




































African Journal of Environmental Economics and Management Vol. 1 (5), pp. 120-125, December, 
2013. Available online at www.internationalscholarsjournals.org © International Scholars Journals 

 

 

Full Length Research Paper 
 

Willingness to pay for protecting natural environments 
in Pulau Redang Marine Park, Malaysia 

 

Mohd Parid Mamat
1
, Mohd Rusli Yacob

2*
, Alias Radam

2
, Awang Noor Abdul Ghani

3
 and Lim  

Hin Fui
1
 

 
1
Forest Research Institute Malaysia, 52109 Kepong, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.  

2
Faculty of Economics and Management, University Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. 

3
Faculty of Forestry, University Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia. 

*Corresponding author. E-mail: mroy@econ.upm.edu.my. 
 

Accepted 8 July, 2013 
 
 

Although marine parks, national parks, wildlife sanctuaries and reserves are established to conserve 
biodiversity and enhance ecotourism, some of the country’s protected areas are under threat whether at 
varying degree. The biggest threat arises from human encroachment. To rescue these resources, 
appropriate conservation strategy must be put in place. This requires proper valuation of the 
environment. Taking Pulau Redang Marine Park (PRMP) as a case, information on people’s willingness 
to pay (WTP) to protect the environment was gathered. Using the dichotomous-choice contingent-
valuation method (CVM), it was found that the recreationists are willing to protect the park. The study 
showed that the average WTP ranged between RM10.86 and RM28.69 that could contribute between 
RM1.65 million and RM4.36 million in aggregate for the year 2008. 

 
Key words: Contingent valuation method, ecotourism, marine park, sustainable development, conservation and 
economic valuation, Malaysia. 

 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
The value of protected natural environments is important 
in decision-making in an increasingly natural-resource-
scarce world. Natural environment includes protected 
areas such as forest reserves and marine parks which 
are also potential ecotourism areas. The increasing 
demand for tourism has led to the development of 
infrastructure facilities, particularly the development for 
natural ecotourism areas. However, the economic bene-
fits of natural ecotourism areas are not readily known 
because of unavailable market price. This is true for the 
marine resources where the potential and realized 
benefits for recreation purposes are not valued. If this is 
not done, the allocation of marine resources cannot be 
determined optimally and conversion for other purposes 
might be possible. Quantifying the economic value of 
natural environment resources can show where goods 

 
 
 

 
and services are currently underpriced by the market. It 
can also indicate whether there is potential to develop 
new markets, to charge prices for the use of natural 
resources or to capture natural resource benefits as cash 
values. Other than generating revenues, prices and mar-
ket measures can provide an effective means of 
regulating the demand for resources and of providing 
incentives for sustainable management.  

Demonstrating the economic value of natural resources 
can make a convincing case for the conservation of the 
ecosystem. Higgins and Turpie (1997), for example, 
valued South Africa‟s mountain fybos ecosystems in 
order to argue for increasing funding and protection. 
Spurgeon (1998) showed how valuation can be used to 
support ecosystem rehabilitation and protection in coastal 
and marine habitats. Kumari (1995, 1996) calculated the 

  



Mamat  et al.               120 
 
 

 
economic values of forest and wetlands in North Selangor 
to make the case for increased international financing to 
secure global benefits. Specifically, for the case of 
protected area, the valuation of economic benefits 
through willingness to pay (WTP) can be used to defend 
the gazetting of new locations or to argue against 
changes in their protected status. Emerton et al. (1999), 
for example, calculated the economic value of ecosystem 
services and livelihood benefits from Nakivubo wetland in 
Kampala, Uganda, at more than USD1.5 million a year, 
using the results to make a strong case for it to be 
protected as part of the city‟s green belt. 
 
