2021
DOI: 10.1007/s10668-021-01759-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Residents’ willingness-to-pay for watershed conservation program facilitating ecosystem services in Begnas watershed, Nepal

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…S 0 denotes the residents' WTP for water quality improvements. Figure 3 [38][39][40][41] shows the logical relationship for each factor, which was established through a combination of existing literature studies and expert consultation. In this figure, V indicates that row factors have a direct or indirect influence on column factors, A indicates that column factors have a direct or indirect influence on row factors, and O indicates that there is no relationship between row and column factors.…”
Section: Ism Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…S 0 denotes the residents' WTP for water quality improvements. Figure 3 [38][39][40][41] shows the logical relationship for each factor, which was established through a combination of existing literature studies and expert consultation. In this figure, V indicates that row factors have a direct or indirect influence on column factors, A indicates that column factors have a direct or indirect influence on row factors, and O indicates that there is no relationship between row and column factors.…”
Section: Ism Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on the regression model, the adjusted R 2 value (0.3989) indicates that 39.89 % of WTP in the study area can be explained by the combination of the variables included in the model. Although this value could be considered low, it is an acceptable value for contingent valuation analysis (Thapa et al, 2021). In socioeconomic studies, Gupta and Chatterjee (2021) and Irawan (2019) mention that an R 2 value between 0.3 and 0.6 indicates that the proposed model has a satisfactory fit.…”
Section: Econometric Model Of Willingness To Pay (Wtp) Estimationmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…pudiera considerarse bajo, es un valor admitido para análisis de valoración contingente (Thapa et al, 2021) Para el caso de los coeficientes, cuatro de las 10 variables evaluadas presentan correlación positiva con la DAP, mientras que las seis restantes presentan correlación negativa (Cuadro 2). El valor Pr(>|t|), para cada uno de los coeficientes, indica que aquellos que sean menores de 0.05 se consideran significativos dentro del modelo (Desta, 2018); esta condición la cumplen casi todas las variables con excepción del estado civil y género de los encuestados.…”
Section: Modelo Econométrico De La Estimación De La Disposición a Pag...unclassified
“…The analysis results show that each household or head of family (KK) is willing to spend money for water conservation; as many as 48% of water users want a contribution of IDR 5,000/month, while 24% express WTP IDR 10,000/month, the rest are willingness to pay below IDR 5,000/month and above IDR 10,000/month. Table 3 shows that the highest WTP for the utilization and preservation of water environmental services is the community (Ren et al 2020;Thapa et al 2022), which utilizes Tuk Sipendok and Tuk Babon water sources in Boyolali Regency and Umbul Songo in Semarang Regency Area. The value of WTP in the three sources is IDR 1,694,400,000/year, IDR 545,184,000/year, and IDR 307,200,000/year, respectively.…”
Section: Wtp Household Supportersmentioning
confidence: 99%