




































 
 

In ternationa l
Scholars
Journa ls

 

African Journal of Environmental Economics and Management ISSN: 2375-0707 Vol. 4 (3), pp. 266-277, 
June, 2016. Available online at www.internationalscholarsjournals.org © International Scholars Journals 

 

Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. 
 
 
 

Full Length Research Paper 
 

Valuation of environmental goods and services: The 
case of Bale Mountains National Park, Ethiopia 

 

1Yilma Haroyu*, 2Muktar Bayeh and 2Habte Wolle 
 

1
College of Natural Sciences, Department of Biology, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, Ethiopia. 

2
College of Natural Sciences, Department of Wildlife Management, Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, Ethiopia. 

 
Accepted 20 May, 2016 

e 

Valuation of non marketed environmental goods and services is a newly emerging research area particularly in 
Ethiopia and other developing countries. The study was aimed to investigate willingness to pay for 
conservation of environmental services and local tourists' entrance fee of Bale mountains National Park as well 
as determinant factors affecting visiting interest of local community. The widely used and flexible technique of 
environmental valuation called contingent valuation method/CVM/ was used. Respondents were given 
hypothetical project of conserving the park. Hypothetical questions were prepared to elicit the maximum 
willingness to pay and Willingness to accept to conserve the park. Dinsho, Goba and Robe towns were 
purposefully selected from which 380 respondents were selected from stratified population using lottery 
method. Logistic regression model was used to quantitatively analyze socio-economic factors of local people to 
visit the park. The research finding indicated that visitors mean entrance fee WTP is over 3 times the current 
entrance fee. Maximum amount of willingness to pay for the proposed conservation project scenario varied 
from 0 to 1000birr (50$), whereas mean and mode were 35 $ and 10$. Regression analysis showed sex, age, 
family size, and education level were significant determinants of visiting the park. In addition, district/nearness, 
education level, job, awareness of biodiversity importance and status, and income level of respondents 
positively affected an individual’s willingness to pay. Generally, the survey was successful in eliciting 
willingness-to-pay for protecting the park and can potentially help policy makers as well as park managers to 
increase number of local tourists so as to increase revenue for conservation work.  
 
Keywords: Contingent valuation, conservation, environmental service, non-market values, tourism, willingness to pay. 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 
     
Nowadays, valuing environmental goods and service (g/s) 
are increasingly becoming a global concern. It is largely 
agreed that successful development activities depend on 
the efficient use of „natural capital‟ (World Bank, 1998). 
However, the market for environmental services is 
substantial and growing throughout the world,  driven in 
part by increasing environmental regulation and changing  
consumer preferences (UNEP, 2012; Kunte et al., 1998), 
and in applying valuation techniques to the analysis of 
 
 
 
Corresponding author. E-mail: yilmaharoyu@gmail.com  

the environmental g/s, both in developed and developing 
countries (Bishop, 1999). However, to do so, several 
types of market failures can be defined (OECD, 1994). 
The most common type of market failure related to the 
environment is the failure to internalize, or take account 
of market values of g/s.  
Before few years ago in production of goods and 
services, physical and human capital was recognized as 
the main factors of production. But nowadays, 
economists have recognized that natural capital is an 
important input in any type of production (Tietenberg, 
2006).  An increasing number of economists nowadays, 
accept that natural capital is used for material and energy  



 
 

Yilma et al.         267 
 
 
 
inputs into production, acts as a "sink" for waste 
emissions from the economic process, and provides a 
variety of "ecological services" to sustain production, 
such as nutrient recycling, watershed protection and 
catchment functions, and climate regulation (Tietenberg, 
2006; Mishra, 2013).  
Environmental assets like other assets provide benefits 
that enhance economic performance (DEFRA, 2007; 
Pearce and Turner, 1990; Cesare, 2000; UNEP, 2012). 
Public benefits derived from biodiversity and natural 
resource such as a national park in the form of 
environmental amenities and ecosystem services implies 
that the environmental goods and services contributes to 
public welfare, and loss of the resources or decline in 
their  quality could result in a loss in welfare (Tietenberg 
2006).  
Generally, literatures divide the value of environmental 
g/s into different categories. When considering why 
individuals place values on a natural resource, a typical 
approach in literature is to distinguish between those who 
use the resource (services) and those who do not 
(Brauman etal, 2007). The values held by the former 
group are generally termed as use values, and may occur 
in many different ways. Direct use values may derive 
from consumptive uses (e.g. fuel wood collection) and/or 
non-consumptive uses (e.g. hiking in the same forest), 
and may involve commercial (selling fuel wood or 
collecting visiting tolls) and/or non-commercial activities 
(home consumption of fuel wood or enjoyment of an 
open-access wilderness area) (Cesare, 2000).  
Only some of environmental goods and services that are 
very crucial for our existences have markets (Cesare 
2000) price (price tag) and these prices are most of the 
time very minimal. So, valuation of such goods and 
services is much more relevant (McClelland, 1993) for 
sustainable development. Some benefits of valuing 
environmental g/s are strengthening green growth 
(McClelland, 1993; Mishra, 2013), helps to better 
understanding of the value of the natural capital, rethink 
the territory in a more integrated and intelligent manner, 
and to conduct more realistic cost/benefit analysis which 
effectively promote the sustainability of the biodiversity in 
the territory, balancing the economic vision with the 
preservation/conservation of natural resources (Santos, 
2013).  
Driven by the continuing desire of Ethiopian government 
for green economic growth, the result of this research can 
potentially awake and ignite decision makers and policy 
makers at national level about monetary value of non 
marketable environmental g/s. In addition, an ability to 
place a monetary value on the services provided by the 
environmental g/s should increasingly be recognized by 
the broader research, policy and business communities.  
The welfare contribution or economic value of protected 
areas in developing countries, however, is scarce. 
Similarly, both use values and non use values of these 
environmental services are not yet comprehensively 

