1 / 21

May Zin Myint 201726063 (M2) Supervisor: Prof. Naoko K A I D A

E c o n o m i c Valuation of Community Forest Management in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar: An Application of Contingent Valuation Method. May Zin Myint 201726063 (M2) Supervisor: Prof. Naoko K A I D A. Jan 2 2 , 2019 ( Tue ). Con te nt.

fabienne
Download Presentation

May Zin Myint 201726063 (M2) Supervisor: Prof. Naoko K A I D A

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Economic Valuation of Community Forest Management in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar: An Application of Contingent ValuationMethod May Zin Myint 201726063(M2) Supervisor: Prof. NaokoKAIDA Jan 22, 2019(Tue)

  2. Content Introduction & Research Background LiteratureReview Objectives Hypothesis Methodology Questionnaire References 2

  3. 1. Introduction & ResearchBackground What is economicvaluation? 3

  4. The attachment of money values to non- marketedassets • Environmental goods and services are public goods • Difficult to put an accurate value onthem • In forest related studies, there are difficulties in availability of reliable socio-economic and biophysicaldata • Focus on community forests where sufficient data are available to enable monetaryvaluation. 4

  5. Provisioning • Regulating • Supporting • Cultural EcosystemServices Conserve Economic Valuation Studies Best PolicyOptions Sustainable Exploitation & Management Policy &Decision making 5

  6. Why Valuation of Community Forest Management? 6

  7. Community forestry was initially defined as, “any situation which intimately involves local people in a forestry activity. (FAO1978) • Initiated in 1990s in developingcountries • High deforestation & Inefficient forest governance • Over half a billion of community forest dependentpeople • Participatory approach for poverty alleviation • Ruraldevelopment • Restoration ofresources • Cash crops forlocal needs at farmlevel • Processing of forest products at thehousehold level Small industry level to generate income 7

  8. Community Forestry Program inMyanmar • Initiated in1995 • Integrated into National Forestry MasterPlan(2001-2031) • 2.27 million acres of community foresttargeted • Community Forestry Instruction(2016) Application forCF Establishment Form CFUG & Mgt.Committee • 30-year landlease • Issue ofCertificate FD & Local Authority Establish CF Approval 8

  9. 2. LiteratureReview

  10. ResearchQuestions What is the local people’s willingness to pay (WTP), in terms of time and/or money, for a community forest managementprogram? What are the factors influencing the willingness to pay time and money(WTPT&WTPM) • Financial constraints of rural people to contributemoney • Still they might be willing to contribute time in terms oflabor 10

  11. 3.Objectives To estimate the WTPM for reforestation programs that protect the selected ecosystem services in the community forests To estimate the WTPT for reforestation programs that protect the selected ecosystem services in the community forests To quantify the economic value of the selected ecosystem services based on the householdWTP To assess the factors influencing the WTPT/WTPM of the households in the community forest villagesstudied. 11

  12. 4.Hypothesis Hypothesis 1: WTPM for reforestation programs is greater for CFUG members thannon-member Hypothesis 2: WTPT for reforestation programs is greater for CFUG members thannon-member Hypothesis 3: WTPT is greater than WTPM forboth CFUG members andnon-members Hypothesis 4: CFUG members are more willing to pay both time and money (i.e. their WTPT and WTPM are higher than that ofnon- members) 12

  13. 5.Methodology • Contingent Valuation Method: A stated preference method widely use for uncovering the value of non-market goods by asking people’sWTP • Hypothetical reforestation programsproposed • Application of aquestionnaire • Double bounded dichotomous choicequestions • To check the validity, open-ended question will beasked • Payment mechanism as conservationfee • WTPM & WTPT (Cash in USD and Labor in terms of timeHours/week) 13

  14. Proposed ForestConservation P 1.rIongcrraeamsesd forestcover 2. Assistednatural regeneration by 30% throughtree planting 4. RegularPatrolling 3.Catchment protection 5. Forest protectionmeasures 14

  15. Study Area &Respondents Mandalay Region Nyaung Oo Township Wan Dwin Township MyeThin Twin Village Ka BarNi Village Yoe Sone Village 110 respondents in each village (UFUG members &non-members) 15

  16. 6.Questionnaire 1. Socio-economic characteristics ofthe households 2.Environmental awareness and perceived benefitsfrom forestecosystems 3. Experience in forestrelated activities 4. Respondents’ assessments ofthe proposedreforestation programs 5. WTPM & WTPT Questions 16

  17. Three sets of bids are prepared for WTP questions. 1USD is equivalent to 1500MMK • Questionnairein English and Burmese • To avoid range bias in WTP questions, bid levels are planned after discussing local forest officers 17

  18. DataAnalysis • WTP will be estimated on the basis of YES/NO answers to the double bounded dichotomous choice questions with three sets of biddingprices • The value of forest management programs will be calculated by multiplying the estimated WTP by total population in thetownship • The mean estimated WTP in labor will be transformed into a monetary value by multiplying the WTP in labor by the hourly wage rate ofrespondents. 18

  19. 7.References Hlaing, E., Inoue, M. (2013). Factors affecting participation of user group members: Comparative studies on two types of community forestry in the Dry Zone, Myanmar. Journal of Forest Research, 18:60-72. DOI10.1007/s10310-011-0328-8 Soe,A.,Sato,N., (2012).LocalPeople'sAttitudestowardsthe Community Forestry- The Case Studies in the Central Dry Zone of Myanmar. Journal of the Faculty of Agriculture, Kyushu University,57(1),273-280 Oo, T., Park, Y., Woo, S., Phonguodume, C., Lee, Y., (2012). Contributions of community forestry to the rural livelihoods and watershed conservation: Acase study in Ywangan township, Shan state, Myanmar. Journal of Environmental Science and Management,15:77-89 Pham.T.D., Yoshino,K., Kaida, N., Nguyen, X,H., Bui, D,T. (2018). Willingness to pay for mangrove restoration in the context of climate change in the CatBa biosphere rerserve, Vietnam. Ocean and coastal management, 163,269-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.07.005 19

  20. Carson, R. T., & Mitchell, R. C. (1993). The Value of clean water: The public’s willingness to pay for boatable, fishable, and swimmable quality water. Water Resources Research, 29(7), 2445–2454.https://doi.org/10.1029/93WR00495 Bhandari, P., Mohan, K., C., Shrestha, S., Aryal, A., Shrestha, U., B., 2016.Assessment of ecosystem service indicators and stakeholder’s willingness to pay for selected ecosystem services in the Chure region of Nepal. Applied Geography, 69,25-34. FAO. (2016). Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. FAO Forestry(p. 54). https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GB005021 KaidaN,Dang,NA.2016.Tourists’perceptionofmarineecosystemconservationin the Nha Trang Bay Marine Protected Area, Vietnam. Tropics 24 (4):187-194 20

  21. ThankYou For Your KindAttention

More Related