首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Linking conservation and welfare: A theoretical model with application to Nepal
Institution:1. GRÉDI - Département d''économique - Université de Sherbrooke, Canada;2. LAMETA - Université de Montpellier, France;1. Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK;2. Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR47TJ, UK;3. World Wildlife Fund, 1250 24th Street NW, Washington, DC 20037, USA;4. Center for Macroecology, Evolution and Climate, Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Denmark;5. United Nations Environment Programme – World Conservation Monitoring Center, 219 Huntington Road, Cambridge CB3 ODL, UK;6. Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA;7. Faculty of Forestry and Nature Conservation, Department of Forest Biology, Sokoine University of Agriculture, Chuo Kikuu, Morogoro, Tanzania;8. Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services Area, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), 2108-11 Kamiyamaguchi, Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0115, Japan;9. York Institute for Tropical Ecosystems (KITE), Environment Department, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK;10. School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk NR47TJ, UK;11. State Key Laboratory of Genetic Resources and Evolution, Kunming Institute of Zoology, Kunming, Yunnan 650223, China;1. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria – EEA Bariloche, Modesta Victoria 4450, 8400 Bariloche, Argentina;2. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, Argentina;3. Institute of Biosciences and Bioresources, National Research Council, Via Madonna del Piano 10, 50019 Sesto Fiorentino (Firenze), Italy;1. Department of Agribusiness and Agricultural Economics, University of Manitoba, 377-66 Dafoe Road, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2;2. Department of Geography, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East, Guelph, Ontario, Canada N1G 2W1;1. Michigan State University, 446 West Circle Dr., East Lansing, MI 48824-1039, USA;2. University of California, Davis 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616, USA;3. ETH Zurich, Tannenstrasse 1, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland;1. Inter-American Development Bank, Strategy Development Division, 1300 New York Avenue N.W., Washington, DC 20577, United States;2. Inter-American Development Bank, Strategy Development Division, 1300 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20577, United States
Abstract:Theoretical articles linking conservation and welfare find a negative relationship between these two variables while empirical studies show that land protection may be positively related to welfare. Several authors attribute this empirical result to the development of ecotourism in protected areas. We thus argue that the gap between the theory and existing empirical results is partly explained by the fact that most theoretical models do not account for a productive activity on protected land. Therefore, we develop a theoretical model in which conservation allows developing an alternative sector and show that the relationship between conservation and welfare is U-shaped. We test this theoretical prediction using Nepalese data and find that conservation combined with ecotourism is indeed positively related to local welfare.
Keywords:Welfare  Conservation  Ecotourism  Protected areas  Nepal
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号