understood in Ethiopia. Therefore, environmental 
management decision making process and policy 
makers, and conservation project implementers have no 
scientific background. According to Bekabil and Anemut 
(2000) very few studies analyzed local peoples 
willingness to pay (WTP) for conservation of national 
parks in Ethiopia. 
There are no comprehensive studies done regarding the 
environmental services provided by BMNP. Recreational 
value and even the entrance fee to enjoy the park is not 
based on the scientific study that really reflect the local 
tourists WTP. Therefore, this study was aimed to 
examine the maximum amount of local tourists‟ 
willingness to pay to visit the park and the monetary 
value that people attach to the conservation of 
environmental services provided by Bale Mountain 
National Park (BMNP) as well as the major determinant 
factors affecting the willingness of local community to visit 
the park and conservation scenario of the park.  
 
 
MATERIALS AND METHODS 
 
Description of the Study Area 
 
BMNP is situated in the Oromia Region encompassing 
2,471km². The park is characterized for its Afro alpine 
habitat, including alpine meadows; it contains the second 
largest moist tropical forest and the only cloud forest in 
Ethiopia. With an altitudinal range from 4400 to 1500 
meters, it harbors an enormous diversity of habitats. All of 
this has resulted in a unique ecosystem that contains 
such a high degree of endemism that it is the envy of 
National Parks. It is estimated that if we were to lose the 
Bale Mountains more endemic mammals would go 
extinct than any similar sized area on our planet. Two of 
our most recognized species, the Ethiopian wolf and the 
mountain Nyala, are safeguarded by the Bale Mountains 
National Park, with more than 50% of the total 
populations of both these endangered species occurring 
within its boundaries (GMP, 2007). The park is home to 
several endemic mammal species, such as the Mountain 
Nyala, Ethiopian Wolf, Giant Mole Rat and Bale Monkey. 
The forest area also provides a habitat for Lion, African 
Wild Dog and Giant Forest Hog.  
This park is safeguarding our Ethiopian Natural Heritage. 
Climatically, the area is characterized by a rainy season 
from March to October and a dry season from November 
to February. Precipitation increases with altitude from 
600mm to 1,000mm in the lower altitude areas to 
1,000mm to 1,400mm in the high alpine areas of BMNP. 
Mean monthly temperatures range from 19°C to 25.4°C. 
The Harenna forest within BMNP and the adjacent Mena 
Angetu National Forest Priority Area (NFPA) on the 
southern slope forms the second largest stand of moist 
tropical forest remaining in Ethiopia covering about 
1,800km².  Approximately,  half  of  the park (877km²) lies  



 
 

268        Afr. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 
 
 
 
within this forest, which is home to high levels of biodiversity 
and endemism including many threatened species such as 
Prunus africana. The forest contains wild coffee (Coffee 
Arabica) and is an important source of timber, NTFPs, honey 
and dry season grazing. The entire forest is under 
considerable human induced pressure due to uncontrolled 
grazing and forest fire threatening the sustainability of the 
forest (Abdurrahman, 2008). 
 
Method of Data Collection 
 
Socio-economic data survey 
 
To collect socio-economic characteristics of respondents, 
two main instruments, namely: Questionnaire and focal 
group discussion were used. To improve the quality of the 
questionnaire, the researchers pre-tested and translated into 
„Afaan Oromo‟, the local language.  Accordingly, Sex of 
household head, age, and district, and marriage status, 
religion of respondents, family size, educational status, 
occupation and income level of the respondents were the 
main socio-economic characteristics collected during data 
collection. In addition to these,  A local peoples‟ perception 
of conservation activities, Levels of knowledge about 
biodiversities exist in the BMNP, purpose of visiting the park, 
Frequency and willingness of visiting the park (whether the 
respondent have taken any trips to the park for different 
reasons) and other relevant data were collected.  
 
