vargas, S Wunder. Selling two environmental services: in-kind payments for bird habitat and watershed protection in Los Negros, Bolivia. Ecological Economics, 2008, 65(4): 675–684
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.12.014
8 B Yu, L Y Xu. Study of eco-compensation in hydropower development in China. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 2012, 13(3): 891–898
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2012.01.083
9 S Scherr, A White, A Khare. Current Status and Future Potential of Markets for Ecosystem Services of Tropical Forests: An Overview. Oaxaca: Mexico, International Tropical Timber Organization, ITTC Paper ITTC (XXXV)/6/Rev, 2003, 1
10 T Wünscher, S Engel, S Wunder. Spatial targeting of payments for environmental services: a tool for boosting conservation benefits. Ecological Economics, 2008, 65(4): 822–833
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.11.014
11 S Pagiola. Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics, 2008, 65(4): 712–724
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.07.033
12 L Chunxia, X Gaodi, X Yu. Ecological compensation and the cost of wildlife conservation: Chang Tang Grasslands, Tibet. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2012, 3(1): 20–25
https://doi.org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2012.01.004
13 S W Broch, N Strange, J B Jacobsen, K A Wilson. Farmers’ willingness to provide ecosystem services and effects of their spatial distribution. Ecological Economics, 2013, 92(8): 78–86
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.12.017
14 H Lindhjem, Y Mitani. Forest owners’ willingness to accept compensation for voluntary conservation: a contingent valuation approach. Journal of Forest Economics, 2012, 18(4): 290–302
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfe.2012.06.004
15 I M Awad. Using econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay to investigate economic efficiency and equity of domestic water services in the West Bank. Journal of Socio-Economics, 2012, 41(5): 485–494
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2012.04.025
16 R T Carson. Contingent valuation: a user’s guide. Environmental Science & Technology, 2000, 34(8): 1413–1418
https://doi.org/10.1021/es990728j
17 P W Wang, J B Jia. Tourists’ willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation and environment protection, Dalai Lake protected area: Implications for entrance fee and sustainable management. Ocean and Coastal Management, 2012, 62(8): 24–33
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.03.001
18 Beijing Municipal Commission of Urban Planning. New town planning in Miyun county (2005–2020), 2007.
19 B Fischhoff. Cognitive processes in stated preference methods. Handbook of Environmental Economics, 2005, 2(1): 937–968
20 N Hanley, R E Wright, B Alvarez-Farizo. Estimating the economic value of improvements in river ecology using choice experiments: an application to the water framework directive. Journal of Environmental Management, 2006, 78(2): 183–193
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.05.001 pmid: 16112797
21 J F Casey, J R Kahn, A A F Rivas. Willingness to accept compensation for the environmental risks of oil transport on the Amazon: a choice modeling experiment. Ecological Economics, 2008, 67(4): 552–559
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.01.006
22 T Christensen, A B Pedersen, H O Nielsen, M R Morkbak, B Hasler, S Denver. Determinations of farmers’ willingness to participate in subsidy schemes for pesticide-free buffer zones- A choice experiment study. Ecological Economics, 2011, 70(8): 1558–1564
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.03.021
23 I Awad, R Hollander. Toward efficient, equitable and sustainable municipal water supplies for domestic purposes in the west bank: a contingent valuation analysis. European Water, 2010
24 C Buckley, S Hynes, S Mechan. Supply of an ecosystem service-Farmers’ willingness to adopt riparian buffer zones in agricultural catchments. Environmental Science and Policy, 2012, 24(12): 101–109
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.07.022
25 S Hynes, E Garvey. Modelling farmers’ participation in an agri-environmental scheme using panel data: an application to the rural environmental protection scheme in Ireland. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 2009, 60(3): 546–562
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2009.00210.x
26 S Mary, R John. Tradeoffs in the choice between logit and OLS for accounting choice studies. Accounting Review, 1991, 66(1): 170–187
27 X H Yu, D Abler. Incorporating zero and missing responses into CVM with open-ended biding: willingness to pay for blue skies in Beijing. Environment and Development Economics, 2010, 15(05): 535–556
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X10000197
28 G A A Wossink. Biodiversity conservation by farmers: Analysis of actual and contingent participation. European Review of Agriculture Economics, 2003, 30(4): 461–485
https://doi.org/10.1093/erae/30.4.461
29 D H MacDonald, M D Morrison, M B Barnes. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept compensation for changes in urban water customer service standards. Water Resources Management, 2010, 24(12): 3145–3158
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-010-9599-7
30 M C Statistics. Yearbook of Miyun County Statistics. Beijing: China’s Statistics Press, 2013
31 P Wang, J P Lassoie, S K Dong, S J Morreale. A framework for social impact analysis of large dams: a case study of cascading dams on the Upper-Mekong River, China. Journal of Environmental Management, 2013, 117(3): 131–140
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.12.045 pmid: 23380304
32 B Yu, L Y Xu. The individual WTA changing analysis for eco-compensation construction in water source conservation area. Advanced Materials Research, 2013, 779–780(3): 1437–1440
https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.779-780.1437
[1] Lei HUANG, Zhijuan SHAO, Weiliang BAO, Bailing DUAN, Jun BI, Zengwei YUAN. The influencing factors of the WTP for the risk reduction of chemical industry accidents in China[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 2012, 6(6): 860-868.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed