Estimating visitors’s willingness to pay for conservation to phong nha ke bang national park

va MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF FORESTRY STUDENT THESIS Title ESTIMATING VISITORS’S WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR CONSERVATION TO PHONG NHA – KE BANG NATIONAL PARK Student name: Vo Thi Thuy An Student ID: 1453091598 Class: K59A Natural Resources Management Course: 2014 - 2019 Class: K59A Natural Resources Management Advanced Education Program Developed in collaboration with Colorado State University, USA Supervisor: Vu Thi Minh Ngoc Hanoi, September, 2018 CONTENT CONTENT LIST OF TABLES LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT4 ABSTRACT0 1.INTRODUCTION 2.GOALS AND ( SPECIFIC) OBJECTIVES: 2.1 GOALS 2.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Study sites – Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP 3.1.1 Location 3.1.2 Natural conditions 3.1.3 Activities in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP 3.1.4 Number of visitors and revenue of the NP 3.2 Methods of data collection 3.2.1 Pre-existing data 2.3.Methods of data analysis 10 2.3.1.Statistic description 10 3.3.2 Contigent valuation method 10 3.3.3 Logistic regression model 11 4.STUDY RESULTS 14 4.1 Descriptive analysis 14 4.2 WTP analysis 17 4.2.1 Analysing WTP of different groups 17 4.2.2 Analysis on factors affecting WTP 19 5.DISCUSSIONS 21 6.CONCLUSIONS 22 7.LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 23 7.1 Limitations 23 7.2.Recommendations for further study 23 REFERENCES24 APPENDIX25 LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: Total number of visitors and revenue from tourism and services of Phong Nha - Ke Bang from 2015 to 2018 (the first months of 2018) Table 3.2 Variables description 13 Table 4.1: Respondents’s profiles 14 Table 4.2 Respondents’s trip information 15 Table 4.3 Perception of respondents 16 Table 4.4 WTP of respondents 17 Table 4.5 Comparison of respondents’s WTP in different groups 18 Table 4.6 Logistic regression estimates 19 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ASEAN Association of South East Asian Nations CV Contigent valuation CVM Contigent valuation method IUCN Internatinal Union for Conversation of Nature NP National Park TC Travel Cost UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization UNWTO World Tourism Organization WTP Willingness to pay ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The success of any thesis can not fail to mention the people who helped during the research Certainly, the author can’t finish the thesis if didn’t get helps from others, hereafter the author would like to express the deep gratitude to those kindness people Firstly, the author would like to thank Master Vu Thi Minh Ngoc, a lecturer of Economics Department of Vietnam National University of Forestry Without her enthusiastic support and guidance, this report will not be able to complete as required Next, the author would like to express gratitude to Mr Truong Thanh Khai, vice president of Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park, who provided many useful informations while the author collecting data in the National Park Finally, the author want to send sincere thanks to the Phong Nha Ke Bang Tourism Center for providing me the date that related my research, with their helps the author had the opportunity to enhance knowledge and experiences that contributed to complete the thesis successfully Thank you ! Hanoi, September Student Vo Thi Thuy An , 2018 ABSTRACT This thesis was conducted to determine the level of willingness to pay for conservation of Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park applying contigent valuation method and logistic regression model Estimating the level of willingness to pay of visitors for conservation is an important scientific basis for proposing and implementing measures to enhance biodiversity conservation in Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park Specifically, the author hypothesize that the Government will increase the price per ticket to improve the conservation biodiversity in NP The result is 83.67% of the total 300 interviewees are willingness to pay if the hypothesis occurred in actual The average of WTP for increasing price is 9,344 VND per ticket Three factors that affect the respondents’s decision on willingness to pay for conservation are also listed, which are education level, income, and age of the visitors Of which, income and education level of visitors have the greatest affect on their WTP for conservation 1.INTRODUCTION Biodiversity conservation has always been the concern and mission of all countries in the world over decades Biological diversity is defined as “ the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part: this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems” (Convention on biological diversity, 1992) The Convention also affirmed that “ the conservation of biological diversity is a common concern of humankind, States are responsible for conserving their biological diversity and for using their biological resources in a sustainable manner” In recognition of this mission, all countries carry out their own national biodiversity conservation by establishing national parks or nature reserves National parks are generally located in areas that are mostly undeveloped, typically areas with rare native flora