IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v12y2010i3p189-193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Socio-economic benefits of protected areas as perceived by local people around Cross River National Park, Nigeria

Author

Listed:
  • Ezebilo, Eugene E.
  • Mattsson, Leif

Abstract

The main objectives of a national park are environmental and biodiversity conservation. However, in most developing nations local people who reside at the vicinity of the park expect that it should also contribute to the social and economic well-being of the people. This paper examines the contribution of the Okwangwo Division of the Cross River National Park, Nigeria, to the provision of various types of infrastructure and income from tourism. Personal interviews were conducted in 150 households in three villages around the park. The study showed that the park has contributed to the provision of infrastructure. Some of the projects, undertaken by the park management, appear to be capital intensive both in the short and long term, thus, risking to make them unsustainable. The results revealed that only one of the villages in the study area benefits from the income from tourism. We suggest that simple, non-capital intensive and sustainable developmental projects should be undertaken. The tourism sector of the local economy should be developed to make income from tourism attractive for more of the local people.

Suggested Citation

  • Ezebilo, Eugene E. & Mattsson, Leif, 2010. "Socio-economic benefits of protected areas as perceived by local people around Cross River National Park, Nigeria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 189-193, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:12:y:2010:i:3:p:189-193
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389-9341(09)00151-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. van Beukering, Pieter J. H. & Cesar, Herman S. J. & Janssen, Marco A., 2003. "Economic valuation of the Leuser National Park on Sumatra, Indonesia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 43-62, February.
    2. Robert Wood & John Handley & Sue Kidd, 1999. "Sustainable Development and Institutional Design: The Example of the Mersey Basin Campaign," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(3), pages 341-354.
    3. Abbot, Joanne I. O. & Thomas, David H. L. & Gardner, Anne A. & Neba, Sama E. & Khen, Mbony W., 2001. "Understanding the Links Between Conservation and Development in the Bamenda Highlands, Cameroon," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(7), pages 1115-1136, July.
    4. Stephen Harrison & Suh, J., 2005. "Management Objectives and Economic Value of National Parks: Preservation, Conservation and Development," Discussion Papers Series 337, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    5. Michael Redclift, 2005. "Sustainable development (1987-2005): an oxymoron comes of age," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 212-227.
    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. Gebregziabher, Dawit & Soltani, Arezoo, 2019. "Exclosures in people’s minds: perceptions and attitudes in the Tigray region, Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 1-14.
    2. Roberto Rodríguez-Díaz & Víctor Javier Colino-Rabanal & Alejandra Gutierrez-López & María José Blanco-Villegas, 2020. "Effect of Protected Areas on Human Populations in the Context of Colombian Armed Conflict, 2005–2018," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-20, December.
    3. Qiu, Lingling & Kant, Shashi & Zeng, Weizhong, 2023. "Indigenous people's perceptions of benefits and costs of China's second phase of the grain for green program and the influencing factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    4. Ayhan Akyol & Türkay Türkoğlu & Sultan Bekiroğlu & Ahmet Tolunay, 2018. "Resident perceptions of livelihood impacts arising from the Kızıldağ National Park, Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 1037-1052, June.
    5. Rafael Robina-Ramírez & Marcelo Sánchez-Oro Sánchez & Héctor Valentín Jiménez-Naranjo & José Castro-Serrano, 2022. "Tourism governance during the COVID-19 pandemic crisis: A proposal for a sustainable model to restore the tourism industry," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(5), pages 6391-6412, May.
    6. Fangbing Hu & Zhongjun Wang & Gonghan Sheng & Xia Lia & Can Chen & Dehui Geng & Xinchen Hong & Nuo Xu & Zhipeng Zhu & Zuofang Zhang & Liying Zhu & Guangyu Wang, 2022. "Impacts of national park tourism sites: a perceptual analysis from residents of three spatial levels of local communities in Banff national park," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 3126-3145, March.
    7. Tamás Telbisz & Zoltán Imecs & András Máthé & László Mari, 2023. "Empirical Investigation of the Motivation and Perception of Tourists Visiting the Apuseni Nature Park (Romania) and the Relationship of Tourism and Natural Resources," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, February.
    8. Rahel Hamad & Heiko Balzter & Kamal Kolo, 2017. "Multi-Criteria Assessment of Land Cover Dynamic Changes in Halgurd Sakran National Park (HSNP), Kurdistan Region of Iraq, Using Remote Sensing and GIS," Land, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-17, March.
    9. Nikoleta Jones & James McGinlay & Andreas Kontoleon & Victoria A. Maguire-Rajpaul & Panayiotis G. Dimitrakopoulos & Vassilis Gkoumas & Jan Åge Riseth & Kalev Sepp & Frank Vanclay, 2022. "Understanding Public Support for European Protected Areas: A Review of the Literature and Proposing a New Approach for Policy Makers," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-15, May.
    10. Eugene Ezebilo, 2016. "Willingness to Pay for Maintenance of a Nature Conservation Area: A Case of Mount Wilhelm, Papua New Guinea," Asian Social Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(9), pages 149-149, September.
    11. Bin Yang & Jun He, 2021. "Global Land Grabbing: A Critical Review of Case Studies across the World," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-19, March.
    12. D. Březina & P. Hlaváčková, 2016. "The assessment of economic indicators of National Park Administrations," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(2), pages 88-96.
    13. Jovana Brankov & Jasna Micić & Jelena Ćalić & Jelena Kovačević-Majkić & Ranko Milanović & Tamás Telbisz, 2022. "Stakeholders’ Attitudes toward Protected Areas: The Case of Tara National Park (Serbia)," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-25, March.
    14. Brankov Jovana & Glavonjić Tamara Jojić & Pešić Ana Milanović & Petrović Marko D. & Tretiakova Tatiana N., 2019. "Residents’ Perceptions of Tourism Impact on Community in National Parks in Serbia," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 11(1), pages 124-142, March.
    15. Daisy Das, 2015. "Conflict or Conservation? A Roadmap for Management of Kaziranga National Park, India," Working Papers 1502, Sam Houston State University, Department of Economics and International Business.
    16. Ling-Zhong Lin & Chi-Fang Lu, 2013. "Fuzzy Group Decision-Making in the Measurement of Ecotourism Sustainability Potential," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 1051-1079, November.
    17. Jeremy Horowitz & Robert L. Pressey & Georgina G. Gurney & Amelia S. Wenger & Kristina A. Pahang, 2018. "Investigating Stakeholder Perceptions of Fish Decline: Making Sense of Multiple Mental Models," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-26, April.

