IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/envsyd/v27y2007i2d10.1007_s10669-007-9003-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social and economic considerations in conserving wetlands of indo-gangetic plains: A case study of Kabartal wetland, India

Author

Listed:
  • Kalpana Ambastha

    (National Remote Sensing Agency)

  • Syed Ainul Hussain

    (Wildlife Institute of India)

  • Ruchi Badola

    (Wildlife Institute of India)

Abstract

The Kabartal wetland situated in the upper Indo-Gangetic flood plains in northern India is significant because of its hydrological and ecological services, and the socio-economic and cultural values that it represents. Despite being designated as a wildlife sanctuary, this wetland is under threat from anthropogenic pressures. As in the case of most wetlands, the reason is incomplete information on its ecological services and functions, breakdown of traditional management structures and the lack of appropriate and recognized property rights. Our study assesses the economic linkages between the Kabartal wetland and the local people living around it, through socio-economic surveys and Contingent Valuation Method (CVM). The major objective of the study was to determine the importance of this wetland to the local people and to give an indication of the distribution of the benefits among various stakeholders. The people in the region are poor, have low literacy levels and high dependence on Kabartal and more than 50% want that the wetland should be drained and the land used for agriculture. However, they are willing to participate in collaborative management initiatives with the state. The willingness of people to accept compensation, as an alternative to access to Kabartal wetland, regressed on various socio-economic and attitudinal parameters, gave an estimated mean value of US $27,500 per household over a period of 60 years. This value is a pointer of the total value of access to Kabartal wetland to the surrounding villagers and would be useful when decisions to compensate people for lost access to Kabartal are made.

Suggested Citation

  • Kalpana Ambastha & Syed Ainul Hussain & Ruchi Badola, 2007. "Social and economic considerations in conserving wetlands of indo-gangetic plains: A case study of Kabartal wetland, India," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 261-273, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:envsyd:v:27:y:2007:i:2:d:10.1007_s10669-007-9003-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10669-007-9003-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10669-007-9003-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10669-007-9003-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
    2. Kramer, R.A. & Sharma, N. & Munashinghe, M., 1995. "Valuing Tropical Forests. Methodology and Cade Study of Madagascar," Papers 13, World Bank - The World Bank Environment Paper.
    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. Ishfaq Ahmad Sheergojri & Irfan Rashid & Ishfaq ul Rehman, 2024. "Systematic review of wetland ecosystem services valuation in India: assessing economic approaches, knowledge gaps, and management implications," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 14(1), pages 167-179, March.
    2. Xiaodong Jing & Guiliang Tian & Minrui Li & Sohail Ahmad Javeed, 2021. "Research on the Spatial and Temporal Differences of China’s Provincial Carbon Emissions and Ecological Compensation Based on Land Carbon Budget Accounting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-21, December.
    3. Honggen Zhu & Zhengfei Guan & Xuan Wei, 2016. "Factors Influencing Farmers’ Willingness to Participate in Wetland Restoration: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Jia He & Yu Wan & Zhonglin Tang & Xiaodong Zhu & Chuanhao Wen, 2019. "A Developed Framework for the Multi-District Ecological Compensation Standards Integrating Ecosystem Service Zoning in an Urban Area in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-24, September.
    5. Sara Kaffashi & Mad Nasir Shamsudin & Alias Radam & Khalid Abdul Rahim & Mohd Rusli Yacob, 2013. "Non-users’ trade-off between natural scenery, water quality, ecological functions and biodiversity conservation: a way to preserve wetlands," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 251-260, June.

    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. Haque, A.B.M. Mahfuzul & Visser, Leontine E. & Dey, Madan M., 2011. "Institutional Arrangements in Seasonal Floodplain Management under Community-based Aquaculture in Bangladesh," Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), vol. 8(1), pages 1-19, June.
    2. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    3. Deslatte, Aaron & Szmigiel-Rawska, Katarzyna & Tavares, António F. & Ślawska, Justyna & Karsznia, Izabela & Łukomska, Julita, 2022. "Land use institutions and social-ecological systems: A spatial analysis of local landscape changes in Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. David Aubin & Frédéric Varone, 2013. "Getting Access to Water: Property Rights or Public Policy Strategies?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(1), pages 154-167, February.
    5. Gani, Azmat & Scrimgeour, Frank, 2014. "Modeling governance and water pollution using the institutional ecological economic framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 363-372.
    6. Wesley R. Brooks & Stephen C. Newbold, 2013. "Ecosystem damages in integrated assessment models of climate change," NCEE Working Paper Series 201302, National Center for Environmental Economics, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, revised Mar 2013.
    7. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.
    8. Rémy Herrera & Poeura Tetoe, 2013. "The Papua Niugini Paradox. Land property archaism and Modernity of peasant resistance ?," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00786274, HAL.
    9. Helga Leitner & Eric Sheppard, 2018. "From Kampungs to Condos? Contested accumulations through displacement in Jakarta," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 50(2), pages 437-456, March.
    10. Kassis, Grâce & Bertrand, Nathalie, 2022. "Institutional changes in farmland governance emerging from a collective land preservation procedure upholding local food projects: Evidence from a French case study," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    11. Olegas Beriozovas & Dalia Perkumienė & Mindaugas Škėma & Abdellah Saoualih & Larbi Safaa & Marius Aleinikovas, 2024. "Research Advancement in Forest Property Rights: A Thematic Review over Half a Decade Using Natural Language Processing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-28, September.
    12. Leibbrandt, Andreas & Lynham, John, 2018. "Does the allocation of property rights matter in the commons?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 201-217.
    13. Massimiliano Gambardella, 2011. "The Scope of Open Licenses in Cultural Contents Production and Distribution," Working Papers hal-04140977, HAL.
    14. Hervé Charmettant & Yvan Renou, 2021. "Cooperative conversion and communalization: Closely observed interactions between the material and the mental," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 92(1), pages 55-77, March.
    15. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    16. Hari Prasad Bhattarai, 2017. "Indigenous Peoples and Right to Natural Resources: An Assessment of Changing Paradigms of Forest Tenure Rights in Nepal," Journal of Development Innovations, KarmaQuest International, vol. 1(2), pages 29-57, October.
    17. Rout, S., 2008. "Institutional and policy reforms in water sector in India: review of issues, concepts and trends," Conference Papers h042926, International Water Management Institute.
    18. Habibullah Magsi & Andre Torr & Yansui Liu & M. Javed Sheikh, 2017. "Land Use Conflicts in the Developing Countries: Proximate Driving Forces and Preventive Measures," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 56(1), pages 19-30.
    19. Anne Jerneck, 2018. "What about Gender in Climate Change? Twelve Feminist Lessons from Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-20, February.
    20. Nichiforel, Liviu & Keary, Kevin & Deuffic, Philippe & Weiss, Gerhard & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark & Winkel, Georg & Avdibegović, Mersudin & Dobšinská, Zuzana & Feliciano, Diana & Gatto, Paola & Gorriz Mi, 2018. "How private are Europe’s private forests? A comparative property rights analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 535-552.

    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:spr:envsyd:v:27:y:2007:i:2:d:10.1007_s10669-007-9003-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.