and fauna and special ecosystems (such as endangered species) have high biodiversity or special geological features Sometimes, national parks are also established in developed areas with the goal of making the area return to its original state In 1962 , Vietnam had the first national park is Cuc Phuong national park, located in three provinces of Ninh Binh, Thanh Hoa, Hoa Binh By January 2018, Vietnam has 32 national parks with a total area of 10,455.74 km² (of which 620.10 km² is sea), occupying about 3% of the land area There are four national parks recognized as ASEAN heritage park: Hoang Lien, Ba Be, Chu Mom Ray and Kon Ka Kinh National Parks The ASEAN Heritage Park is a valuable place to develop tourism, research in science, culture and education In order to be recognized as a heritage park, the national park must reach the criteria of naturalness, wilderness, ecological integrity and the diversity of the population Besides, some national parks in Vietnam have been recognized by UNESCO as world natural heritages such as Phong Nha - Ke Bang national Park or a part of the world natural heritage such as Bai Tu Long of Ha Long Bay Most national parks have a dual role, on the one hand providing habitat for wildlife, on the other hand it serves as a popular tourist destination for visitors Managing potential conflicts between these two goals can be a problem, particularly as visitors will bring income to the national park and national park using this source of income to sustain and develop conservation projects National parks are also provide many valuable resources with direct use values such as timber, animals and plants, minarals … and many indirect values such as flood mitigation, atmospheric carbon removal, regulation water resources, limited erosion, conserve biodiversity The balance between the need to exploit these resources and the loss caused by exploiting is often a very important challenge for the park management system In almost national parks offen occursillegal hunting, exploit rare plants and other form of illegal exploiting This threatens the integrity of many valuable habitats The problem here is that the number of the endangered species is increasing not only in quantity but also at threat levels – warned by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Nature Resources (IUCN) In IUCN red list 1996, there were 25 species of Vietnam in the list of endangered species which was 46 in 2004, and rose to 47 species in 2010 including bison, red shed, Douc Langur and Black Langur Douc This shows that Vietnam's biodiversity is gradually becoming a crisis Recognizing that biodiversity conservation is a concern of the world in general and Vietnam in particular, the author finds out that the conservation of biodiversity in national parks is a subject that needs to be explored more closely The aim of this research was to assess the willingness to pay that local and international visitors pay for the purpose of conservation Specifically, in this research the author conducted a survey to estimate the amount of responents were willingness to pay for conservation of Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP and estimate the average WTP of visitors This survey is also investigated factors that affect WTP by processing data and will be presented by model 2.GOALS AND ( SPECIFIC) OBJECTIVES: 2.1 GOALS The research aims to improve the capacity of biodiversity conservation of Phong Nha Ke Bang National Park 2.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES - To determine the visitor's willingness to pay (WTP) to biodiversity conservation in Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park - To identify the factors influencing WTP to biodiversity conservation of visitors in Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Study sites – Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP 3.1.1 Location Phong Nha -Ke Bang National Park is located in the north of the Truong Son Range ( from 17° 21' to 17° 39' North latitude and from 105° 57' to 106° 24' East longitude) belongs to Tan Trach, Thuong Trach, Phuc Trach, Xuan Trach and Son Trach commune in Bo Trach district, Quang Binh province The NP is located far away 50 km of Dong Hoi city to the northwest and about 500 km of Ha Noi to the South Source: Quang Binh’s tourism Center In 2003, Phong Nha -Ke Bang National Park was recognized by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as a World Natural Heritage with geological and geomorphological criteria (criterion viii) In 2015, Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park was again honored with the World Heritage List according to two new criteria: "Outstanding value represents ecological progress in evolution and development of terrestrial ecosystems (criterion IX); owning natural habitats is most significant for biodiversity conservation (criterion X)" Respondents’s profiles are displayed in table 4.1 Interm of gender, the majority of visitors were male, accounting for 58% (174) Most the visitors were from 21 to 35 years old which accounting for 57.7% (173) of the total visitors By income, the lowest income level is only 1.5 million VND/month and the highest income level is 25 million VND/month Half of the visitors have income from million to 10 million VND, which accounting for 50.3% (151) This is understandable because this is the average income of the Vietnamese people