 
Pulau Redang Marine Park (PRMP), Malaysia 
 
Pulau Redang Marine Park is located about 45 km (24.2 
nautical miles) North-Northeast of Kuala Terengganu. 
Currently, the population on the island was about 1300 
people from more than 200 families. They engage in 
traditional fishing related activities and supplement their 
income from petty trading, harvesting of natural resour-
ces such as edible birds‟ nest from the swiflet colonies or 
guarding of turtle nests and eggs for the Department of 
Fisheries Malaysia. Some of them are also involved in the 
tourism activities, as tour boat operators, tourist guides or 
tour boatmen and assistants. Redang Island offers crystal 
clear waters and numerous diving sites for enthusiasts. 
 

Redang Island and other several islands in the 
archipelago are recognized as having one of the best 
corals and marine ecosystems in Malaysia. The waters 
surrounding these islands were gazetted as part of the 
Pulau Redang Marine Park, under the establishment of 
Marine Park Malaysia Order 1994 (Fisheries Act 1995). 
The boundary of the marine park is established by a line 
linking all points to nautical miles from the shores (low 
water mark) of Pulau Redang and several other smaller 
islands, that is, Lima, Ekor Tebu and Pinang. The largest 

island is Pulau Redang, which is about 25 km
2
 (9.5 mile

2
) 

in area, and is dominated by two imposing North-south 
ridges separated by a low-lying central valley. The coast 
on the eastern side of the island is blessed with 
sweeping, white sandy beaches, while the western side is 
wilder, rockier in nature. The vegetation on the island is 
lush, characterized by varied forest types. The goals of 
the Pulau Redang Marine Park are to protect, conserve 
and manage in perpetuity marine environment of 
significance and to encourage public understanding, 
appreciation and enjoyment of Malaysia‟s natural 
heritage by present and future generations. This paradise 
island is perfect for snokerling, swimming, scuba diving, 
jungle trekking, boating and canoeing. 
 
 
MATERIALS AND METHODS 
 
Surveying visitors or recreationists is done by using a structured 

 

  
 
 

 
questionnaire, the source of primary data. Before the questions were 

asked, the respondents were briefed on the objectives and the purpose 

of the survey. The questionnaire was administered in a single interview 

with every respondent. An interviewing session for a respondent took 

about 30 - 40 min. The approach of CVM for this study used the 

dichotomous choice – double bounded format. The format gives the 

respondent an apportunity to choose the amount of  
WTP. Through this format, the response „yes‟ or „no‟ was needed for 

the WTP questions. There are 6 different bids given to different 

respondents randomly. Each respondent only has to say „yes‟ or „no‟ to 

the bid posed to him. Six bids were selected for use: RM1, RM2, RM5, 

RM8, RM10, and RM30. The charges are chosen based on a pilot 

study. In a pilot study involving 38 respondents, the study asked (open-

ended question) possible payment that respondents might be willing to 

pay above the current fee (RM5.00). In the pilot study, the lowest WTP 

given by respondents was RM1 and the highest WTP was RM50. 

However, only one respondent give RM50. Therefore, RM1 and RM30 

were chosen as the lowest and highest WTP respectively. Same 

method is used by Hall et al. (2002) to determine bid values, based 

upon results from pre-testing or pilot test. They used open-ended 

questions which give them values from USD0 - USD260. They choose 

to place a bid from USD2 - USD100. In order to understand the 

determinants of the visitor‟s WTP responses and to see whether these 

determinants were consistent with economic demand theory, a series of 

multivariate analyses were performed with the data obtained from the 

questionnaire. Various independent variables were used to attempt to 

explain the variation in different measures of visitor‟s 
 
WTP for conservation of the marine park.  

This study was concentrated on the users‟ group for a number of 
reasons. The individual visitors instead of households were chosen 
as respondents for interview. “Visitors” were broadly defined as 
those who use the park and participate in the activities provided. In 
terms of sample interviewed, Roscoe (Sekaran, 1992) proposes 
rules of thumb for determining sample size as larger than 30 and 
less than 500 are appropriate for most research; and for samples 
that are broken into sub-samples, a minimum sample size of 30 for 
each category is necessary. As a further guideline, Calia and 
Strazzera (1998) in their study on bias and efficiency of single 
versus double bound CVM model, define “small size sample” as 
sample of 100 or less; categorize sample size of 250 – 400 as 
“medium size sample”; and more than 1000 as “large sample size”.  
They conclude that even for a medium sample size, both single and 
double bound CVM perform well in giving point estimates for the 
parameters and of the mean WTP. Given the limited time and 
budget constraints, the study managed to obtain 308 responses for 
the analysis. The survey was undertaken in March-July 2004. The 
analyses were done in stata/SE 8.0 and LIMDEP 7.0. 

