基于计划行为理论的湿地生态系统服务支付意愿及影响因素分析

doi:10.18402/resci.2017.05.09

Abstract

Abstract:

Ecosystem service assessment is the basis of decision making for environmental management policy. The validity and reliability of the Choice Experiment method for evaluating non-market items by acquiring individual's payment will be a very important issue for scholars. Taking the Sanjiang Plain Wetland as an example,we built a method to evaluate willingness to pay for wetland ecosystem services based on the Theory of Planned Behavior to explore potential motives for willing to pay for wetland ecosystem services. This method improves the reliability and scientificity of traditional Choice Experiments which only contain socioeconomic information parameters. By fitting multi-Logit models chosen according to the utility function of wetland ecosystem services,we empirically analyzed respondent willingness to pay for wetland ecosystem services and influence factors. The wetland ecosystem service function is mainly reflected by the four ecosystem service properties:wetland area,biodiversity,water conservation and natural landscape. We found that residents’ preferences for wetland ecosystem services from high to low respectively are water conservation,wetland area,natural landscape and biodiversity. Model test results show that fitting the multi-logit model introduces behavioral attitudes,subjective norms and perceived behavior as control variables is better and explains the choices of consumer payments. The marginal prices of ecosystem service function properties are prefixed targets in order to realize Sanjiang Plain Wetlands ecosystem service function in the future:willingness to pay for improving water conservation 98.92 CNY;the willingness to pay for maintaining the existing wetland area is 58.90 CNY;the willingness to pay to improve the natural landscape is 54.09 CNY;and the willingness to pay to improve the biodiversity is 46.06 CNY.

Key words: Theory of Planned Behavior, Choice Experiment method, Sanjiang Plain Wetland, ecosystem services, Multinomial Logit Model

Qin GAO, Changlin AO, Biqi MAO, Yuxuan LU. Analysis of willingness to pay for ecosystem services and influence factors based on the TPB[J].Resources Science, 2017, 39(5): 893-901.

