Applying contingent valuation in China to measure the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Ejina region

Abstract This paper reports an attempt to apply the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) in rural China. The CVM was used to obtain estimates of willingness to pay for restoring Ejina ecosystem services. In our survey, we used a payment card format and a 12-page survey booklet with maps depicting the reasons why Ejina ecosystem deteriorated, the means by which ecosystem services could be restored from their current level. We used an in-person interview along with the survey booklet. We employed a parametric model to estimate the benefits of restoring Ejina ecosystem. Results from 700 in-person interviews indicate that households would pay an average of 19.37 (RMB) per year with 20.78 per household for the main river area, and 16.41 per household for the rest of Hei basin. The aggregate benefit to residents of the Hei basin is 8.84 million annually for 20 years. Taking into account an environmental discount rate calculated by using respondent's equivalent utility between periodical payments and lump sum payments, the present value of aggregate benefit of restoring Ejina ecosystem is 55.33 million. These results suggest that the general public in Hei Valley would be willing to pay to restore the Ejina ecosystem, although this amount is substantially less than the estimated costs of restoration.

[1]  J. Loomis.  Measuring the Economic Benefits of Removing Dams and Restoring the Elwha River: Results of a Contingent Valuation Survey , 1996 .

[2]  A. Al-Reda,et al.  A reconnaissance study of a clastic coastal sabkha in Northern Kuwait, Arabian Gulf , 1999 .

[3]  John B. Loomis,et al.  Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey , 2000 .

[4]  Richard G. Walsh,et al.  Recreation Economic Decisions Comparing Benefits and Costs , 1986 .

[5]  Trudy Ann Cameron,et al.  OLS versus ML estimation of non-market resource values with payment card interval data , 1989 .

[6]  H. Telser,et al.  The contingent valuation method in health care. An economic evaluation of Alzheimer's disease. , 2003, Developments in health economics and public policy.

[7]  Gregory L. Poe,et al.  Elicitation Effects in Contingent Valuation: Comparisons to a Multiple Bounded Discrete Choice Approach , 1998 .

[8]  Paul R. Ehrlich,et al.  Population, Sustainability And Earth's Carrying Capacity , 1992 .

[9]  R. O'Neill,et al.  The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital , 1997, Nature.

[10]  Robert Cameron Mitchell,et al.  Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method , 1989 .

[11]  C. Guodong,et al.  Water resource development and its influence on the environment in arid areas of China—the case of the Hei River basin , 1999 .

[12]  Robert Costanza,et al.  The value of ecosystem services , 1998 .

[13]  T. Stevens,et al.  Sensitivity of Contingent Valuation to Alternative Payment Schedules , 1997 .

[14]  D. Romano,et al.  Environmental resource valuation : applications of the contingent valuation method in Italy , 1998 .

[15]  Edward J. Dudewicz,et al.  Modern Mathematical Statistics , 1988 .