 
Econometric models 
 
Logistic model 
 
The exploration of whether a person is willing to pay for con-
servation of the marine park was done using logistic model. This 
model was chosen because of its ability to deal with a dichotomous 
dependent variable and a well-established theoretical background. 
The model is specified as follows: 
 

Pi = E(Y =1 Xi)= 1/{1 + e
-(0 +

 
ii)

}] (1) 
 
where Pi = the probability that Y =1, Xi is a set of independent 
variables explained above and i is coefficient to be estimated 
corresponding to logistic distribution. Taking a natural logarithm of 
Equation (1), the study obtained, 
 
Li  = ln {Pi (1- Pi)} = 0 + ii + ei (2) 

  



 
 

 
where Li , which is called logit, is the log of the odd ratios and is 
linear in both independent variables and parameters. The estimation 
method to be used will be the maximum likelihood estimator (MLE). 

 
Double-bounded dichotomous choice model 

 
 

 
employed to estimate the values with a binary dependent variable, 
the “yes” and “no” responses to the WTP question. For this model, 
the estimation of mean and median WTP was done by using the 
estimated coefficients given by Cameron and Quiggin (1994). The 
estimation of the coefficients using bivariate probit model includes 
two related models, which can be expressed as: 

n 
In this  model, respondents  are presented with two levels  of  bid Y*1 = α1 +  ß1 B1 + Σ ßixi + ε1   (9) 

 

where the second bid is contingent upon the response to the first   i=2   
 

bid. If the individual responds “yes” to the first bid, the second bid       
 

(denoted Bi
u
) is an amount greater than the first bid (Bi < Bi

u
); if the   m    

 

individual responds “no” to the first bid, the second bid (Bi
d
) is some Y*2 = α2 +  ß1 B2 + Σ ßjxj + ε2   (10) 

 

amount smaller than the first bid (Bi
d
 < Bi).     j=2    

 

 Thus, there are four possible outcomes: (a) both answers are corr [ε1, ε2] = ρ     
 

“yes”; (b) both answers are “no”; (c) a “yes” followed by a “no”; and       
 

(d) a “no” followed by a “yes”. The likelihoods of these outcomes Where Y1  and Y2  are the binary responses to the WTP questions; 
 

are denoted as γ
yy

, γ
nn

, γ
yn

, γ
ny

, respectively. Given the assumption B1  and B2  are the bids  in the first and second bid  question;  Xi 
 

that each respondent is  maximizing their utility, the formulas  for represents socio-demographic variables  and α’s  and ß‟s  are the 
 

these likelihoods are as follows. In the first case, the study has Bi
u
 > coefficients to be estimated.    

 

Bi and γ
yy

(Bi,Bi
u
) = Pr{Bi ≤ max WTP and Bi

u
 ≤ max WTP}  (3)       

 

= Pr{Bi ≤ max WTP|Bi
u
 ≤ max WTP} Pr{Bi

u
 ≤ max WTP}         

 

= Pr{Bi
u
 ≤ max WTP} = 1 – G(Bi

u
,θ) since, with Bi

u
 > Bi, Pr{Bi ≤ max EMPIRICAL RESULTS    

 

WTP|Bi 
u  u d 

≤ max 
   

 

≤ max WTP} ≡ 1. Similarly, with Bi   < Bi, Pr{Bi        
 

WTP|Bi ≤ max WTP} ≡ 1. Hence,          
 

γ
nn

(Bi,Bi
d
) = Pr{Bi > max WTP and Bi

d
 > max WTP} = G(Bi

d
,θ). For the purpose of the study, estimations are undertaken 

 