Figures/Tables 5

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

References 22

[1]	Bai Y,Zhuang C,Ouyang Z,et al.Spatial characteristics between biodiversity and ecosystem services in a human-dominated watershed[J]. Ecological Complexity,2011,8(2):177-183.
[2]	冯磊,敖长林,焦扬,等. 三江平原湿地非使用价值支付意愿的影响因素[J]. 数学的实践与认识,2012,42(1):59-67.
	[Feng L,Ao C L,Jiao Y,et al.Influencing factors of the willingness to pay for non-use value evaluation of Sanjiang Wetland[J]. Mathematics in Practice and Theory,2012,42(1):59-67.]
[3]	敖长林,高丹,毛碧琦,等. 空间尺度下公众对环境保护的支付意愿度量方法及实证研究[J]. 资源科学,2015,37(11):2288-2298.
	[Ao C L,Gao D,Mao B Q,et al.Methods for measuring public willingness to pay for environmental conservation and empirical research under spatial scale[J]. Resources Science,2015,37(11):2288-2298.]
[4]	佟锐,敖长林,焦扬,等. 基于廉价磋商的CVM 假想偏差修正研究[J]. 资源科学,2016,38(3):501-511.
	[Tong R,Ao C L,Jiao Y,et al.A correction study of CVM hypothetical bias based on cheap talk for the Songhua River Basin[J]. Resources Science,2016,38(3):501-511.]
[5]	Birol E,Koundouri P,Karousakis K.Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes:The case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece[J]. Ecological Economics,2006,60(1):145-156.
[6]	徐中民,张志强,龙爱华,等. 额济纳旗生态系统服务恢复价值评估方法的比较与应用[J]. 生态学报,2003,23(9):1841-1850.
	[ Xu Z M,Zhang Z Q,Long A H,et al.Comparison and application of different contingent valuation methods in measuring total economic value of restoring Ejina Banner 's ecosystem services[J]. Ecologica Sinica,2003,23(9):1841-1850.]
[7]	许丽忠,陈芳,杨净,等. 基于计划行为理论的公众环境保护支付意愿动机分析[J]. 福建师范大学学报:自然科学版,2013,29(5):87-93.
	[Xu L Z,Cheng F,Yang J,et al.Motivation behind contingent valuation in the context of the planned behavior theory[J]. Journal of Fujian Normal University:Natural Science Edition,2013,29(5):87-93.]
[8]	Sauer U,Fischer A.Willingness to pay,attitudes and fundamental values-on the cognitive context of public preferences for diversity in agricultural landscapes[J]. Ecological Economics,2010,70(1):1-9.
[9]	高琴,敖长林,陈红光,等. 基于居民生态认知的非使用价值支付意愿空间分异研究-以三江平原湿地为例[J]. 生态学报,2014,34(7):1851-1859.
	[Gao Q,Ao C L,Chen H G,et al.Spatial differentiation research of non-use value WTP based on the residents of ecological cognition:Taking the Sanjiang Plain as a case[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica,2014,34(7):1851-1859.]
[10]	敖长林,陈瑾婷,焦扬,等. 生态保护价值的距离衰减性-以三江平原湿地为例[J]. 生态学报,2013,33(16):5109-5117.
	[Ao C L,Chen J T,Jiao Y,et al.The effect of distance on the ecological conservation value:A case study of Sanjiang Plain Wetland[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica,2013,33(16):5109-5117.]
[11]	敖长林,刘芳芳,焦扬,等. 三江平原湿地生态价值属性选择分析[J]. 农业技术经济,2012,(7):87-93.
	[Ao C L,Liu F F,Jiao Y,et al.Analysis on the ecological value attribute selection of Sanjiang plain wetland[J]. Journal of Agrotechnical Economics,2012,(7):87-93.]
[12]	敖长林,董育宁,焦扬,等. 基于双栏模型的三江平原湿地生态保护价值评估[J]. 资源科学,2016,38(5):929-938.
	[Ao C L,Dong Y N,Jiao Y,et al. Ecological value evaluation of the Sanjiang Plain Wetland based on the double-hurdle mode[J]. Resources Science,2016,38(5):929-938.]
[13]	敖长林,王静,高琴,等. CVM数据分析中的半参数模型及实证研究[J]. 系统工程理论与实践,2014,(9):2332-2338.
	[Ao C L,Wang J,Gao Q,et al.The semi-parametric model and empirical research in CVM[J]. Systems Engineering-Theory &Practice,2014,(9):2332-2338.]
[14]	Ajzen I.Understanding the Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior[M]. Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall,1980.
[15]	Hanley N,Wright R E,Alvarez-Farizo B.Estimating the economic value of improvements in river ecology using choice experiments:An application to the water framework directive[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2006,78(2):183-193.
[16]	李京梅,陈琦,姚海燕. 基于选择实验法的胶州湾湿地围垦生态效益损失评估[J]. 资源科学,2015,37(1):68-75.
	[Li J M,Chen Q,Yao H Y,et al.Valuing the loss of ecological benefits from wetland reclamation in Jiaozhou Bay based on choice experiments[J]. Resources Science,2015,37(1):68-75.]
[17]	Lancaster K J.A new approach to consume theory[J]. Journal of Political Economy,1966,74(2):132-157.
[18]	Cherchi E, Ortúzar J D D. Can mixed logit reveal the actual data generating process? Some implications for environmental assessment[J]. Transportation Research Part D Transport & Environment,2010,15(7):428-442.
[19]	Wallmo K,Lew D K.Valuing improvements to threatened and endangered marine species:An application of stated preference choice experiments[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2011,92(7):1793-1801.
[20]	Hanemann M,Loomis J,Kanninen B.Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation[J]. American Journal of Agricultural Economics,1991,73(4):1255-1263.
[21]	Chen M F.Extending the theory of planned behavior model to explain people's energy savings and carbon reduction behavioral intentions to mitigate climate change in Taiwan-moral obligation matters[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2016,112(3):1746-1753.
[22]	López-Mosquera N,García T,Barrena R.An extension of the theory of planned behavior to predict willingness to pay for the conservation of an urban park[J]. Journal of Environmental Management,2014,135(4):91-99.

