Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments

•Using a choice experiment we analyze the willingness to accept a mangrove-conservation policy.•We study total and discretionary exclusion for third parties to resources under concession.•Externally imposed rules about exclusion prevent/motivate users from participating in PES.•Preferences for accep...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:World development 2019-11, Vol.123, p.104619, Article 104619
Hauptverfasser: Maldonado, Jorge H., Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio, Henao-Henao, Juan P., Bruner, Aaron
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 104619
container_title World development
container_volume 123
creator Maldonado, Jorge H.
Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio
Henao-Henao, Juan P.
Bruner, Aaron
description •Using a choice experiment we analyze the willingness to accept a mangrove-conservation policy.•We study total and discretionary exclusion for third parties to resources under concession.•Externally imposed rules about exclusion prevent/motivate users from participating in PES.•Preferences for accepting the conservation policy exhibits heterogeneity among users.•We contribute to the discussion on the determinants of participation in conservation schemes. Payments for environmental services (PES) constitute a growing approach to achieve the sustainability of ecosystems and the benefits they provide to people. However, informal tenure and lack of capacity to enforce property rights impede implementation of PES initiatives. Such challenges are common for local communities in coastal and marine areas who overexploit Common-Pool Resources (CPR) under open access. Assigning property rights to organized users has been implemented as a solution, transforming a public good into a club good. Nevertheless, the nature of CPR makes it difficult to define and enforce use rights based on territorial criteria, which might generate equity concerns between organized users and their peers who lose rights. This paper investigates, using a choice experiment, the willingness of Ecuadorian mangrove resource users to accept a conservation policy that combines a concession for sustainable extraction and an economic incentive. Given that a collective concession for the sustainable use and management of CPR implies exclusion of other communities, we specifically analyze two different access levels: i. total exclusion, where the agreement defines that no one other than the concessionaires can access and extract the resources, and ii. discretionary exclusion, where the concessionaires can establish their own rules and conditions for allowing access and use of the resources by third parties. Our interest is to identify how externally imposed rules around exclusion prevent or motivate organized users from participating in approaches to CPR management based on allocation of property rights. We find that having the discretion to choose the level of exclusion matters to resource users when deciding whether to accept the proposed mangrove management strategy. Moreover, we show that preferences for accepting the conservation policy exhibits heterogeneity among users. We contribute to the discussion on the determinants of participation in incentive-based conservation programs.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104619
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2312515203</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0305750X19302657</els_id><sourcerecordid>2312515203</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-a0216e2f4c41dfa060ecebc9ea4e18efcd11698ea40529fe4890f2576595ebbe3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUEtOwzAQtRBIlMIVkCXWKbYTJ_UKqlI-UiU2ILGzXGfSumrjYDuBHoFb4xBYsxrNzPvMPIQuKZlQQvPr7eTDul1ZQjdhhIo4zHIqjtCITos04ULQYzQiKeFJwcnbKTrzfksI4akoRujrzoLH8Kl3rTe2xnsVAjhsaqxt7cF1KvRjtXYAe6iDv8EzrJUHbKsIrtfOdoDbiPQ9KWwAL3SrSuuM6jWUD3Fr6jVulAtGm0YF6w5Yb6zREI0bcOZH-BydVGrn4eK3jtHr_eJl_pgsnx-e5rNlotOChUQRRnNgVaYzWlaK5AQ0rLQAlQGdQqVLSnMxjS3hTFSQTQWpGC9yLjisVpCO0dWg2zj73oIPcmtbV0dLyVLKOOWMpBGVDyjtrPcOKtnEO5U7SEpkH7vcyr_YZR-7HGKPxNuBCPGHzoCTXhuoNZTGgQ6ytOY_iW_sCZMX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2312515203</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments</title><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Maldonado, Jorge H. ; Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio ; Henao-Henao, Juan P. ; Bruner, Aaron</creator><creatorcontrib>Maldonado, Jorge H. ; Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio ; Henao-Henao, Juan P. ; Bruner, Aaron</creatorcontrib><description>•Using a choice experiment we analyze the willingness to accept a mangrove-conservation policy.•We study total and discretionary exclusion for third parties to resources under concession.