       (4) by  using  both  the  single  and  double-bounded  dicho- 
 

When a “yes” is followed by a “no”, the study has Bi
u
 > Bi and  tomous choice models. For the single-bounded dichoto- 

 

γ 
yn  u u u  

(5) 
mous choice model, the study estimated the WTP using 

 

 (Bi,Bi  ) = Pr{Bi ≤ max WTP ≤ Bi } = G(Bi  ;θ);  
Logistic  model,  while  for  the  double-bounded  dichoto-  

and when a “no” is followed by a “yes”, the study has Bi
d
 < Bi and 

 

mous choice analysis the study used a log-logistic and 
 

γ
ny

(Bi,Bi
d
) = Pr{Bi ≥ max WTP ≥ Bi

d
} = G(Bi;θ) – G(Bi

d
;θ).  (6) log-normal  model  including  the  bivariate  probit  model.  

         

Given a sample of N respondents, where Bi, Bi
u
, and BID1 are the The  explanatory variables used  are  listed  in  Table 1. 

 

bids used for the ith respondent, the log-likelihood function takes These  variables  were  included  into  the  models  partly 
 

the form,     because they were believed to be important determinants 
 

        of WTP.     
 

    N          
 

ln L
D

(θ) = ∑ {di
yy

 ln γ
yy

 (Bi, Bi
u
 ) + di

nn
 ln γ

nn
 (Bi,Bi

d
) + di

yn
 ln γ

yn
 (Bi, Bi

u
 ) 

Willingness = α + β1AGE + β2YRSEDU + β3INCOME β+  

+ di
ny      

 

    i=1    β4FOREIGN + β5 PERCEP +  β6VISIT+ β7BID1 + β8BID2 
 

              

ln γ
ny

 (Bi,Bi
d
)},   (7) 

Results for the logistic model show that age (AGE) of the  

        
 

where di
yy

 , di
nn

 , di
yn

 and  di
ny

   are binary-valued indicator variables. respondents and bid assigned for conservation fee are 
 

The ML estimator for the double-bounded model, θ
D

, is the solution positively related (Table 2). When the age of the respon- 
 

to the equation ∂ln L
D

(θ
D

) /∂θ = 0, subject to ∂
2
 ln L/∂Q

2
<0.   dents  increases,  the  probability  of  saying  „yes‟  will 

 

The mean for the double bounded approach is calculated as the increase. Thus, the age of respondents increased by one 
 

year; the probability of saying „yes‟ increased to 0.5%.  area  under  the  probability  function  of  accepting  the  bid  using  

Results also show the positive relationship for years in 
 

integration  technique.  The  area  shows  the  proportion  of  the 
 

population who would consume the good at each price level, and education (YRSEDU). The higher in education resulted 
 

their associated utility. It can be expressed as:   higher probability of accepting the bid. In other words, 
 

    
U 

  higher educated person is more likely to pay. Besides 
 

      

that, the higher the monthly income (INCOME), the more 
 

E( WTP) = ∫(1+ea+bWILLINGNESS) -1 db  (8) 
 

    L   likely the respondents will accept a given bid. For the 
 

      

perception on recreational facilities and services provided 
 

where (1+e
a+bWILLINGNESS

) 
-1

 is the probability of saying “yes” and U 
 

(PERCEP),  a positive perception from respondents 
 

and L are the upper and lower limits of the integration respectively. resulted in higher probability of saying „yes‟ or accepting  

Whereas the median is as follows:    
 

   

the bid. People who are satisfied with the recreational  α/B1      
 

     

facilities and services provided are willing to pay more. 
 

 Since in the analysis, the studies include covariates, α is a linear 
 

function of the covariates, instead of the intercept. That is α=Xβ, However, inconsistency in terms of  expected sign still 
 

where X is a vector of covariates and β is a vector of parameters. remained for variable measuring number of visit (VISIT). 
 

        The  coefficients  for  bid  offered  (BID1)  are  negatively 
 

Bivariat probit model    correlated with the probability of acceptance as expected. 
 

