The Opportunity Cost of Labor for Valuing Mangrove Restoration in Mahakam Delta, Indonesia
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Data Collection and Survey Structure
2.3. Analytical Framework
2.3.1. Determinants and Intensity of WTCL for Mangrove Restoration
2.3.2. Marginal Effects
2.3.3. Conversion of Labor Contribution into Monetary Value
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Statistics
3.2. Interest of Household in Salaried Work
3.3. Labor Time and Wage Rate of Time (WRT)
3.4. Monetary Value of Mangrove Restoration
3.5. Parameter Estimates of Willingness to Contribute
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A. Questionnaire on Mangrove Restoration in Mahakam Delta
- Increased of habitats for fish, shrimp and crabs that support the community’s livelihoods;
- mangrove vegetation provides new livelihood options for the local community through ecotourism activities; and
- Mangrove vegetation protects coasts from damage by tidal waves, hurricanes, and tsunamis;
- (1)
- Would you be willing to contribute labor for the mangroves restoration program?
- (2)
- If yes, how much time are you willing to give in voluntary work in support of the program?
- (a)
- Hours per day ( )
- (b)
- Days per week ( )
- (c)
- Weeks per month ( )
References
- Everard, M.; Jha, R.R.; Russell, S. The benefits of fringing mangrove systems to Mumbai. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2014, 24, 256–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giri, C.; Ochieng, E.; Tieszen, L.L.; Zhu, Z.; Singh, A.; Loveland, T.; Masek, J.; Duke, N. Status and distribution of mangrove forests of the world using earth observation satellite data. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 2011, 20, 154–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kairo, J.G.; Wanjiru, C.; Ochiewo, J. Net Pay: Economic analysis of a replanted mangrove plantation in Kenya. J. Sustain. For. 2009, 28, 395–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vo, Q.T.; Kuenzer, C.; Vo, Q.M.; Moder, F.; Oppelt, N. Review of valuation methods for mangrove ecosystem services. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 23, 431–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costanza, R.; D’Arge, R.; de Groot, R.; Farber, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; Limburg, K.; Naeem, S.; O’Neill, R.V.; Paruelo, J.; et al. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 1997, 387, 253–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polidoro, B.A.; Carpenter, K.E.; Collins, L.; Duke, N.C.; Ellison, A.M.; Ellison, J.C.; Farnsworth, E.J.; Fernando, E.S.; Kathiresan, K.; Koedam, N.E.; et al. The loss of species: Mangrove extinction risk and geographic areas of global concern. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e10095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Spalding, L.; Kainuma, M.; Collins, L. World Atlas of Mangroves; Earthscan: London, UK; Washington, DC, USA, 2010; Volume 39, pp. 107–109. ISBN 978-1-84407-657-4. [Google Scholar]
- Joffre, O.M.; Bosma, R.H.; Bregt, A.K.; van Zwieten, P.A.M.; Bush, S.R.; Verreth, J.A.J. What drives the adoption of integrated shrimp mangrove aquaculture in Vietnam? Ocean Coast. Manag. 2015, 114, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giesen, W.; Wulffraat, S.; Zieren, M.; Scholten, L. Mangrove Guidebook for Southeast Asia; FAO: Rome, Italy; Wetlands International: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2006; ISBN 974-7946-85-8. [Google Scholar]
- Brander, L.M.; Wagtendonk, A.J.; Hussain, S.S.; McVittie, A.; Verburg, P.H.; de Groot, R.S.; van der Ploeg, S. Ecosystem service values for mangroves in Southeast Asia: A meta-analysis and value transfer application. Ecosyst. Serv. 2012, 1, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salem, M.E.; Mercer, D.E. The economic value of mangroves: A meta-analysis. Sustainability 2012, 4, 359–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swallow, B.M.; Woudyalew, M. Evaluating willingness to contribute to a local public good: Application of contingent valuation to tsetse control in Ethiopia. Ecol. Econ. 1994, 11, 153–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Garra, T. Bequest values for marine resources: How important for indigenous communities in less-developed economies? Environ. Resour. Econ. 2009, 44, 179–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS). Kutai Kartanegara in Figures. 2017. Available online: https://kukarkab.bps.go.id/webbeta/website/pdf_publikasi/Kabupaten-Kutai-Kartanegara-Dalam-Angka-2017.pdf (accessed on 17 May 2017).
