Economic
valuation of cultural ecosystem services: A case of tropical reservoir
ecosystem
M.
Meharoof1, V.K. Yadav1*, A. Sharma1, V.
Anitha2, T.T. Paul3, L. Paul1 and C. P.
Dave1
1Fisheries
Economics, Extension and Statistics Division, ICAR-Central Institute of
Fisheries Education, Mumbai-400 061, India
2Forest
Economics Department, KSCSTE-Kerala Forest Research Institute, Thrissur-680
653, India
3Reservoir
and Wetland Division, ICAR-Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute,
Cochin-682 018, India
Received: 17 February
2024 Revised: 02 May 2024 Accepted:
05 July 2024
*Corresponding Author Email : vinodkumar@cife.edu.in
*ORCiD:
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3466-6460
|
|
Abstract
Aim:
This
study analyzes the economic value of ecotourism in the Peechi reservoir of
Kerala, focusing on cultural ecosystem services (CES) provided by the
reservoir.
Methodology:
Consumer
surplus of visitors visiting the reservoir was estimated using travel cost
methodology, employing both primary and secondary data collection methods.
Results:
Peechi
reservoir attracts an average of 165,061 visitors annually, generating
revenue of ₹29,03,631.88 and
₹3,35,434.38 as entry and parking fees, respectively. Applying travel cost
methodology, the total economic value of ecotourism at Peechiwas estimated at
₹32,39,066.25 per year. The estimated potential economic value of the Peechi
reservoir was ₹120,309,765 with a consumer surplus of ₹757.58.
Interpretation:
The
CES offered by the reservoir ecosystem have not received enough attention.
Recognizing the intrinsic value of these under appreciated services can serve
as a powerful catalyst for their conservation, fostering a cycle of
awareness, informed decision making, and responsible tourism, ultimately
paving the path towards sustainable development.
Key
words: Cultural
ecosystem services, Ecotourism, Monetary valuation, Reservoir, Travel cost
method
|
|
Copyright © 2024 Triveni Enterprises. All rights reserved. No part of the Journal can be
reproduced in any form without prior permission. Responsibility
regarding the authenticity of the data, and the acceptability of the
conclusions enforced or derived, rest completely with the author(s).
|
|