   

The negative and statistically significant coefficients on 
 

        
 

Following this, another nonlinear model using bivariate probit was bid suggested that  the higher  the  amount respondents 
 

121       Afr. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 



Mamat  et al.               122 
 

 
 

Table 1. Variables used in estimation models. 
 

Willingness Dependant variable with 1 if respondent is willing to pay for the amount asked to them, 0 
 otherwise 

AGE Age of the respondent 
YRSEDU The visitor‟s number of years in school (Years in education) 
INCOME Monthly gross income (RM/month) 
FOREIGN Foreign visitors (dummy, 1= foreigner, 0=local) 
PERCEP Visitors perception on recreational facilities & services Provided 
VISIT Number of visit (dummy, 1=visit two time & above,  0= first time visit 
BID1 Dichotomous choice bid assigned. There are 6 sets of bid; RM1, RM2, RM5, RM8, RM10 and RM30 
BID2 Follow-up bid assigned 

 
 
 
Table 2. The estimated parameters of the models for the preservation of the PRMPs. 
 
   Coefficient of the models   

 Variable Logistic model Bivariate probit Log-logistic Log-normal 
  initial bid 1  2   
   WTP  WTP   

 Constant -0.480(1.208) -0.344(0.698)  -0.331(0.625) 0.236(0.722) 0.146(0.424) 
 AGE 0.005(0.018) 0.002(0.010)  0.003(0.009) 0.001(0.012) 0.003(0.007) 
 YRSEDU 0.142(0.062) ** 0.085(0.036) ** 0.074(0.032) ** 0.125(0.038)*** 0.073 (0.023)*** 
 INCOME 0.00004(0.00005) 0.000025(0.000026) 0.0000037(0.000023) 0.084(0.042) ** 0.038(0.025)* 
 FOREIGN 3.138(1.343) ** 1.7697(0.641) *** 1.002(0.449) ** 1.573(0.595) *** 0.959 (0.367)*** 
 PERCEP -0.023(0.376) -0.022(0.216)  0.204(0.203) 0.491(0.258)* 0.270(0.152)* 
 VISIT -0.612(0.366) -0.361(0.217)*  -0.066(0.196)   

 BID 1 (start bid) -0.255(0.042)*** -0.139(0.023)***   -1.665(0.153)*** -0.991(0.083)*** 
 BID 2    - 0.116(0.018) ***   

 -2 log likelihood 113.109 251.181   332.870 330.107 
 No. of obs.(n) 248 248   308 308 

 Pseudo R
2
 0.338      

 Chi squared     665.741 660.214 
 
*Significance at 10% level; **significance at 5% level and *** significance at 1% level. 

 
 
 
were asked to pay, the less likely they would pay.  

For bivariate probit model, the results indicate that the 
years in education (YRSEDU) have a statistically signi-
ficant positive impact on both the respondents initial and 
subsequent decision on their contribution towards 
willingness to pay for preservation of the PRMP. Namely, 
the regression coefficient is 0.085 at the initial response 
and 0.074 at the follow-up response, which means that 
the higher level in education the higher the probability 
that people shall accept the proposed willingness to pay 
or in other words they would be willing to pay more. The 
foreigner (FOREIGN) variable shows positive relationship 
of individual‟s willingness to contribute to conservation 
effort in PRMP. The value of regression coefficient was 
1.77 for initial and 1.002 for follow-up response. Also, the 
number of visit (VISIT) for this variable only proved to be 
a statistically significant determinant in relation to an 
individual‟s initial bid on willingness to pay for the 
preservation of PRMP. The regression coefficient is - 

 
 

 
0.361, which means that in case of respondents with the 
background or experience visiting PRMP before, the 
probability of acceptance of initially proposed willingness 
to pay value reduces, compared to respondents who are 
visiting PRMP for the first time. In other words, people 
who are the first time visitors to PRMP would be willing to 
pay more compared to others who have an experience 
visiting PRMP before.  