The majority occupations of visitors are government servant and private employee, which in order accounting for 39% (117) and 31% (93) of total visitors The highest education level of visitors in this study is Mater Degree which only accounting for 9.3% (28) and most of visitors graduated Bachelor Degree which is 47.3% (142) b Respondents’s trip information Table 4.2 Respondents’s trip information No Characterristics First time visit Yes 223 74.3 No 77 25.7 ≤500,000 108 36.0 500,000 – 1,000,000 172 57.3 20 6.7 236 78.7 59 19.7 1.7 >3 0.0 Climbing 25 8.3 Taking Wildfile photos 17 5.7 Advanture games close to nature 69 23.0 189 63.0 0 Travel Cost >1,000,000 Percentage (%) N Time of visit Favorite activities Exploring the cave Others 15 In total 300 respondents, most of visitors visit the NP is first time accounting for 74.3% (223) The average travel cost (include travel expenses, food expenses, visit expeneses and other expenses incurred) was calculated is 722.000 VND/ visitor Most of visitors spent only day to visit and there is no visitor spent more than days Almost the visitors come to the national park to explore the cave (table 4.2) c Perception of the NP of the respondents Table 4.3 Perception of respondents No Option N Function of NP Maintain and protect the biodiversity; Conserve cultural and historical values Place to visit and explore Place to exploit forest products, hunt animals Other opinions The visit of people in the national park will affect the natural resources Yes No Concerned about conservation Often Sometimes No Are willingness to pay Yes No Reason of visitors are willingness to pay For my own benefit For the next generation For society as a whole Other (specify) Reason of visitors are not willingness to pay I not believe paying will solve the problem I believe the Government should provide all the cost I feel the problem is not serious I believe the conservation still take place without my contribution I fail to understand the questions Percentage (%) 213 71.0 80 26.7 0.0 2.3 265 35 88.3 11.7 167 32 101 55.7 10.7 33.7 251 49 251 64 113 123 49 83.7 16.3 29 59.2 11 22.4 10.2 8.2 0.0 25.5 45.0 49.0 0.0 Source: The author's calculation based on the respondents' answers This table shows that most people and visitors are aware of the function of the national park as protecting biodiversity and preserving cultural and historical values accounting for 71 16 % ( 213) Most of people understand the functions and values of the national park There are 88.3% (265) of visitors know that the visit of people in the NP will affect the natural resources The level of interest in conservation of the respondents is also positive, there are 55.7% visitors concern about conservation problems This demonstrates that conservation issues are one of major concern of people , which is a good signal for conservation projects in national parks In this study, there are 83.7% ( 251) of visitors are willingness to pay for the conservation in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP, 16.3% (49) of visitors are not willingness to pay Most of visitors are willingness to pay for conservation for whole society and the next generation There are two main reasons why people are not willingness to pay First, there are 29 visitors chose the ideal “ Not believe paying will solve the problem”, 11 visitors believe that the Government should provide all the cost 4.2 WTP analysis 4.2.1 Analysing WTP of different groups Table 4.4 WTP of respondents WTP level ( VND) N SUM 49 5,000 70 350,000 10,000 78 780,000 15,000 72 1,080,000 20,000 31 620,000 Total 300 2,830,000 9,433 Average WTP In general, all visitors show their WTP for conservation fee in different level of price The average WTP which respondents are willingness to pay for conservation in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP is 9,433 VND/ ticket This shows that the issues of biodiversity conservation and environmental protection in Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park are quite well supported by visitors 17 Table 4.5 Comparision of respondents’s WTP in different groups N Average WTP ( thousand VND) Under 35 173 5.722 35 -50 100 14.3 Over 50 27 15.185 Gender 300 Female 126 5.436 Male 174 12.327 Self employed 61 10.327 Private employee 93 4.408 Government servant 117 13.632 Others 29 6.724 International 93 15.054 Vietnamese 207 4.815 Primary School 15 1.000 Secondary School 61 2.869 Highschool 54 6.481 Bachelor Degree 142 12.922 Master Degree/PhD 28 16.25 ≤ 2,000,000 22 1.818 > 2,000,000 - ≤ 5,000,000 111 6.126 > 5,000,000 – ≤10,000,000 151 12.053 > 10,000,000 – ≤ 15,000,000 17.222 > 15,000,000 – ≤ 20,000,000 18.75 > 20,000,000 – ≤ 25,000,000 20.000 No Age Occupation Nationality Education Income This table suggests that older people are more likely to be concerned about conservation and environmental issues than young people Older respondents are more willing to pay for conservation, especially those over 50 who are willing to pay for conservation at a relatively high level of 15.185 thousand VND The level of willingness to pay also varies by gender which male are willing to pay more than female Respondents with different 18 occupations also have different levels of WTP This firgure indicates that respondents that have occupation related to the government are more willing to pay than other occupations The results also show that the international visitors