Focus group discussion 
 
Three focal group discussions (FGDs) were formed. Each 
FGD had ten members. The first FGD was concerning 
hypothetical conservation of environmental goods and 
services project to be designed and implemented. This was 
done to elicit WTP and WTA the bids and thereby to 
describe environmental g/s in monetary term. The second 
FGD was to make agreement on alternatives bids (Ranges 
of birr (Dollar) that the respondents were asked to vote as 
optimal entrance fee. The third FGD was to discuss an 
acceptable ways of funding the hypothetical project. We 
made a discussion on whether the hypothetical project could 
be funded by community only or both by government and the 
local community. The first group made up of higher officials 
of Ethiopia wild life conservation authority and senior 
professionals of Park management, wildlife conservation, 
tourism management and Ethiopian Biodiversity 
Conservation Institute. The second group and third group 
were made up of local expert office leaders as well as 
Dinsho Woreda administrative officers, and local farmers of 
five male and five female household heads. 

 

Structure of contingent valuation design 
 
CVM survey design of Loomis et al. (1996) was used, which 
comprise three elements: portraying the resource to be  
valued;  describing  particular financial mechanism (e.g., 
property taxes, utility bills, trust funds/donations, etc.) and  
eliciting the respondent‟s  WTP in Ethiopian Birr (1 
Dollar=20.48 Ethiopian Birr during this study time).  

The nature of the goods and services and the changes 
valued (value of changes in terms of conservation of BMNP 
as a result of hypothetical project) were specified in details 
to respondent before directly asking how much respondents 
were willing to pay for a conservation program of BMNP.. 
For example, by asking, if the project cost household 100 
birr (5$) each year, were he/she willing to pay the amount to 
implement the project. The dichotomous choice 
questionnaire mentioned above allowed to statistically trace 
out a demand relationship. To do so, the relationship was 
established between the probability of a “yes” response and 
the Ethiopian birr (Dollar) amount.  
 
Prob (Yes) = 1 –  {1 + exp[ B0– B1X1+ B2X2+ B3X3+...BnXn]}

–1
   

……………………..1 
Where B: Coefficients to be estimated using logit statistical 
techniques associated with the independent variables Xi: 
Ethiopian Birr (US Dollar) amount the household is asked to 
pay. Then expected mean WTP value was calculated as: 
Mean WTP = ( 1/B0)  × ln  (1 + exp[ B0– 
B1X1+B2X2+B3X3+...BnXn] )………..equation 2 
 
Sampling techniques and sample size determination 
 
Three towns of Bale Zone namely Dinsho, Goba and Robe 
were selected purposefully since residents of these towns 
have relatively good awareness of Environmental g/s of 
BMNP. Then respondents were selected randomly using 
lottery method.  The population size of Dinsho, Goba and 
Robe were 3609, 32025 and 44382 respectively. Totally, 
population of the three selected districts was 80073 HHs.  
Therefore, the total sample size was determined by the 
following formula; 
 
n =   z

2
pqN   

14611.4007……………………………………………………eq

uation .1 
E

2 
(N-1)+Z

2
pq 

Where n=appropriate total sample size, N=Total HH in the 
areas, P=5%/given/, E=marginal 
error=5%,q=.95,z=confident interval=1.96 
n=1.96

2
*0.05*.95*80073 

.05
2
(80073-1)+1.96

2
*.05*.95    =380HHs  

This sample size was allocated proportionally for the three 
towns: Dinsho, Goba and Robe. 
 

 

Method of Data Analysis 

 
Both quantitative and qualitative methods of data analysis 
were employed to analyze the collected data. 
Quantitatively, descriptive statistics such as mean, mode 
and rating techniques (likert scale) were used.  In 
addition to this, logistic regression was used to analyze 
the socio-economic factors affecting local community‟s 
interest to visit the park and factors affecting the 
willingness to pay for the hypothetical conservation 
project. In logistic regression analysis dependent variable 
was dummy variable which took 1 if the respondents 
were visited the park so far and 0 otherwise. The different  



 
 

Yilma et al.         269 
 
 
 
 
socio-economic variables were used as explanatory 
variables. 

 

RESULT AND DISCUSSION 
 
Socioeconomic characteristics 
 
This section presents the socio economic characteristics 
of the respondents. Socio economic and demographic 
characteristics such as sex of household head, age, and 
district, and marriage status, religion of respondents, 
family size, educational status, occupation and income 
level of the respondents  were analyzed and presented in 
table 1.  
The above table indicates most of the respondents were 
male (64.6%) and majority of them were married (57.1). 
Only 9% of the respondents were illiterate and relatively 
high percentages (30.6%) of them have attended primary 
school. Few respondents reported that they have 
attended others type of educational level (religious 
creeds, such as Quran). 46.4% of the respondents 
occupied on petty trade and the significant percentage 
were government employer. Only 10% of them were 
farmers.  
 