The other model tested in this study was log-logistic 
and log-normal models. According to the results, the 
coefficients on FOREIGN are significant at 1% level of 
significance and have positive signs with the WTP, which 
is similar to the results found in Mahdzan et al. (2000), 
meaning foreign visitors are more likely to say “yes” to 
the bid amount offered to them. The coefficient on 
YRSEDU is also significant at the 1% level of significance 
and has a positive sign indicating that the higher the 
education, the more likely the respondents are willing to 
pay for the preservation of the PRMP. A priori, the study 

  



123       Afr. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 
 
 
 

Table 3. Mean and median WTP estimated for the sample. 
 

Models  Mean WTP (RM) Median WTP (RM) 
Logistic Initial bid 16.87 16.81 
Bivariate probit Initial bid 17.83 17.20 

 Follow-up bid 17.73 16.55 
Log-logistic  10.86 5.15 
Log-normal  28.69 5.05 

 
 

 
would expect that a higher level of education will lead to a 
higher probability of the bid amount being accepted. This 
expectation is due to the assumption that educated 
people have more information and are more aware of 
environmental issues (Arin and Kramer, 2002). In the 
study by Lockwood et al. (1993), education has a positive 
effect on WTP because it is related to income where a 
higher level of education means a higher income. In 
relation, INCOME is significant at the 5% level of signifi-
cance in log-logistic model and 1% level of significance in 
log-normal model; both are positive sign indicating that 
the higher the monthly income, the more likely they will 
agree to pay for preserving the park. This result is in line 
with the past studies done by Carson et al. (1994) and 
Alias and Shazali (2005) which indicate a positive rela-
tionship between income and WTP. The BID1 is highly 
significant and has the expected negative sign, meaning 
that the higher the amount respondents were asked to 
pay, the less likely they would pay. This demonstrates 
respondents carefully considered the amount they were 
asked to pay. All the variables in the double-bounded 
approach are significant at a different level except for 
AGE which is insignificant in the double-bounded 
approach and is therefore, eliminated from the model. 
This means that the variable “AGE” does not have a 
significant effect on the probability of saying “yes” to the 
bid amount offered. 
 
 
Estimation of mean and median willingness to pay 
 
There are four approaches involved in estimating mean 
and median WTP, namely through logistic, bivariate 
probit, log-logistic and log-normal analysis. The calcu-
lated mean and median values are listed according to 
models estimated using different approaches in Table 3.  

Referring to estimates obtained from positive WTP 
responses, the mean WTP was quite close to the median 
WTP for logistic model. The estimation of the mean WTP 
was RM16.87. From the bivariate probit models, the 
mean WTP ranges from RM17.73 - RM17.83 slightly 
higher than logistic. On the other hand, models estimated 
through log-logistic provide lower estimates to that of 
logistic and biprobit model, of RM10.86. The log-normal 
model provides the highest estimate of RM28.69. From 
the overall results, the mean WTP is found to be slightly 

 
 
 
higher than median WTP. 
 
 
Aggregation 
 
In order to aggregate the WTP for the preservation of 
PRMP, the individual WTP obtained from the analysis 
was multiplied by the number of visitors to PRMP. The 
yearly calculated conservation values or benefits for 
PRMP based on the mean willingness to pay computed 
from respected models for the year 1994 - 2008 are 
shown in Table 4.  

In mid-1990s, the expected values based on mean from 
all models are quite small. However, it increases every 
year. In 1994, the estimated benefit based on mean 
willingness to pay for the logistic model was about 
RM140, 847.63. This value increased more than eighteen 
times in the year 2008, which is RM2.5 million. For the 
bivariate probit model was about RM148,862.67 and 2.7 
million for initial bid and RM148,027.77 and RM2.6 million 
for follow-up bid for the same year. Using log-logistic and 
log-normal analysis, it was estimated the benefit was 
about RM1.6 million and RM4.3 million respectively for 
the year 2008. In this study, in order to estimate the 
economic value of recreational site at Pulau Redang 
Marine Park, as mentioned earlier, the values of WTP 
should be multiplied by the number of visitors. To 
increase the economic value of this Park, a few actions 
should be taken to encourage more people to visit the 
park. The current conservation fee (RM5.00) is consi-
dered very minimum. Since the maximum WTP found in 
this study was RM28.69, this value can be used by the 
authority to determine the appropriate conservation fee. 
 