属性	管理水平	解释
湿地面积	恶化	放任其恶化,湿地面积减少
	维持	维护现状不变
生物多样性	恶化	放任其恶化,物种减少
	维持	维护现状不变
	改善	取得良好的管理效果,物种恢复
水源涵养	恶化	放任其恶化,水质污染,水量降低
	维持	维护现状不变
	改善	取得良好的管理效果,水质改善,水源丰富
自然景观	恶化	放任其恶化,环境破坏,污染严重
	维持	维护现状不变
	改善	取得良好的管理效果,景观优美
支付保护价格/元	0、50、100、 150、200	每人每年支付的费用

属性	方案 A	方案 B	方案 C
湿地面积	维持	维持	A和B我都不选,对三江平原不进行任何保护
生物多样性	—	维持
水源涵养	—	改善
自然景观	改善	维持
支付保护价格/元	200	100	0
您的选择是:选择 A（）选择 B（）选择 C（）

变量	描述	定义	样本比例/%
性别	男	SEX=0	47.72
	女	SEX=1	52.28
年龄/岁	18以下	AGE=1	7.11
	18~25	AGE=2	17.77
	26~39	AGE=3	37.56
	40~59	AGE=4	28.42
	60以上	AGE=5	9.14
受教育程度	小学及以下	EDU=1	7.61
	初中	EDU=2	23.86
	高中	EDU=3	33.50
	大学	EDU=4	30.46
	研究生及以上	EDU=5	4.57
个人月收入/万元	0.5以下	INC=1	36.55
	0.5~1	INC=2	12.18
	1~3	INC=3	25.89
	3~5	INC=4	14.21
	5~10	INC=5	7.61
	10以上	INC=6	3.55

变量	模型1				模型2				模型3
变量	系数	标准误	z值	p值	系数	标准误	z值	p值	系数	标准误	z值	p值
湿地面积	0.343 3**	0.142 3	2.41	0.015 9	0.798 1***	0.285 1	2.80	0.005 1	0.270 9***	0.162 9	1.66	0.006 5
生物多样性	0.219 6**	0.096 9	2.46	0.014 0	0.408 3**	0.207 1	1.97	0.048 7	0.211 9**	0.114 9	1.84	0.045 2
水源涵养	0.470 6***	0.102 2	4.61	0.000 0	1.259 4***	0.329 6	3.82	0.000 1	0.455 0***	0.119 2	3.82	0.000 1
自然景观	0.238 2**	0.104 9	2.09	0.036 3	0.654 9***	0.215 1	3.04	0.002 3	0.248 8***	0.124 9	2.64	0.002 1
ASC1	-0.777 9*	0.429 8	-1.81	0.070 3	-1.267 5*	0.664 3	-1.91	0.056 4	-1.101 5***	0.576 9	-2.60	0.009 3
性别					0.742 1**	0.345 9	2.14	0.032 0	0.966 3***	0.353 9	2.73	0.006 3
年龄					-0.003 6	0.196 7	-0.02	0.985 6	0.235 4	0.177 4	1.33	0.184 5
教育程度					0.354 6**	0.178 3	1.99	0.046 7	0.710 5***	0.164 2	4.33	0.000 0
收入					0.464 7***	0.163 9	2.83	0.004 6	0.104 9***	0.126 1	0.83	0.004 1
行为态度									1.145 2***	0.170 2	6.73	0.000 0
主观规范									0.887 9***	0.186 2	4.77	0.000 0
知觉行为控制									0.276 8*	0.163 7	1.69	0.090 8
支付价格	-.004 9***	0.001 2	-4.24	0.000 0	-0.011 1***	0.002 8	-3.91	0.000 1	-0.004 6***	0.001 4	-3.32	0.000 9
Log likelihood	-534.247 0				-521.301 4				-389.883 7
Pseudo-R²	0.088 1				0.184 0				0.264 8
AIC/N	1.859 0				1.828 0				1.733 7