Average Entrance fee to Visit the Park  
 
Visitors mean WTP to visit the park was over 3 times 
greater than the current entrance fee (20Birr). The least 
and most typical entrance fee WTP was 20 Birr (1$) 
whereas average entrance WTP was 60 Birr (3$) (Figure 
2).  Similar study conducted on “Visitors‟ willingness to 
pay for an entrance fee :A case study of marine parks in 
Malaysia”  showed that the willingness to pay (WTP) per 
person per visit to moderate the environmental impact of 
inland development is 5.95USD, which is lower than the 
WTP to reduce crowding, 7.89 USD (Siti, 2009).However, 
in  our case, the existing entrance fee set by the 
government is lower than the tourists willingness to pay 
simply  to encourage the visiting frequency of  both local 
and international  tourists . Thus, there is room of 
increasing entrance fee if the Park Managers desire to 
increase revenue by collecting money from local tourists 
in addition to what have been collected from international 
tourists. Therefore, policy makers and/or park managers 
can set Ethiopian Birr ranging from 20-60 (1-3 USD) as 
entrance to visit the Park particularly for local tourists. 
Similarly, wide range of willingness to pay park entrance 
fee (50 to 150 Dinars) for Fruska Gora Mountain also 
found by Aleksandra Vujko and Tamara Gajic (2014). To 
sustainably conserve the biodiversity of the park, 
increasing the entrance fee is crucial especially to 
monitor and manage environmental goods and services.  
The respondents were asked to choose from different 
ranges of entrance fee and 70% of them voted to pay the 

range of  20-70 Ethiopian Birr (1-3.5$). Figure 2 shows 
that, about 14% were willing to pay the highest bid (150 
Birr (7.5 $). Therefore, the current entrance fee is not a 
limiting factor in determining number of entrance.  The 
result of the study remarked that it is not appropriate to 
limit entrance fee to low amount. The low entrance fees 
fail to justify conservation of Biodiversity or pursuance of 
a policy of cost recovery (Mmopelwa et al., 2007).  
It is widely believed that is important to introduce an 
additional fee based on visitors interest (providing 
entrance fee option from minimum 20 (1$) to the mean of 
60 Birr (3$) and even as larger as they can offer). In 
some parts of the world, increasing park entrance fee 
was not significantly reduced visitor numbers, especially 
in the long-term since the demand for visiting the park is 
relatively inelastic (Herath, 2000; Shultz et al., 1998). 
This means, the amount of entrance fee should be open 
to the visitor above the set minimum fee to give chance 
for those visitors who are willing to pay more so as to 
make the national park a luxury or a snobbish good. 
 
Purpose of visiting and reason why local people do 
not visit the park 
 
Those respondents who responded they had visited the 
park were asked for what purpose they had visited the 
park so far and those who had not visited the park were 
also asked to indicate their reasons. Accordingly, 
respondents reported that they visited the park for 
purpose of recreation, research and education. This is 
due to the fact that natural spaces can potentially provide 
an arena in which children and University students can 
learn outside of the classroom, and there is evidence to 
suggest that this is a more effective form of learning (SIG, 
2009). In another hand, people who have not visited the 
park so far reported that lack of visiting habit, 
unaffordable entrance fee, and the lack of information 
about benefit of BMNP / absence of advertisement, 
absence of attractive infrastructure and additional 
manmade recreational part of the park as the reasons for 
they had not visited the park. 
Figure 3 indicates, only about 56% of the respondents 
visited the park and 43% of them had not visited though 
the park is near to them. Table 2 presents the reasons of 
local people for visiting the park. About 70% of 
respondents answered that they visited the park for the 
sake of recreation. The study carried out  to estimate the 
recreational benefit people gain from the Loch  Garten 
site and the value (£0.57 million and £0.77 million per 
year)  reported that  an estimate of the benefit people 
enjoy from visiting the site, predominantly for recreation 
(Value of Biodiversity, 2006). However, only about two 
percent were visited for research work and about 16% for 
education purpose. 
The Study finding showed, entrance fee was not a 
significant  limiting  factor  that  hinders respondents from  



 
 

270        Afr. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 
 
 
 

 
Figure 1. Location of the Bale National Park. 
 
 
 
 

Table 1: Socio-Economic characteristics of the respondents. 
 

Variables  Characteristics  Percentages  

Sex  Male  64.6 

Female  35.4 

Marriage status  Single  40.8 

Married 57.1 

Divorced  2 

Religious  Muslim  40.1 

Christian  57.8 

Wakefata  1.4 

Family size  1-3 63.8 

4-6 22.7 

>6 13.5 

Level of education  Illiterate  9.5 

Primary  30.6 

Secondary school  27.2 

University level  32 

others /religious -- .7 

 Occupation   Petty trade  46.4 

Farming  10 

Government employer  43.6 

 
 
 
 
 

visiting the park since only 7.2% of they responded 
reported they could not offer the current entrance fee to 
frequently visit the park. This result is quite different from 
studies conducted in Australia that majority of the visitors 

(67 percent) said they pay 0 entrance fee to visit park. On 
the other hand, about 17.1 of the respondents mentioned 
that they have not visited the park because of all the 
described problems as reason for not visiting the park.  