•Externally imposed rules about exclusion prevent/motivate users from participating in PES.•Preferences for accepting the conservation policy exhibits heterogeneity among users.•We contribute to the discussion on the determinants of participation in conservation schemes. Payments for environmental services (PES) constitute a growing approach to achieve the sustainability of ecosystems and the benefits they provide to people. However, informal tenure and lack of capacity to enforce property rights impede implementation of PES initiatives. Such challenges are common for local communities in coastal and marine areas who overexploit Common-Pool Resources (CPR) under open access. Assigning property rights to organized users has been implemented as a solution, transforming a public good into a club good. Nevertheless, the nature of CPR makes it difficult to define and enforce use rights based on territorial criteria, which might generate equity concerns between organized users and their peers who lose rights. This paper investigates, using a choice experiment, the willingness of Ecuadorian mangrove resource users to accept a conservation policy that combines a concession for sustainable extraction and an economic incentive. Given that a collective concession for the sustainable use and management of CPR implies exclusion of other communities, we specifically analyze two different access levels: i. total exclusion, where the agreement defines that no one other than the concessionaires can access and extract the resources, and ii. discretionary exclusion, where the concessionaires can establish their own rules and conditions for allowing access and use of the resources by third parties. Our interest is to identify how externally imposed rules around exclusion prevent or motivate organized users from participating in approaches to CPR management based on allocation of property rights. We find that having the discretion to choose the level of exclusion matters to resource users when deciding whether to accept the proposed mangrove management strategy. Moreover, we show that preferences for accepting the conservation policy exhibits heterogeneity among users. We contribute to the discussion on the determinants of participation in incentive-based conservation programs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0305-750X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5991</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104619</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Access ; Acquiescence ; Agreements ; Club goods ; Community ; Compromises ; Conservation ; Conservation contracts ; Conservation incentives ; Criteria ; Discretionary access ; Economic incentives ; Ecosystems ; Environmental policy ; Experiments ; Extraction ; Heterogeneity ; Local communities ; Local users ; Marine environment ; Participation ; Payment for environmental services ; Payments ; Peers ; Preference heterogeneity ; Property rights ; Resource conservation ; Resource management ; Sustainability ; Sustainable ecosystems ; Sustainable use ; Tenure</subject><ispartof>World development, 2019-11, Vol.123, p.104619, Article 104619</ispartof><rights>2019 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright Pergamon Press Inc. Nov 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-a0216e2f4c41dfa060ecebc9ea4e18efcd11698ea40529fe4890f2576595ebbe3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-a0216e2f4c41dfa060ecebc9ea4e18efcd11698ea40529fe4890f2576595ebbe3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104619$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27866,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Maldonado, Jorge H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henao-Henao, Juan P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruner, Aaron</creatorcontrib><title>Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments</title><title>World development</title><description>•Using a choice experiment we analyze the willingness to accept a mangrove-conservation policy.•We study total and discretionary exclusion for third parties to resources under concession.•Externally imposed rules about exclusion prevent/motivate users from participating in PES.•Preferences for accepting the conservation policy exhibits heterogeneity among users.