- Sidik, A.S. The changes of mangrove ecosystem in Mahakam Delta, Indonesia. A complex social-environmental pattern of linkages in resources utilization. In Proceedings of the Rescopar Scientific Meeting, Samarinda, Indonesia, 25–26 February 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Persoon, G.A.; Simarmata, R. Undoing ‘marginality’: The islands of the Mahakam Delta, East Kalimantan (Indonesia). J. Mar. Isl. Cult. 2014, 3, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allen, G.P.; Chambers, J.L.C. Sedimentation in the Modern and Miocene Mahakam Delta; Indonesian Petroleum Association: Jakarta, Indonesia, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Bourgeois, R.A.; Gouyon, A.; Jésus, F.; Levang, P.; Langeraar, W.; Rahmadani, F.; Sudiono, E.; Sulistiadi, B. A Socio Economic and Institutional Analysis of Mahakam Delta Stakeholders; Total-Fina-Elf; CIRAD: Montpellier, France, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Creocean. Mahakam Delta 1999 Environmental Baseline Survey; Final Report to Total Indonesie; Creocean: Montpellier, France, 2000; 132p, unpublished. [Google Scholar]
- Venkatachalam, L. The contingent valuation method: A review. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2004, 24, 89–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, C.H.; Wang, C.H. Estimating the Total Economic Value of Cultivated Flower Land in Taiwan. Sustainability 2015, 7, 4764–4782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lankia, T.; Neuvonen, M.; Pouta, E.; Sievänen, T. Willingness to contribute to the management of recreational quality on private lands in Finland. J. For. Econ. 2014, 20, 141–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asrat, P.; Belay, K.; Hamito, D. Determinants of farmers’ willingness to pay for soil conservation practices in the southeastern highlands of Ethiopia. Land Degrad. Dev. 2004, 15, 423–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tilahun, M.; Vranken, L.; Muys, B.; Deckers, J.; Gebregziabher, K.; Gebrehiwot, K.; Bauer, H.; Mathijs, E. Rural Households’ Demand for Frankincense Forest Conservation in Tigray: A Continent Valuation Analysis. Land Degrad. Dev. 2013, 26, 642–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hung, L.T.; Loomis, J.B.; Thinh, V.T. Comparing money and labour payment in contingent valuation: The case of forest fire prevention in Vietnamese context. J. Int. Dev. 2007, 19, 173–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arbiol, J.; Borja, M.; Yabe, M.; Nomura, H.; Gloriani, N.; Yoshida, S.I. Valuing human leptospirosis prevention using the opportunity cost of labor. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2013, 10, 1845–1860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Eom, Y.S.; Larson, D.M. Valuing housework time from willingness to spend time and money for environmental quality improvements. Rev. Econ. Househ. 2006, 4, 205–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ready, R.C.; Buzby, J.C.; Hu, D. Differences between continuous and discrete contingent value estimates. Land Econom. 1996, 72, 397–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strazzera, E.; Genius, M.; Scarpa, R.; Hutchinson, G. The effect of protest votes on the estimates of WTP for use values of recreational sites. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2003, 25, 461–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maddala, G.S. Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Economics; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1983; pp. 257–291. [Google Scholar]
- Tobin, J. Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables. Econometrica 1958, 26, 24–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Susilo, H.; Takahashi, Y.; Yabe, M. Evidence for mangrove restoration in the Mahakam Delta, Indonesia, Based on Households’ Willingness to Pay. J. Agric. Sci. 2017, 9, 30–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andersen, J.K.; Boldrin, A.; Christensen, T.H.; Scheutz, C. Mass balances and life cycle inventory of home composting of organic waste. Waste Manag. 2011, 31, 1934–1942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tuan, T.H.; My, N.H.D.; Anh, L.T.Q.; Toan, N.V. Using contingent valuation method to estimate the WTP for mangrove restoration under the context of climate change: A case study of Thi Nai lagoon, Quy Nhon city, Vietnam. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2014, 95, 198–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Champ, P.A.; Bishop, R.C. Is willingness to pay for a public good sensitive to the elicitation format? Land Econ. 2006, 82, 162–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loomis, J.; Brown, T.; Lucero, B.; Peterson, G. Evaluating the Validity of the Dichotomous Choice Question Format in Contingent Valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 1997, 10, 109–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variables | Description | Mean | Std. Dev | Min | Max |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Dependent | |||||