 
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
 
Pulau Redang Marine Park (PRMP) is a natural environ-
ment area with a rich diversity of aquatic flora and fauna. 
The establishment of PRMP is to protect the aquatic flora 
and fauna and also to allow natural regeneration of 
aquatic life. The idea is to promote scientific study and 
research on the marine ecosystem. PRMP with its attrac-
tions is suitable as “pleasure grounds or picnic sites” 
which offer recreation and enjoyment especially for 
urbanites. Today, many authorities realize that promoting 



Mamat  et al.               124 
 

 

 
Table 4. Estimated benefits (RM) of conservation PRMP based on mean logistic, Bivariate probit analysis, log-logistic and 
log-normal model. 
 
   Logistic model Bivariate probit model Log-logistic Log-normal 
      model model 
 Year No. of Initial bid Initial bid Follow-up bid WTP=10.86 WTP=28.69 
  visitor WTP=16.87 WTP=17.83 WTP=17.73   

 1994 8349 140847.63 148862.67 148027.77 90670.14 239532.81 
 1995 22725 383370.75 405186.75 402914.25 246793.50 651980.25 
 1996 34743 586114.41 619467.69 615993.39 377308.98 996776.67 
 1997 36198 610660.26 645410.34 641790.54 393110.28 1038520.62 
 1998 34466 581441.42 614528.78 611082.18 374300.76 988829.54 
 1999 47008 793024.96 838152.64 833451.84 510506.88 1348659.52 
 2000 52634 887935.58 938464.22 933200.82 571605.24 1510069.46 
 2001 73580 1241294.60 1311931.40 1304573.40 799078.80 2111010.20 
 2002 63826 1076744.62 1138017.60 1131635.00 693150.36 1831167.94 
 2003 76219 1285814.53 1358984.80 1351362.90 827738.34 2186723.11 
 2004 142476 2403570.10 2540347.10 2526099.50 1547289.36 4087636.44 
 2005 123159 2077692.30 2195925 2183609.10 1337506.74 3533431.71 
 2006 135098 2279103.26 2408797.34 2395287.54 1467164.28 3875961.62 
 2007 151397 2554067.39 2699408.51 2684268.81 1644171.42 4343579.93 
 2008 151824 2561270.88 2707021.92 2691839.52 1648808.64 4355830.56 
 
Note: Data were collected from Marine Park Seksyen, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Malaysia. 

 

 
areas which are still in virgin condition and protected 
under the law can lead to greater interest in ecotourism. 
In the case of PRMP, the park provides excellent 
ecotourism products which can become an economic 
force in the future. The increase in the number of visitors 
to the park does indicate its economic potential.  

PRMP, the earliest marine ecosystem gazetted as a 
marine protected area under the Fisheries Regulation 
1983, received more than 151,824 tourists during the 
year 2008 and this figure is expected to increase in the 
future. This situation or trend becomes a challenge to the 
authorities to cater to the needs of tourists and at the 
same time ensure that the ecosystem is well preserved. 
The main attraction of the park to tourists is its coral 
reefs, which attract mostly snorkellers, although some 
diving activity does occur in the area.  

Determination of economic values for protected areas 
or natural resources is useful in comparing the benefits of 
different projects or programmes and as a guide to policy-
makers in deciding the best alternative use of the 
resources. Besides, the management of natural 
resources as well as the regulation of other activities that 
affect the resources can be undertaken more efficiently. 
The policy- makers should really consider the impact of 
any policy made on these marine parks. From the study, 
it is proven that preserving these marine parks should be 
the government‟s priority. This can be seen from the 
willingness to pay by the visitors, for preserving the whole 
ecosystem in these marine parks.  