 
 

Yilma et al.         271 
 
 
 

 
 

Figure 2. Willingness to pay for Entrance fee WTP. 

 

 

Local people attitude towards the importance of 
conserving BMNP 
 
Under this sub section, we presented the value that the 
local people derive from the Bale Mountains National 
Park. Respondents reported that they derived both use 
and non use value of environmental goods and services 
from the park such as recreation, job opportunity, 
endemism, scenic value, education and research value. 
Table 3 indicates likert scale of local people attitude 
regarding the benefits or importance of conserving 
BMNP.  The presented result showed that conservation 
works and activities are very important (4 likert scale) for 
the purpose of recreation, to protect current endemism 
status, and scenic value whereas important (3 likert 
scale) for education and less important (2likert scale) for 
creating job opportunity, cultural value and research 
work. The research finding carried out by Peter Edwards 
& Cyrus Abivardi indicated that the recent powerful new 
argument for protecting biodiversity in the past 18 years 
since we need it for our survival(Edwards 
&Abivardi,19998). This realization has grown gradually as 
a result of the increasing scale of environmental 
problems we face, such as acidification. 
Local people attitude towards harmful effect of human 
pressure in the absence conservation activities.  
Table 4 indicates without the proposed project, natural 
and man-made factors and other human pressure have 

highly affect scenic beauty of the forest, tourism air 
quality, recreation and etc except fishing, risk of flood and 
water quality which respondents responded as these 
were not affected (2 likert scale) by the fire with and 
without the proposed conservation scenario.  
 
Socio –Economic Factors affecting visiting interest 
of local people 
 
The socio-economic /characteristics /variables/ that 
determined the interest of local people to visit the park 
were analyzed using logistic regression (where 
independent variable was binary response,1 labeled as 
yes for who already visited the park and 0 labeled no for 
those who did not visited the park). Logistic regression 
was used to identify socio economic factors affecting the 
WTP (OECD, 2002).The respondent‟s mean willingness-
to-pay is influenced by a number of socio-economic and 
demographic factors. The result of logistic regression was 
put in table 5.  As it is indicated in table 5, at 95% level of 
significance, four socio- economic variables: sex(p=.00), 
family size(p=.005), level of Education(.022) and 
occupation were  variables  significantly affected the 
interest of local people of  visiting  Bale Mountains 
National Park.  Sex which is dummy variable (where 1 
labeled if the respondents were male and 0 otherwise) 
affected the visiting interest of local people positively. 
This means that males were more likely to visit the park  

Percent

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

M
ax

 e
nt

ra
nc

e 
fe

e

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Percent  vs Entrance fee (Birr) 

Percent  vs Mean 

Percent  vs Mode 



 
 

272        Afr. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 
 
 
 

 

   Figure 3. Percent of yes and no response of past experience of visiting the park. 
 
 
 
 
 

Table 2. Percentage of BMNP visiting and not visiting reasons.  
 

Purpose of visiting the 
park 

% Reasons for not visiting the park  Percent 

Recreation 70.5 Lack of visiting habit 54.1 

Research 2.7 Unaffordable entrance fee 7.2 

Education 15.2 The details of BMNP not advertised enough 17.1 

Other 11.6 No additional manmade recreational part of the park 4.5 

 

Table 2. also presents lack of visiting habit was the most typical reason (54.1%) that prohibit local people from visiting the park.  
 

 
 

 
      Table 3. Analysis of importance of conserving BMNP. 

 

 Recreation Job 
opportunity 

Endemism Scenic 
value 

Education Culture 
Value 

Research 
value 

Other 

Median 4 2 4 4 3 3 4 4 

Mode 4 2 4 4 3 2 2 4 

Std. Dev .81 .96 .61 .56 .53 .89 .72 .71 

Variance .66 .93 .37 .314 .28 .81 .53 .49 
         

        Source: Own survey, 2015/16. 

 
 
 
 

relative to females. On the other hand, family size 
affected the visiting interest of the local respondents 

negatively, as family size increases; local peoples were 
less likely to visit the park. Level of education affected the  

No: 43.5 
Yes: 56.5 



 
 

Yilma et al.         273 
 
 
 
Table 4. Effects of human pressure and fire on the park. 
 