had a higher WTP than domestic visitors Respondents with higher education level also are more willing to pay than the one with lower education The higher the level of education, the higher the level of willingness to pay Finally, different levels of income of respondents also lead to different levels of willingness to pay for conservation Particularly, the result shows that the higher income, the more wiliness to pay Those who earn more than 20 million VND per month, are willing to pay for conservation at the maximum level at 20 thousand VND per ticket It can be explained by the fact that visitors with different income levels have different levels of willingness to pay Because with the higher the income, the more capacity to pay for something other than personal expenses 4.2.2 Analysis on factors affecting WTP Table 4.6 Logistic regression estimates B Gender Age Income Nationality Education Occupation Constant S.E 1.076 634 0.211* 089 0.525* 169 14.112 3191.053 0.523** 112 0.231 281 -12.564** 2.642 Wald 2.885 5.643 9.596 0.000 21.803 674 22.615 df Sig 1 1 1 Exp(B) 0.089 2.933 0.018 1.234 0.002 1.690 0.996 1344989.167 000 1.687 0.412 1.259 0.000 000 95% C.I.for EXP(B) Lower Upper 847 10.156 1.038 1.469 1.212 2.355 000 1.355 2.102 726 2.184 Note: ** significant at 99% confidence , * significant at 95% confidence The significant value of gender, occupation and nationality variables larger than 0.05 which means that these variables are not statistic significant in this research (In this study, the author only considers the significant of variables from 95% confidence level ) The remaining independent variables as income, education and age variables which have sig value less than 0.05 Thus, it can be explained that the income, education and age variables are significant at 95% confidence in this model In other words, there are factors have an impact on respondents’s decision on WTP, which are age, education, income and signs of regression coefficient matching expectations (table 4.6) 19 After performing the logistic regression analysis without the independent variables which are not statistically significant, the results is presented in table 4.7 Table 4.7 Logistic regression with statistic significant independent variables B Age Income Education Constant S.E .211 577 549 -12.524 -2 Log likelihood Cox & Snell R Square Nagelkerke R Square Sig .086 163 111 2.444 Wald df 6.081 12.533 24.607 26.259 Sig 1 1 014 000 000 000 Exp(B) 95% C.I.for EXP(B) Lower Upper 1.236 1.044 1.462 1.780 1.294 2.450 1.732 1.394 2.152 000 103.138 0.399 0.688 0.000 The coefficient of interpretation of the model: Nagelkerke R Square is 0.688 This means that 68.8 % of the variance of the dependent variable is explained by independent variables in the model, the rest being due to other factors Income and education are the two most influential factors in the probability of willingness to pay for conservation in this study As stated, is the probability that respondents are willingness to pay for conservation is the probability changing when an independent factor changes ( presented in Exp(B) column in table 4.7) a Income variable => = 1.78 % Income is the most influential variable in respondents’s decision on WTP for conservation When other factors remain unchanged, the higher monthly income of respondents, the higher probability of visitors are willing to pay for conservation In particular, when income of respondents increases million VND, the probability that respondents are willingness to pay for conservation increases to 1.78% This is quite consistent with the reality, as the higher the income of visitors, the greater the affordability for their costs Conversely, when their income is low, most of the money will be spent on personal or family expenses and they will not have enough money to cover other costs b Education variable => = 1.732 % 20 Similar with income variables, education variable play a very important role in this model because it also has an strong impact on respondents’s decision on WTP for conservation If years of schooling of respondents increases year and other conditions are constant, it would increase the probability of respondents are willing to pay for conservation to 1.732 % This can be explained by the fact that highly educated people are more willing to pay for social problems than those who are less educated Education level is determined based on the number of years of schooling Visitors with higher education will have the opportunity to gain more knowledge about resource protection as well as the consequences of biodiversity loss This is consistent with the explanation that highly educated people will have a better sense of environmental protection and willingness to pay than the one with lower education c Age variable => = 1.236 % Age of respondents have a slight impact to WTP When other factors are unchanged, if the age of visitors increases by one year, the probability that respondents are willingness to pay for conservation increases to 1.236% This is explained that older people tend to pay for social activities more than young people Occupation, gender and nationality of respondents are not statistic significant in this research This can be explained that gender, occupation and nationality of visitors does not affect their decision on WTP for conservation In this study, the occupation, gender and nationality of visitors may