At the moment, Malaysian government seemed “very 
reluctant” to implement economic tools as one of their 

 

 
ways of handling environmental issues. Most of the 

recreational sites, gazetted or non-gazetted, still do not or 

do impose only a very marginal entrance charge. As an 

example the entrance fee to the PRMP, which is just 

RM5.00 per person per adults and normally they will waive 

the fee for school children coming in groups or persons who 

claim that they enter for educational purposes. Therefore, 

the study would very much like to suggest to the authority to 

start using economic tools to protect the environment while 

providing funding for the same purpose. A benefit capture 

instrument should be implemented in order to target tourists‟ 

consumer surplus.  
From the issues brought up in this study, the WTP of 
visitors per visit is between RM10.86 - RM28.69; the 
study suggests that the fee to the PRMP should be 
increased from the current charges of RM5.00 for adults 
and RM2.50 for children below 12.  

Quantifying the economic values of protected areas 
can show where goods and services are currently under-
priced and can also capture benefits for the protected 
areas as cash values or monetary values as well as 
generating revenues. Prices and market measures can 
provide an effective means of regulating the demand for 
resources and incentives for sustainable management. 
 
 
REFERENCES 
 
Alias R, Shazali AM (2005). Use of Dichotomous Choice Contingent 

Valuation Method to Value the Manukan Island, Sabah. Pertanika J. 
Soc. Sci. Humanities 13(1):1-8.  

Arin T, Kramer RA (2002). Divers Willingness to Pay to Visit Marine 

  



125       Afr. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 
 

 
Sanctuaries: An Exploratory Study. Ocean Coastal Manage. 45:171-
183.  

Calia P, Strazzera E (1998). Bias and Efficiency of Single vs. Double 
Bounded Models for Contingent Valuation Studies: A Monte Carlo 
Analysis. Working Paper. CRENoS: Universita‟ degli Studi di Cagliari,  
(http://veprints.unica.it/331/). Assessed on 20 October 2010. 

Cameron TA, Quiggin J (1994). Estimation using contingent valuation  
data from a dichotomous choice with follow-up questionnaire. J. 
Environ. Econ. Manage. 27(3):218-234  

Carson RT, Wilks, Imber D (1994). Valuing the Preservation of 
Australia's Kakadu Conservation Zone. Oxford Econ. Papers 46:727-
749.  

Emerton L, Iyango L, Luwum P, Malinga A (1999). The economic value 
of Nakivubo Urban wetland, Uganda. IUCN – The World 
Conservation Union, Eastern Africa Regional Office, Nairobi.  

Hall DC, Hall JV, Murray SN (2002). Contingent Valuation of Marine 
Protected Areas: Southern California Rocky Intertidal Ecosystems. 
Natural Resour. Modell. 15(3):335-368.  

Higgins SI, Turpie J (1997). An ecological economic simulation model of 
mountain fybos ecosystem: dynamics, valuation and management. 
Ecol. Econ. 22(2):155-169 

 
 

 
Kumari K (1995). An environmental and economic assessment of forest 

management option: A case study in Malaysia. Washington, D.C., 
Environment Department Papers No. 026, Environmental Economics 
Series, World Bank.  

Kumari K (1996). An application of the incremental cost framework to 
biodiversity conservation: A wetland case study in Malaysia. London, 
Working Paper GEC 95-15, Centre for Social and Economic 
Research on the Global Environment.  

Lockwood M, Loomis J, DeLacy T (1993). A Contingent Valuation 
Survey and Benefit-Cost Analysis of Forest Preservation in East 
Gippsland, Australia. J. Environ. Manage. 38:233-243.  

Mahdzan AA, Bahrain RS, Amizan A, Aznor AS (2000) Conserving 
Pulau Payar: are visitors willing to share the cost? Proceedings of 
National Symposium on Pulau Payar Marine Park p.15.  

Sekaran U (1992). Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building 
Approach. (2

nd
Ed.). Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.  

Spurgeon PG (1998). The socio-economic costs and benefits of coastal 
habitat rehabilitation and creation. Marine Pollut. Bulll. 37(8-12):373-
382. 
 