 

S
c
e

n
ic

  

b
e

a
u

ty
  

T
o

u
ri
s
m

 

A
ir

 q
u

a
lit

y
 

S
o

il 

e
ro

s
io

n
 

w
a

te
r 

q
u

a
lit

y
 

R
is

k
 o

f 

fl
o

o
d
 

H
e

a
lt
h

 o
f 

tr
e

e
 

R
e

c
re

a
ti
o

n
 

F
is

h
in

g
 

D
iv

e
rs

it
y
 o

f 

fa
u

n
a
 

D
iv

e
rs

it
y
 o

f 

fl
o

ra
 

E
n

d
e

m
ic

 

s
p

e
c
ie

s
 

Median 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 

Mode 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 

Std. 

Deviation 

.84 .76 .81 .52 .51 .57 .71 2.7 .57 .66 .67 .67 

Variance .704 .57 .66 .27 .26 .33 .51 7.2 .32 .44 .44 .45 

   

 Source: Own survey, 2015/16. 

 

Table 5: Variable of Determinants for Visiting the Park. 
 

Variable Coefficient  S.E. P-value. 

Sex 3.505 .740 .000 

Age .041 .046 .365 

District .658 .407 .106 

Marriage .983 .738 .183 

Religion .652 .620 .293 

Family size -.489 .174 .005 

Education level .885 .345 .022 

Occupation  1.165 .538 .030 

Income level .475 .409 .0369 

Constant -7.655 2.176 .000 

Source: Own survey, 2015/16. 

 

interest of visiting the park positively; which implies that, 
educated local people were more likely to visit the park 
relative to non educated individuals. 
 
Determinants of Willingness to Pay for Conservation 
of the Park 
 
In addition to the investigated the local peoples‟ 
willingness to pay for entrance fee, respondents were 
given the bid and asked whether they were willing to 
accept the bid or not.  
Accordingly, 77.6% of the respondents were willing to 
pay for the proposed conservation scenario while the 
remaining respondents were not because of two main 
possible reasons: the project itself did not convince them 
(32%) and they (68%) believed that they drive no benefit 
from the park (Figure 4).  Study conducted in Australia 
also indicated local peoples can have different reasons 
for the lack of willingness WTP for conservation (Tisdell 
and Wilson, 2003)  
The socio economic determinants of WTP for 
conservation of BMNP (Table 6). The income of the local 
people has positive impact (P=0.023) on the respondent‟s 
willingness to contribute towards the realization of the 
targeted conservation scenario (Table 6). This indicated 
that the households with more income were more likely to 

contribute for conservation of the park. Similarly, 
occupation, familiarity with Natural resources of the park, 
frequency of visiting and level of education were 
positively affected WTP of local people for conservation. 
Households who were occupied on petty trade were more 
likely willing to contribute relative to farmers. The more 
peoples were familiar with natural resources and high 
frequency of visiting the park, the more they are willing to 
pay for conservation. The result indicated that if there are 
enough recreational facilities and necessary services 
provided at recreational areas, i.e. if tourists are satisfied 
with the recreational facilities and services, their 
willingness to pay increases (Mamat et al, 2013).  
 
Maximum willingness to pay 
 
The respondents were asked how much money in 
Ethiopian Birr they were willing to pay simply to 
understand how they value the environmental goods and 
service that are derived from the park. To elicit their 
willingness to pay, they were briefed how different factors 
aggravated the degradation of the Bale Mountains 
National Park and conservation project (hypothetical) was 
designed to minimize the problems. After this, they were 
asked how much birr (Dollar) they are willing to pay if the 
project cost is to be covered by local people, then a larger 



 
 

274        Afr. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 
 
 
 

 

Figure 4. Reasons for Motivated local peoples WTP.  
 
 
 

Table 6. Determinants of willingness to pay for conservation of BMNP. 
 

Explanatory variable Β S.E. Sig. 

Sex -.386 .582 .507 

Age .009 .033 .789 

District 1.117 .321 .000 

Marriage .851 .469 .070 

Religion .037 .434 .933 

Family Size -.112 .124 .363 

Education level .825 .306 .032 

Job .155 .350 .007 

Visiting rate .551 .181 .02 

Familiarity on NR status 1.21 .509 .007 

Income level .699 .308 .023 

 Source: Own survey, 2015/16. 

 

 
 
percentage of visitors were willing to pay especially 
Dinsho district (Table 6). The study conducted in 
Australia by Clem Tisdell and Clevo Wilson (2003) 
indicated that 64 percent of the respondents reported 
they would be willing to pay if the money is used for the 
benefit of the park, while only 26 percent said they were 
not willing to pay and the rest (10 percent) did not answer 
this question. This study result also shows that the 
amount they proposed for conservation highly varies from 
0 to 1000 (Figure 5) which indicates the degree of their 
awareness or consciousness such that respond ants 
would give priority to conservation of natural resources.  
Using open ended query, though the maximum amount of 
willingness to pay for the conservation of Bale Mountain 
National park varies from 0-1000, mean and mode WTP 

for the proposed conservation project scenario were 697 
and 200 birr (34.9 and 10 $) (Figure 5). This implies that 
the respondents were willing to pay 697 on average 
annually for conservation purpose which indicates local 
communities give high value for the resource.   Since the 
maximum WTP found in this study and also studies 
conducted in other country, for instant, in Malaysia 
reported that, such value can be used by the authority to 
determine the appropriate conservation fee (Mohd Parid 
Mamat et al 2013).  
If the benefits could be demonstrated, then the „user-
pays‟ principle could become acceptable to most visitors 
and also at the same time obtain the political support of 
the public Machado (2000). From the alternative bids 
presented to them, majority of respondents did choose  