Labor time | Number of hours that households are willing to contribute labor time per month on mangrove restoration program | 9.18 | 10.99 | 0 | 80 |
Wage rate of time | Monetary compensation per labor time received by the household for mangrove restoration program (in IDR thousand/month) | 398.76 | 625.76 | 0 | 6400 |
2. Independent | |||||
Gender | 1 if the respondent is male; 0 if female | 0.79 | 0.41 | 0 | 1 |
Age | 1 = below 20; 2 = 20–30; 3 = 31–40; 4 = 41–50; 5 = 51–60; 6 = over 60 | 3.38 | 1.03 | 1 | 6 |
Family size | Family size of respondents | 2.94 | 1.52 | 0 | 7 |
Occupation | 1 if the respondent is fish farmer; 0 if otherwise | 0.34 | 0.47 | 0 | 1 |
Residence status | 1 if the respondent is indigenous; 0 if immigrant | 0.34 | 0.48 | 0 | 1 |
Education | 1 = never; 2 = primary school; 3 = secondary school; 4 = high school; 5 = university degree | 2.18 | 0.98 | 1 | 5 |
Income (Million IDR) | 1 = less than 1; 2 = 1–1.99; 3 = 2–2.99; 4 = 3–3.99; 5 = 4–5; 6 = more than 5 | 3.18 | 1.45 | 1 | 6 |
Planting of mangrove seedlings | 1 if respondent wants to participate in planting of mangrove seedlings; 0 if otherwise | 0.37 | 0.48 | 0 | 1 |
Responsibility | The responsibility of the local community to mangrove restoration. 1 if respondent agrees; 0 is disagree | 0.90 | 0.30 | 0 | 1 |
Nursery | 1 if mangrove benefit as nursery ground; 0 if otherwise | 0.40 | 0.49 | 0 | 1 |
Participation | Frequency | Percent | Cumulative |
---|---|---|---|
Planting of mangrove seedlings | 134 | 51.34 | 51.34 |
Monitoring of plants progress | 86 | 32.95 | 84.29 |
Mangrove areas protection | 41 | 15.71 | 100.00 |
Labor Time (Hours/Month) | WRT | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hours/Month | Freq | Percent | Cumulative | IDR 000/Month | Freq | Percent | Cumulative |
>10 | 143 | 54.79 | 54.79 | >500 | 173 | 66.28 | 66.28 |
10–30 | 101 | 38.70 | 93.49 | 500–1000 | 59 | 22.61 | 88.89 |
31–50 | 13 | 4.98 | 98.47 | 1001–1500 | 16 | 6.13 | 95.02 |
51–70 | 3 | 1.15 | 99.62 | 1501–2000 | 6 | 2.30 | 97.32 |
70< | 1 | 0.38 | 100.00 | 2000< | 7 | 2.68 | 100.00 |
Description | |
---|---|
Number of samples (respondent) | 364 |
Number of distributed questionnaires (respondent) | 380 |
Questionnaire response | 0.96 |
Number of households (person) | 31241 |
Opportunity cost of time (IDR million/year) | 4.79 |
Annual benefit (IDR billion/year) | 143 |
Variables | Labor Time | WRT | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coeff | t-Value | Marginal Effects | Coeff | t-Value | Marginal Effects | |||
Constant | 7.45 | * | 1.73 | 114.08 | 0.46 | |||
Gender | 1.19 | 0.74 | 0.03 | 165.27 | * | 1.79 | 0.09 | |
Age | 0.71 | 1.09 | 0.02 | 51.69 | 1.40 | 0.03 | ||
Family size | −1.87 | *** | −4.06 | −0.05 | −81.7 | *** | −3.10 | −0.05 |
Resident | −1.64 | −1.15 | −0.05 | −62.78 | −0.77 | −0.04 | ||
Occupation | 0.53 | 0.33 | 0.02 | −21.99 | −0.24 | −0.01 | ||
Education | 0.43 | 0.61 | 0.01 | 18.14 | 0.45 | 0.01 | ||
Income | −3.51 | *** | −6.55 | −0.10 | −170.42 | *** | −5.56 | −0.10 |
Planting of mangrove seedlings | 7.98 | *** | 5.52 | 0.23 | 592.2 | *** | 7.17 | 0.33 |
Responsibility | 8.37 | *** | 3.45 | 0.24 | 361.74 | ** | 2.59 | 0.20 |
Nursery | 3.32 | ** | 2.45 | 0.10 | 99.96 | 1.28 | 0.06 | |
Log Likelihood | −1090.46 | −2135.96 | ||||||
LR χ2 (10) | 124.88 | *** | 122.48 | *** | ||||
Pseudo R2 | 0.0542 | 0.0279 |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Susilo, H.; Takahashi, Y.; Yabe, M. The Opportunity Cost of Labor for Valuing Mangrove Restoration in Mahakam Delta, Indonesia. Sustainability 2017, 9, 2169. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122169
Susilo H, Takahashi Y, Yabe M. The Opportunity Cost of Labor for Valuing Mangrove Restoration in Mahakam Delta, Indonesia. Sustainability. 2017; 9(12):2169. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122169
Chicago/Turabian StyleSusilo, Heru, Yoshifumi Takahashi, and Mitsuyasu Yabe. 2017. "The Opportunity Cost of Labor for Valuing Mangrove Restoration in Mahakam Delta, Indonesia" Sustainability 9, no. 12: 2169. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122169