属性	模型1	模型2	模型3
湿地面积	69.50	71.96	58.90
生物多样性	44.46	36.82	46.06
水源涵养	95.26	113.56	98.92
自然景观	48.22	59.05	54.09

Analysis of willingness to pay for ecosystem services and influence factors based on the TPB

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Cited

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 5

References 22

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	ZHOU Yihu, FANG Tingting, LI li. Decision-making mechanism of farmers’ homestead exit based on the TAM-TPB framework [J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(1): 148-160.
[2]	HUANG Li, ZHOU Mi. International ecosystem service research dynamics and regional differences: A bibliometric analysis based on Web of Science data [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(4): 607-620.
[3]	YANG Liwen, WANG Dayong, WANG Yongzhi, LIANG Ze, WU Shuyao, LI Shuangcheng. Quantitative assessment of the supply-demand relationship of soil conservation service in the Sushui River Basin [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(12): 2451-2462.
[4]	YANG Lei, FENG Qingyu, CHEN Liding. Ecosystem services of soil and water conservation measures on the Loess Plateau [J]. Resources Science, 2020, 42(1): 87-95.
[5]	Yang LIU, Jun BI, Jianshu LV. Classification of ecosystem services and a reclassification framework of watershed ecosystem services [J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(7): 1189-1200.
[6]	Qingchun GUAN, Jinmin HAO, Yueqing XU, Guoping REN, Lei KANG. Zoning of agroecological management based on the relationship between supply and demand of ecosystem services [J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(7): 1359-1373.
[7]	Yangyang WANG, Yu XIAO, Gaodi XIE, Jie XU. Sand-fixing function of the grassland ecosystem in Ningxia based on the revised wind erosion model [J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(5): 980-991.
[8]	DING Zhenmin, YAO Shunbo. Model and measurement of payment for ecosystem services at small scale [J]. Resources Science, 2019, 41(12): 2182-2192.
[9]	Qiong QIU, Han SHI. Differentiation of the core concepts of natural resourceand ecosystem accounting [J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(10): 1901-1914.
[10]	Zhen CHEN, Jie GUO, Minghao OU. Characterization of the differences between farmers' intentionfor farmland transfer and their circulation behavior [J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(10): 2039-2047.
[11]	Mei WANG, Wenxiong WANG. Consistency of farmers' cognition and behavior in the adjustment of land ownership under farmland consolidation [J]. Resources Science, 2018, 40(1): 53-63.
[12]	Bo SUN, Wei DUAN, Huimin DING, Yan FENG, Yali WEN. Preference analysis of household ecological compensation in Crested Ibis protected area in Hanzhong,Shaanxi based on choice experiments [J]. Resources Science, 2017, 39(9): 1792-1800.
[13]	Yasheng WAN, Jiumiao CHENG, Jiuxing WU, Luocheng FEI, Yuting XU. Differences between rural homestead exit intention and exit behavior based on theory of planned behavior [J]. Resources Science, 2017, 39(7): 1281-1290.
[14]	Jian CHENG, Jiumiao CHENG, Luocheng FEI, Yuting XU, Yihu ZHOU. Modeling of farmer household psychological decision-making in farmland transfer [J]. Resources Science, 2017, 39(5): 818-826.
[15]	Erping SHANG, Erqi XU. Temporal and spatial variation of main ecosystem services in Guizhou and Guangxi Karst Mountainous region [J]. Resources Science, 2017, 39(10): 2000-2015.