not be related to their perception of conservation In case of gender, this may be explained by the fact that perception about conservation between male and female is not too different, so gender of respondent does not affect their decision to pay 5.DISCUSSIONS The number of visitors to Phong Nha – Ke Bang are increasing over years, leading to the increasing of economic growth in the region However, this make the environment faced to invironment degration problems Illegal activities are still occurring in the NP, the development of unsustainable ecotourism model makes the environment become increasingly polluted by human actions Nowadays, human society is raising awareness of environmental protection and biodiversity conservation in a positive way Many people understand that protecting the environment and the natural resources is also a way to protect their lives Conversely, there are some people who destroyed nature because they are not responsible for their actions and they not have to compensate for the damage they cause 21 Therefore, using CVM to identify WTP people for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development of Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park is necessary The average WTP of respondents for conservation in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP by increasing price of ticket is 9,344 VND per ticket This is the average number that reflects the positivity on the willingness to pay for conservation in Phong Nha – Ke Bang national park of visitors This level of willingness to pay is medium, which is not too high nor too low for a developing country like Vietnam At least, there are still 83.7% of visitors are willing to pay for conservation However, this is still considered a positive sign of visitors to the conservation of biodiversity in national parks The main reasons why visitors are willingness to pay are they pay for the benefit of whole society and for the next generation, which means that the anxiety of the visitors is for the whole society, not for themselves Most visitors visit the national park for the first time, visitors who come to the national park more than one time are just a little, so the national park needs to develop more attractive activities to attract them come back again Education level, income and age of respondents are the factors influenced the respondents’s WTP in this research Income and education level are two most important factors which have the greatest impact on respondents’s decision on WTP for conservation The higher education level and income, the higher probability that visitors are willingness to pay for conservation It is believed that visitors, who have the more knowledges, are more positive on their perception and making decision Age of respondents also have a slight affect on WTP for conservation Older people is willingness to pay more than young people There are several studies in the world that have find out the same results For example, the research “Estimating willingness to pay for recreational services of two public parks in Peshawar, Pakistan” was studied by Himayatullah Khan, Farman Ali, Humayun Khan, Mahmood Shah and Saba Shoukat in 2014 By using logistic regression, this research also had a result that income, education, and age of respondents are statistically significant indicating a positive correlation with visitors’ WTP for improved recreational services From that, the author recognizes that if the project is implemented, the government should consider the impact of these factors on WTP to have a reasonable adjustment in creasing the price of ticket for conservation project in Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park 6.CONCLUSIONS The study uses the contigent valuation method to determine the level of willingness to pay for conservation fee of Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park in order to understand the importance of biodiversity conservation The interview of 300 visitors was conducted, 22 consisting of 207 domesstic visitors and 93 international visitors In total 300 people were interviewed, there are 251 respondents are willingness to pay, accounting for 83.67% with an average of willingness to pay for conservation is increasing of fee is 9,433 VND/ ticket The results of WTP for conservation is positive, which proved that the hypothesis : “Increasing price of entrance fee of Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park to improve the capacity of conservation” is feasible By using logistic regression model, the author has shown that there are factors that affect respondents’s WTP for consevation in this study, included: education income and age of respondents In particular, income and education levels are two most influential factors The result of this study by using CVM and logistic regression could be useful tools in providing relevant information for decision makers and policy purposes in biodiversity conservation and national parks management Results of indentifying the factors that affect the WTP of visitors socio-demographic and economic characteristics of visitors will provide a guideline and information for the Gorvernment This study also contribute to the sustainable development of Phong Nha – Ke Bang national Park and other NP in Vietnam Finnally, it’s very important to remember that preserving and protecting the natural resources are always our