•We contribute to the discussion on the determinants of participation in conservation schemes. Payments for environmental services (PES) constitute a growing approach to achieve the sustainability of ecosystems and the benefits they provide to people. However, informal tenure and lack of capacity to enforce property rights impede implementation of PES initiatives. Such challenges are common for local communities in coastal and marine areas who overexploit Common-Pool Resources (CPR) under open access. Assigning property rights to organized users has been implemented as a solution, transforming a public good into a club good. Nevertheless, the nature of CPR makes it difficult to define and enforce use rights based on territorial criteria, which might generate equity concerns between organized users and their peers who lose rights. This paper investigates, using a choice experiment, the willingness of Ecuadorian mangrove resource users to accept a conservation policy that combines a concession for sustainable extraction and an economic incentive. Given that a collective concession for the sustainable use and management of CPR implies exclusion of other communities, we specifically analyze two different access levels: i. total exclusion, where the agreement defines that no one other than the concessionaires can access and extract the resources, and ii. discretionary exclusion, where the concessionaires can establish their own rules and conditions for allowing access and use of the resources by third parties. Our interest is to identify how externally imposed rules around exclusion prevent or motivate organized users from participating in approaches to CPR management based on allocation of property rights. We find that having the discretion to choose the level of exclusion matters to resource users when deciding whether to accept the proposed mangrove management strategy. Moreover, we show that preferences for accepting the conservation policy exhibits heterogeneity among users. We contribute to the discussion on the determinants of participation in incentive-based conservation programs.</description><subject>Access</subject><subject>Acquiescence</subject><subject>Agreements</subject><subject>Club goods</subject><subject>Community</subject><subject>Compromises</subject><subject>Conservation</subject><subject>Conservation contracts</subject><subject>Conservation incentives</subject><subject>Criteria</subject><subject>Discretionary access</subject><subject>Economic incentives</subject><subject>Ecosystems</subject><subject>Environmental policy</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Extraction</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>Local communities</subject><subject>Local users</subject><subject>Marine environment</subject><subject>Participation</subject><subject>Payment for environmental services</subject><subject>Payments</subject><subject>Peers</subject><subject>Preference heterogeneity</subject><subject>Property rights</subject><subject>Resource conservation</subject><subject>Resource management</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><subject>Sustainable ecosystems</subject><subject>Sustainable use</subject><subject>Tenure</subject><issn>0305-750X</issn><issn>1873-5991</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUEtOwzAQtRBIlMIVkCXWKbYTJ_UKqlI-UiU2ILGzXGfSumrjYDuBHoFb4xBYsxrNzPvMPIQuKZlQQvPr7eTDul1ZQjdhhIo4zHIqjtCITos04ULQYzQiKeFJwcnbKTrzfksI4akoRujrzoLH8Kl3rTe2xnsVAjhsaqxt7cF1KvRjtXYAe6iDv8EzrJUHbKsIrtfOdoDbiPQ9KWwAL3SrSuuM6jWUD3Fr6jVulAtGm0YF6w5Yb6zREI0bcOZH-BydVGrn4eK3jtHr_eJl_pgsnx-e5rNlotOChUQRRnNgVaYzWlaK5AQ0rLQAlQGdQqVLSnMxjS3hTFSQTQWpGC9yLjisVpCO0dWg2zj73oIPcmtbV0dLyVLKOOWMpBGVDyjtrPcOKtnEO5U7SEpkH7vcyr_YZR-7HGKPxNuBCPGHzoCTXhuoNZTGgQ6ytOY_iW_sCZMX</recordid><startdate>20191101</startdate><enddate>20191101</enddate><creator>Maldonado, Jorge H.</creator><creator>Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio</creator><creator>Henao-Henao, Juan P.</creator><creator>Bruner, Aaron</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Pergamon Press Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20191101</creationdate><title>Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments</title><author>Maldonado, Jorge H. ; Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio ; Henao-Henao, Juan P. ; Bruner, Aaron</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-a0216e2f4c41dfa060ecebc9ea4e18efcd11698ea40529fe4890f2576595ebbe3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Access</topic><topic>Acquiescence</topic><topic>Agreements</topic><topic>Club goods</topic><topic>Community</topic><topic>Compromises</topic><topic>Conservation</topic><topic>Conservation contracts</topic><topic>Conservation incentives</topic><topic>Criteria</topic><topic>Discretionary access</topic><topic>Economic incentives</topic><topic>Ecosystems</topic><topic>Environmental policy</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Extraction</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>Local communities</topic><topic>Local users</topic><topic>Marine environment</topic><topic>Participation</topic><topic>Payment for environmental services</topic><topic>Payments</topic><topic>Peers</topic><topic>Preference heterogeneity</topic><topic>Property rights</topic><topic>Resource conservation</topic><topic>Resource management</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><topic>Sustainable ecosystems</topic><topic>Sustainable use</topic><topic>Tenure</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Maldonado, Jorge H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henao-Henao, Juan P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bruner, Aaron</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>World development</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Maldonado, Jorge H.