P
e

rc
e

n
t

0

20

40

60

80

100 Yes 

NO 

Get no benefit 

Not convinced 

A                  B



 
 

Yilma et al.         275 
 
 
 

 

Figure 5. Maximum willingness to pay (WTP) for the proposed conservation project. 

 

 

 
Figure 6. Annual willingness to pay for the BMNP conservation scenario. 
 
 
 

 

annual WTP amount of 50-100 Birr (2.5 – 5$) (figure 6).  
 
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
 
The study tried to investigate the optimum entrance fee of 
visiting Bale mountains National park, both socio-
economic factors and other the park related factors 
hindering local individuals to visit the park. The study 
revealed that the current entrance fee that visitors are 

paying is not significantly affecting the visiting interest of 
the local individuals. But lack of visiting habit and 
absence of manmade recreational sites which attract 
local individual tourists and lack advertisement and 
awareness creation regarding the recreational benefit of 
the park were the most significant factors affected the 
visiting interest of the local visitors.  Logistic regression 
analysis indicated that Socio economic factors such as 
level of education, Occupation (those occupied by petty  

M
a
x
 W

T
P

 f
o

r 
th

e
 p

ro
p

o
s
e

d
 p

ro
je

c
t 
(B

ir
r)

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

Robe                                          Goba                        Dinsho

Yearly WTP for conservation (Birr)

0 50-100 100-300 300-500 >1000

Pe
rc

en
t o

f 
re

sp
on

de
nt

s

0

10

20

30

40

50



 
 

276        Afr. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 
 
 
 
trade were more likely to visit the park relative to farmers 
and other occupation), sex of households (male 
individuals were more likely to visit the park relative to 
female individuals) positively affected the interest and 
frequency of visiting the park. „Family size‟, affected 
negatively the visiting interest of the local people. Based 
on these findings, the researcher forwarded the 
followings are recommendation 
 Government should give great attention for the 

development of recreational facilities  
 The park managers should exhaustively 

advertise the recreational benefit of the park to 
local individual in using local language, afaan 
oromoo 

 After setting the minimum entrance fee, visitors 
should be given opportunity of paying more 
(there should be mechanisms of making it legal 
with receipt) 

 Educational office of Bale zone should provide 
elder education for those who are illiterate  to 
boost their participation in any affairs so as to 
increase their willingness to participate in 
conservation activities  

 Conservation project aimed to minimize the 
degradation rate of BMNP whose cost is to be 
covered by local community can be designed in 
such as way that local people pay up to 697 Birr 
(34.9$) after exhaustive and detail awareness 
creation regarding the importance of the project 
and the cost to be incurred to implement the 
project in very transparent way. 

 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
 
This study was financially supported by the Madda 
Walabu University. Bale Mountain National Park, Goba, 
Dinsho and Sinana natural resources management 
experts has helped in providing secondary data and 
arranging group discussions. We also acknowledge the 
contribution of Mr Lema Tiki, research coordinator of 
Biodiversity and Natural Resources of Mada Walabu 
University who helped us in organizing and arranging 
seminars and comments from other researchers. Lastly, 
We heart fully  acknowledge local community of Bale 
Zone ,Oromia region, for their cooperation in giving us 
reliable response to questions prepared to collect primary 
data 
 
 
REFERENCES 
 
Aleksandra Vujko and Tamara Gajic (2014).Persuasive 

Communication and Visitors Willingness to Pay Park 
User Fees. TURIZAM Volume 18, Issue 1 1-10 (2014)  

Bishop JT (1999).  Valuing Forests: A Review of Methods 
and Applications in Developing Countries. International 
Institute for Environment and Development: London. 

Brauman KA, Daily GC, Duarte TK and Mooney HA 
(2007). The Nature and Value of Ecosystem Services: 
An Overview Highlighting Hydrologic Services. Annu. 
Rev. Environ. Resour. 

Cesare Dosi (2000). Environmental values, valuation 
methods, and natural disaster damage assessment. he 
UN ECLAC, Italy. 