    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. Millar, Neal & McLaughlin, Eoin & Börger, Tobias, 2019. "The Circular Economy: Swings and Roundabouts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-19.
    2. Michael Redclift, 2018. "Sustainable Development in the Age of Contradictions," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 49(3), pages 695-707, May.
    3. Hametner, Markus, 2022. "Economics without ecology: How the SDGs fail to align socioeconomic development with environmental sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    4. Rao, Nalini S. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Portela, Rosimeiry & Wang, Xuanwen, 2015. "Global values of coastal ecosystem services: A spatial economic analysis of shoreline protection values," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 95-105.
    5. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    6. Paulo A.L.D. Nunes & Elena Ojea & Maria Loureiro, 2009. "Mapping of Forest Biodiversity Values: A Plural Perspective," Working Papers 2009.4, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    7. Vastola, Vincenzo & Russo, Angeloantonio & Vurro, Clodia, 2017. "Dealing with Cultural Differences in Environmental Management: Exploring the CEP-CFP Relationship," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 267-275.
    8. Joon Sik Kim & Peter W. J. Batey, 2021. "Integrated watershed revitalization: the experience of the Mersey Basin Campaign," Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 531-563, June.
    9. Gregory Nguh Muluh & Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi & Ngwa Kester Azibo, 2019. "Challenges and Prospects of Sustaining Donor-Funded Projects in Rural Cameroon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-25, December.
    10. Tomicevic, Jelena & Shannon, Margaret A. & Milovanovic, Marina, 2010. "Socio-economic impacts on the attitudes towards conservation of natural resources: Case study from Serbia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 157-162, March.
    11. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    12. Matthew Cohen, 2017. "A Systematic Review of Urban Sustainability Assessment Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-16, November.
    13. Kwasi Gyau BAFFOUR AWUAH & Felix N. HAMMOND & Colin A. BOOTH & Jessica E. LAMOND, 2014. "Evolution And Development Of Urban Land Use Planning: Analysis From Human Action Theory Perspective," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(2), pages 35-67, May.
    14. Kim, Sophanarith & Phat, Nophea Kim & Koike, Masao & Hayashi, Hiromichi, 2006. "Estimating actual and potential government revenues from timber harvesting in Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(6), pages 625-635, August.
    15. Lee, Misuk & Choi, Hyunhong & Koo, Yoonmo, 2017. "Inconvenience cost of waste disposal behavior in South Korea," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 58-65.
    16. Daniela Gottschlich & Leonie Bellina, 2017. "Environmental justice and care: critical emancipatory contributions to sustainability discourse," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(4), pages 941-953, December.
    17. Albers, Heidi J. & Robinson, Elizabeth J.Z., 2007. "Spatial-temporal aspects of cost-benefit analysis for park management: An example from Khao Yai National Park, Thailand," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2-3), pages 129-150, August.
    18. Katharina Biely & Dries Maes & Steven Passel, 2018. "The idea of weak sustainability is illegitimate," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 223-232, February.
    19. Bev Wilson & Arnab Chakraborty, 2013. "The Environmental Impacts of Sprawl: Emergent Themes from the Past Decade of Planning Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(8), pages 1-26, August.
    20. 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.

    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:eee:forpol:v:12:y:2010:i:3:p:189-193. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.