</au><au>Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio</au><au>Henao-Henao, Juan P.</au><au>Bruner, Aaron</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments</atitle><jtitle>World development</jtitle><date>2019-11-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>123</volume><spage>104619</spage><pages>104619-</pages><artnum>104619</artnum><issn>0305-750X</issn><eissn>1873-5991</eissn><abstract>•Using a choice experiment we analyze the willingness to accept a mangrove-conservation policy.•We study total and discretionary exclusion for third parties to resources under concession.•Externally imposed rules about exclusion prevent/motivate users from participating in PES.•Preferences for accepting the conservation policy exhibits heterogeneity among users.•We contribute to the discussion on the determinants of participation in conservation schemes. Payments for environmental services (PES) constitute a growing approach to achieve the sustainability of ecosystems and the benefits they provide to people. However, informal tenure and lack of capacity to enforce property rights impede implementation of PES initiatives. Such challenges are common for local communities in coastal and marine areas who overexploit Common-Pool Resources (CPR) under open access. Assigning property rights to organized users has been implemented as a solution, transforming a public good into a club good. Nevertheless, the nature of CPR makes it difficult to define and enforce use rights based on territorial criteria, which might generate equity concerns between organized users and their peers who lose rights. This paper investigates, using a choice experiment, the willingness of Ecuadorian mangrove resource users to accept a conservation policy that combines a concession for sustainable extraction and an economic incentive. Given that a collective concession for the sustainable use and management of CPR implies exclusion of other communities, we specifically analyze two different access levels: i. total exclusion, where the agreement defines that no one other than the concessionaires can access and extract the resources, and ii. discretionary exclusion, where the concessionaires can establish their own rules and conditions for allowing access and use of the resources by third parties. Our interest is to identify how externally imposed rules around exclusion prevent or motivate organized users from participating in approaches to CPR management based on allocation of property rights. We find that having the discretion to choose the level of exclusion matters to resource users when deciding whether to accept the proposed mangrove management strategy. Moreover, we show that preferences for accepting the conservation policy exhibits heterogeneity among users. We contribute to the discussion on the determinants of participation in incentive-based conservation programs.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104619</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0305-750X
ispartof World development, 2019-11, Vol.123, p.104619, Article 104619
issn 0305-750X
1873-5991
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2312515203
source PAIS Index; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Access
Acquiescence
Agreements
Club goods
Community
Compromises
Conservation
Conservation contracts
Conservation incentives
Criteria
Discretionary access
Economic incentives
Ecosystems
Environmental policy
Experiments
Extraction
Heterogeneity
Local communities
Local users
Marine environment
Participation
Payment for environmental services
Payments
Peers
Preference heterogeneity
Property rights
Resource conservation
Resource management
Sustainability
Sustainable ecosystems
Sustainable use
Tenure
title Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T15%3A57%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20exclusion%20matter%20in%20conservation%20agreements?%20A%20case%20of%20mangrove%20users%20in%20the%20Ecuadorian%20coast%20using%20participatory%20choice%20experiments&rft.jtitle=World%20development&rft.au=Maldonado,%20Jorge%20H.&rft.date=2019-11-01&rft.volume=123&rft.spage=104619&rft.pages=104619-&rft.artnum=104619&rft.issn=0305-750X&rft.eissn=1873-5991&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104619&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2312515203%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2312515203&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0305750X19302657&rfr_iscdi=true