Clem Tisdell and Clevo Wilson (2003). Economics, 
Ecology and the Environment. Working Papers on 
Economics, Ecology and the Environment. ISSN 1327-
8231 

DEFRA (2000). An introductory guide to valuing 
ecosystem services.  Nobel House 17 Smith Square 
London SW1P 3JR 

Dlamini CS (2007). Towards the Improvement of Policy 
and Strategy Development for the Sustainable 
Management of Non-timber Forest Products: 
Swaziland: A Case Study. Ph.D. Dissertation. 
University of Stellenbosch. RSA.  

Economics & Funding SIG June (2007). Valuing the 
Benefits of Biodiversity. Date Accessed:09/23/2016. 
http://www.biodiv.org/.  

Gebrelibanos Gebremariam and  Abdi Edriss (2012). 
Valuation of Soil Conservation Practices in Adwa 
Woreda, Ethiopia: A Contingent Valuation Study. 
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development. 
Vol.3, No.13, 2012 

GMPBMNP, (2007). General management plan of Bale 
mountain national park (2007-2017) 

Herath G (2000), “Issues surrounding entrance fees as a 
suitable mechanism for financing natural areas in 
Australia”, International Journal of Wilderness, 6(2): 35-
39. 

Kunte AK,  Hamilton JD, and Clemens M (1998). 
“Estimating National Wealth: Methodology and 
Results”. Environmental Economics Series, 
Environment Department. Washington D.C.: The World 
Bank Group 

Loomis, John B, González-Cabán, Armando,  Gregory, 
Robin (1996). A contingent valuation study of the value 
of reducing fire hazards to old-growth forests in the 
Pacific Northwest. Res. Paper PSW-RP-229-Web. 
Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, 
Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; 24 p. 

Machado K B (2000). Funding conservation programs 
through the use of entrance fees: the case of 
Galapagos National Park, Ecuador, PhD. Dissertation, 
Cornell University. 

McClelland  GH, (1993). Preference Reversals and the 
measurement of environmental values. Journal of Risk 
and Uncertainty,6, 5-18 

Mishra SK,( 2013). Valuation of Environmental Goods 
and services. North Eastern Hill University. Date 
accessed: 11/10/2014. 
http://www.msu.edu/user/schmid/mishra.htm 

Mmopelwaa G, Kgathia DL, Molefheb L (2007). Tourists‟ 
perceptions and their willingness to pay for park fees: A  

http://www.biodiv.org/
http://www.msu.edu/user/schmid/mishra.htm


 
 

Yilma et al.         277 
 
 
 
    case study of self-drive tourists and clients for mobile 

tour operators in Moremi Game Reserve, Botswana, 
Tourism Management, 28(4), 1044-1056. 

Mohd Parid Mamat, Mohd Rusli Yacob, Alias Radam, 
Awang Noor Abdul Ghani and Lim Hin Fui (2013). 
Willingness to pay for protecting natural environments 
in Pulau Redang Marine Park, Malaysia. African 
Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 
Vol. 1 (5), pp. 120-125, December, 2013.  

OECD (1994). Managing the Environment: The Role of 
Economic Instruments. Paris, France 

OECD (Organization For Econimic Co-oporation and 
Development) (2012). Hnadbook of Biodiversity 
Valuation: A guideline for policy makers. OECD 
Publication,2 Rue Andre-Pascal, 757775 Paris Cedax 
16, France. 

Pearce D, and RK Turner (1990), Economics of Natural 
Resources and the Environment. Baltimore: The Johns 
Hopkins University Press. 

Peixoto I. and Abramson G (2006). The effect of 
biodiversity on the hantavirus epizootic. Ecology 

Perrings C, (2010). Biodiversity, ecosystem services, and 
climate change: The economic problem. Environmental 
Department Papers, Environmental Economics Series, 
Paper Number 120. Washington, D.C.: The  

 

 
   International Bank for Reconstruction and 

Development/the World Bank. 
Peter J, Edwards & Cyrus Abivardi (1998). The Value of 

Biodiversity: Where Ecology and Economy Blend. 
Geobotanical Institute ETH, Zurichbergstrasse38, 8044 
Zurich, Switzerland. 

Santos S, (2013). Economic Value of the Ecosystem 
Services. Date Acccessed: 27/09/2014. 

Sarker R, McKenney DW (1992). Measuring Unpriced 
Values: An Economic Perspective and annotated 
bibliography for Ontario – forestry Canada. Ontario 
Region, Sault ste. Mare.  

Shultz  S, Pinazzo, J and Cifuentes, M. (1998), 
“Opportunities and limitations of contingent valuation 
surveys to determine national park entrance fees: 
evidence from Costa Rica”, Environment and 
Development Economics, 3: 131-149. 

UNEP, (2012). Trade and Environment Briefings: 
Environmental Services. Californi a, 94105, USA. 

Value of Biodiversity (2006); Watched Like Never Before 
(2006) RSPB  

World Bank (1998), “Economic Analysis and 
Environmental Assessment”. Supplement of the  
Environmental Assessment Sourcebook  23. 
Washington D.C.: The World Bank - Environment 
Department. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


