Evaluating Willingness to Sell Vegetation in the White Volta Basin in Northern Ghana

Gandaa, Z, Bizoola *

University for Development Studies, Tamale, Ghana.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

Concepts of ecosystem services have been developed to make explicit connections between human welfare and ecological sustainability for policy, development, and conservation initiatives. Economic concepts such as the distinction between prices and values, and the acknowledgment of their values are context-specific which may change across space and time. Contingent valuation is a survey-based economic technique for valuing non-market resources, such as vegetation. This method is often used to establish the amount people are willing to be compensated for maintaining the existence of an environmental feature such as a tree, shrub, or grass. The level of importance attached to provisioning services as well as cultural services and cultural heritage differ in the rural communities hence different cash values attached. It is often perceived that rural community members do not put monetary value on vegetation, the study is therefore aimed at establishing monetary value rural communities have value for vegetation. The study was conducted in two irrigated and two unirrigated landscapes consisting of about 54 communities and comprising 240 respondents. Participatory Rural Appraisal tools were used. Random Utility Theory was applied and used for the analysis. The willingness to sell vegetation was significant at a 5% confidence level concerning native, sex, age, education, and household head. Marital status was, however, not significant in all the landscapes. The price trend is observed to be across a landscape, from the catchment to the downstream ecosystem.

Keywords: Contingent valuation, vegetation, ecosystem services, rural community, livelihood


How to Cite

Bizoola, Gandaa, Z,. 2024. “Evaluating Willingness to Sell Vegetation in the White Volta Basin in Northern Ghana”. International Journal of Environment and Climate Change 14 (7):277-87. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijecc/2024/v14i74269.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Daily GC, Söderqvist T, Aniyar S, Arrow K, Dasgupta P, Ehrlich PR, Walker B. The value of nature and the nature of value. Science. 2000;289(5478):395-396.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA). Ecosystems and human well-being: Current state and trends: findings of the condition and trends working group. Island Press, Washington, DC. 2005;160.

Muradian R, Arsel M, Pellegrini L, Adaman F, Aguilar B, Agarwal B, Garcia‐Frapolli E. Payments for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win‐win solutions. Conservation letters. 2013;6(4):274-279.

Edem KC, Ross CH, Martin FQ, Erasmus HO. Natural resource and biodiversity conservation in Ghana: the use of livelihoods support activities to achieve conservation objectives. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management. 2014;10(4).

Arriagada R, Perrings C. Making payments for ecosystem services work. Publishing Services Section, Nairobi; 2009. ISO 14001:2004

Rojas M, Aylward B. What are we learning from experiences with markets for environmental services in Costa Rica? A review and critique of the literature. International Institute for Environment and Development, London; 2003.

Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs DEFRA; 2007. Website www.defra.gov.uk

Hurford PA, Harou JJ. Balancing ecosystem services with energy and food security - Assessing trade-offs from reservoir operation and irrigation investments in Kenya’s Tana Basin. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci; 2014.

Turner RK. The place of economic values in environmental valuation. In: Bateman IJ, Willis KG (eds.) Valuing environmental preferences. Oxford University Press, Oxford; 1999.

Tahulela T. The relationship between agroforestry and ecosystem services: role of agroforestry in rural communities (Doctoral dissertation), Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch University; 2016.

Ryan CM, Pritchard R, McNicol I, Owen M, Fisher JA, Lehmann C. Ecosystem services from southern African woodlands and their future under global change. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2016; 371(1703):20150312.

Burkhard B, Kroll F, Müller F, Windhorst W. Landscapes’ capacities to provide ecosystem services – a concept for land-cover-based assessments. Landscape Online. 2009;15(1):1-22.

Fisher JA, Patenaude G, Meir P, Andrea J, Nightingale JA, Rounsevell DAM, Williams M, Woodhouse HI. Strengthening conceptual foundations: Analysing frameworks for ecosystem services and poverty alleviation research. Global Environmental Change; 2013.

DOI:www.elsevier.com/locate/gloenvcha

Martín-López B, Montes C, Benayas J. Influence of user characteristics on the valuation of ecosystem services in Doñana Natural Protected Area (southwest Spain). Environmental Conservation. 2007;34(3): 215-224.

Hejase AJ, Hejase HJ. Research Methods, a Practical Approach for Business Students. (2nd Ed.) Philadelphia, PA: Massadir Inc; 2013.

Torkelsson Å. Resources, not capital: A case study of the gendered distribution and productivity of social network ties in rural Ethiopia. Rural Sociology. 2007;72(4):583-607.

Water Resources Commission (WRC). The White Volta Basin - Integrated Water Resource Management Plan. Accra – Ghana; 2008.