IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i6p868-d1415827.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring Public Support for Bolivia’s Protected Areas: A Contingent Valuation Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Stefanie Rakela

    (Conservation Strategy Fund, Av. Pablo Sanchez No 6981, Entre Calles 1 y 2 de Irpavi, La Paz, Bolivia)

  • Thais Vilela

    (Conservation Strategy Fund, Washington, DC 20036, USA)

  • Sophia Espinoza

    (Conservation Strategy Fund, Av. Pablo Sanchez No 6981, Entre Calles 1 y 2 de Irpavi, La Paz, Bolivia)

  • Alfonso Malky Harb

    (Conservation Strategy Fund, Av. Pablo Sanchez No 6981, Entre Calles 1 y 2 de Irpavi, La Paz, Bolivia)

  • Carla Mendizábal Vergara

    (Independent Researcher, Santa Cruz, Bolivia)

Abstract

This study investigates Bolivians’ willingness to pay for an annual passport facilitating visits to protected areas (PAs) in Bolivia, aiming to address challenges in PA financing and management amidst escalating deforestation. Employing the contingent valuation method, a representative sample of citizens aged 18 or older from major cities across Bolivia participated in a telephone interviewing questionnaire. The findings reveal limited public awareness and recognition of PAs, alongside significant interest in visiting these areas for tourism purposes or simply donating to the system to reduce its current financial gaps. Concerns regarding trust and transparency in fund management are highlighted, with demographic factors and perceptions influencing willingness to pay estimated at approximately USD 35 for a one-year passport. This study underscores the necessity for targeted interventions to enhance public awareness, improve infrastructure, and ensure transparency in fund management, thereby promoting sustainable tourism and safeguarding Bolivia’s PAs.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefanie Rakela & Thais Vilela & Sophia Espinoza & Alfonso Malky Harb & Carla Mendizábal Vergara, 2024. "Exploring Public Support for Bolivia’s Protected Areas: A Contingent Valuation Approach," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-17, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:868-:d:1415827
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/6/868/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/6/868/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vilela, Thais & Malky Harb, Alfonso & Mendizábal Vergara, Carla, 2022. "Chileans' willingness to pay for protected areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    2. Roberto Ponce & Felipe Vásquez, 2016. "Payment for Ecosystem Services in the Bolivian Subandean Humid Forest," Serie Working Papers 35, Universidad del Desarrollo, School of Business and Economics.
    3. Matus Kubak & Beata Gavurova & Klaudia Legutka, 2020. "Economic Value Estimation of the Natural Heritage of the Tatra National Park," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-17, April.
    4. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    5. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    6. Shultz, Steven & Pinazzo, Jorge & Cifuentes, Miguel, 1998. "Opportunities and limitations of contingent valuation surveys to determine national park entrance fees: evidence from Costa Rica," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 131-149, February.
    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. Vilela, Thais & Malky Harb, Alfonso & Mendizábal Vergara, Carla, 2022. "Chileans' willingness to pay for protected areas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    2. David Worden & Getu Hailu & Kate Jones & Yu Na Lee, 2022. "The effects of bundling on livestock producers' valuations of environmentally friendly traits available through genomic selection," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 70(4), pages 263-286, December.
    3. Richard T. Carson & Miko_aj Czajkowski, 2014. "The discrete choice experiment approach to environmental contingent valuation," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 9, pages 202-235, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Ran, Shenghong, 2006. "Comparison of contingent valuation and choice experiment in solid waste management programs in Macao," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(3), pages 430-441, May.
    5. Dani Aoun, 2015. "Who pays more to preserve a natural reserve, visitors or locals? A confidence analysis of a contingent valuation application," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 17(4), pages 471-486, October.
    6. Powe, N. A. & Bateman, I. J., 2003. "Ordering effects in nested 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' contingent valuation designs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 255-270, June.
    7. Diane Dupont, 2003. "CVM Embedding Effects When There Are Active, Potentially Active and Passive Users of Environmental Goods," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 25(3), pages 319-341, July.
    8. Baral, Nabin & Stern, Marc J. & Bhattarai, Ranju, 2008. "Contingent valuation of ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: Implications for sustainable park finance and local development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 218-227, June.
    9. Acey, Charisma & Kisiangani, Joyce & Ronoh, Patrick & Delaire, Caroline & Makena, Evelyn & Norman, Guy & Levine, David & Khush, Ranjiv & Peletz, Rachel, 2019. "Cross-subsidies for improved sanitation in low income settlements: Assessing the willingness to pay of water utility customers in Kenyan cities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 160-177.
    10. Takehisa Kumakawa, 2016. "Contingent valuation of scenic lakes," Tourism Economics, , vol. 22(5), pages 1121-1125, October.
    11. Ndebele, Tom & Forgie, Vicky, 2017. "Estimating the economic benefits of a wetland restoration programme in New Zealand: A contingent valuation approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 75-89.
    12. Artem Korzhenevych & Charles Kofi Owusu, 2021. "Renewable Minigrid Electrification in Off-Grid Rural Ghana: Exploring Households Willingness to Pay," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.
    13. Jung-Eun Kim & Jungsung Yeo, 2010. "Valuation of Consumers’ Personal Information: A South Korean Example," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 297-306, September.
    14. Cook, David & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Kristófersson, Daði Már, 2016. "Energy projects in Iceland – Advancing the case for the use of economic valuation techniques to evaluate environmental impacts," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 104-113.
    15. Luchini, Stéphane & Watson, Verity, 2013. "Uncertainty and framing in a valuation task," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 204-214.
    16. Graça, Manjate, 2018. "Scope effects in contingent valuation: an application to the valuation of irrigation water quality improvements in Infulene Valley, Mozambique," Research Theses 334752, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    17. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    18. Hammitt, James K. & Herrera-Araujo, Daniel, 2018. "Peeling back the onion: Using latent class analysis to uncover heterogeneous responses to stated preference surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 165-189.
    19. Jayson L. Lusk, 2003. "Effects of Cheap Talk on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay for Golden Rice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(4), pages 840-856.
    20. Apurba Shee & Carlo Azzarri & Beliyou Haile, 2019. "Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Agricultural Technologies: Evidence from a Field Experiment in Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.

    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:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:6:p:868-:d:1415827. 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.