Next Article in Journal
Shark Fishing vs. Conservation: Analysis and Synthesis
Next Article in Special Issue
Land Use-Based Participatory Assessment of Ecosystem Services for Ecological Restoration in Village Tank Cascade Systems of Sri Lanka
Previous Article in Journal
A Study on the Optimal Flexible Job-Shop Scheduling with Sequence-Dependent Setup Time Based on a Hybrid Algorithm of Improved Quantum Cat Swarm Optimization
Previous Article in Special Issue
Investigation of Spatio–Temporal Changes in Land Use and Heat Stress Indices over Jaipur City Using Geospatial Techniques
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Payments for Watershed Ecosystem Services in the Eyes of the Public, China

1
State Key Laboratory of Urban and Regional Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China
2
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3
Key Laboratory of the Ministry of Education for Coastal Wetland Ecosystems, College of the Environment and Ecology, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361102, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2022, 14(15), 9550; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159550
Submission received: 30 May 2022 / Revised: 27 July 2022 / Accepted: 31 July 2022 / Published: 3 August 2022

Abstract

Recent decades have witnessed an increased development of schemes for payment for watershed ecosystem services (PWES). However, the public is usually excluded from PWES systems. Reliable and empirical research on PWES from the public perspective is scarce. Aiming to understand public perceptions, attitudes, participation, and responses to PWES, this paper investigated local residents living in the Yongding River watershed area through a face-to-face questionnaire survey. The results showed that the public had limited knowledge of PWES. The public was keen to be involved in PWES decision-making, but the current level of public participation was very low. Regarding willingness to pay (WTP) and willingness to accept (WTA), nearly 55% of the respondents supported paying the upstream residents for protecting the environment if they were beneficiaries in the downstream areas, while 85% of the respondents agreed to accept compensation if they were contributors to environmental improvement in the upstream areas. Although some of the respondents’ daily lives were affected by the watershed environment, they were reluctant to pay, reflecting a sign of “free-riding”. The regression analysis showed that public concerns, values, knowledge of PWES and the watershed environment, and demographic factors determined the WTP and WTA. The results of the contingent valuation method and opportunity costs method showed that the annual payment for headwater conservation areas (Huailai and Yanqing) ranged from CNY 245 to 718 million (USD 36 to 106 million). This study contributes to our limited knowledge and understanding of public sentiment and makes recommendations for improving public receptivity to PWES.
Keywords: public perceptions; payment for watershed ecosystem services; willingness to pay; willingness to accept; public participation public perceptions; payment for watershed ecosystem services; willingness to pay; willingness to accept; public participation

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chen, C.; He, G.; Lu, Y. Payments for Watershed Ecosystem Services in the Eyes of the Public, China. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159550

AMA Style

Chen C, He G, Lu Y. Payments for Watershed Ecosystem Services in the Eyes of the Public, China. Sustainability. 2022; 14(15):9550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159550

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chen, Chunci, Guizhen He, and Yonglong Lu. 2022. "Payments for Watershed Ecosystem Services in the Eyes of the Public, China" Sustainability 14, no. 15: 9550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159550

APA Style

Chen, C., He, G., & Lu, Y. (2022). Payments for Watershed Ecosystem Services in the Eyes of the Public, China. Sustainability, 14(15), 9550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159550

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop