Value capture mechanisms, transaction costs, and heritage conservation: A case study of Sanjiangyuan National Park, China

• Jiayu Wu ^[1] ; Gefei Wu ^[1] ; Tianli Zheng ^[2] ; Xiaobin Zhang ^[1] ; Kan Zhou ^[3]
  1. [1] Zhejiang University

     Zhejiang University

     China

     
  2. [2] Environmental Science and Technology Research Center, Tianjin research institute for water transport engineering, China
  3. [3] Institute of Geographical Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China

  Mostrar afiliaciones +
• Localización: Land use policy: The International Journal Covering All Aspects of Land Use, ISSN 0264-8377, ISSN-e 1873-5754, Nº. 90, 2020
• Idioma: inglés
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Dialnet Métricas: 2 Citas
• Resumen

  • Value capture has been shown to be an innovative instrument to solve the dilemma of funding shortfalls for protected areas. However, value capture mechanisms are often ineffective even though financing from the domestic budget is sufficient. This paper structures a theoretical framework to compare two value capture mechanisms (ecological compensation and ecological migration) based on implementation effects (heritage protection and welfare promotion) and transaction costs (the costs of information, bargaining, and policing). Sanjiangyuan National Park in China is adopted as an empirical case. Based on multi-source data collection and in-depth interviews, we review the ecological compensation in multiple functions and ecological migration in multiple forms for this case. Our results suggest that value capture tools have attained great achievements and dramatically changed the lives of aborigines. We then evaluate implementation effects separately: compensation for ecological regulation, bonuses for incentives, and transfer payments to the poor could all contribute to better ecological restoration and increased resident income. However, although ecological engineering accounts for the largest expenditures, it has little influence on heritage protection and welfare promotion. We also find that the transaction costs of ecological migration are significantly higher than those of ecological compensation. To our knowledge, this investigation is the first attempt to understand domestic funds for protected areas from a novel value capture perspective, and the results of this study can provide guidance for both protected area finances and policy evaluation.