mission which benefit for the next generation in the future 7.LIMITATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Limitations Because the research is limited in time, budget, human resources and experiences, the selected sample may not be large enough, so the data can only partially reflect the characteristics of the population, not the overall population 7.2.Recommendations for further study - Select the sample size larger to get the data which can reflect almost the characteristics of the population - Generates more WTP values in payment card in the questionnaire for higher accuracy 23 REFERENCES English references CBD (1992), “Convention of Biological Diversity” United Nations Debi Prasad Bal, Seba Mohanty (2014), “Determination of WTP for Entrance fee to National Park: An Empiricial Investigation” International Journal of Ecological Economics & Statistics G Mmopelwa, D.L Kgathi, L Molefhe (2006), “Tourists’ perceptions and their willingness to pay for park fees: A case study of self-drive tourists and clients for mobile tour operators in Moremi Game Reserve, Botswana” Tourism Management 28 (2007) 1044 – 1056 Himayatullah Khan, Farman Ali, Humayun Khan (2014), “Estimating willingness to pay for recreational services of two public parks in Peshawar, Pakistan” Environmental Economics IUCN (1994), “ Guidelines for Protected Areas Management Categories” Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Sara Kaffashi , Mohd Rusli Yacob , Maynard S Clark (2015), “ Exploring visitor’s WTP to generate revenues for managing the National Elephant Conservation in Center Malaysia” Forest Policy and Economics Sara Kaffashi, Mohd Rusli Yacod, Mayanrd S Clark (2015), “ Exploring visitor’s willingness to pay to generate revenues for managing the National Elephant Conservation Center in Malaysia” Forest Policy and Economics Thalany Kamri (2013), “Willingness to Pay for Conservation of Natural Resources in the Gunung Gading National Park, Sarawak” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences Vienamese references Phong Nha Explorer (2008), “General introduction of Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park” https://phongnhaexplorer.com/phong-nha/vuon-quoc-gia-phong-nha-kebang.html Phong Nha Ke Bang Tourism Center (2018), “Report on tourists and revenue from tourism and services of Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park from 2016 to 2018” Quang Binh Tourism (2016) , “Biodiversity value of Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park” http://www.quangbinhtourism.vn/Phong-Nha -Ke-Bang/Da-dang-sinhhoc.aspx APPENDIX Questionaire Introduction: This survey was conducted to collect information for research of students of Vietnam National Univarsity of Forestry on conservation of the National Park The purpose of this survey is to find out the level of visitor interest and willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation in the NP The information in this survey will contribute to the development of conservation and preservation of Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park This research needs your best information and opinions to have the most accurate assessments that contribute to the development of the national park All information will be kept completely confidential and only intended for research purposes, so please answer as accurate as possible Thank you! PART : VISITORS PROFILE (Please tick the box that you think matches your answer best!) Where are you from? ……………………………………………………………… What is your gender? How old are you? Male Female ……………………………………………………………… Which level of graduation have you completed? Primary shcool High shcool Secondary shcool Bachelor Degree Master Dregree What is your average monthly income? ………………………………………………… What is your occupation? Self employed Private employee Gorvenment servant Others Can you estimate your total travel cost for this trip? ( include travel expenses, food expenses, visit expeneses and other expenses incurred) ………………………………………………….VND How many days you plan to spend on this trip ? ………………………………………………………………….day(s) Do you participate in any environmental Organization? Yes No PART 2: PERCEPTION ABOUT THE NATIONAL PARK 10 Is this the first time you have been to Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park? Yes 11 No What activity you like the most here ? Climbing Taking Wildfile photos Advanture games Exploiting the cave close to nature 12 How are the infrastructures in this national park? Very modern and development Quite modern and development Development Poor and underdeveloped 13 14 How you evaluate the beauty of the landscape in the national park? Very beautiful Beautiful Nothing special Not beautiful How is the service attitude of the staff in national park? Awesome So so Bad Very bad 15 In your opinion, what are the main functions of the national park? Maintain and protect the biodiversity; Conserve cultural and historical values Place to visit and explore Place to exploit forest products, hunt animals Other opinions 16 Do you often care about the topic of biodiversity conservation in Vietnam? Very often Don’t care Sometimes 17 Do you think that the visit of people in the national park will affect the natural resources ? Yes No PART 3: VISITOR’S WILLINGNESS TO PAY I would now like you to read the below box, which tells you about many negative problems are occurring in national park It is important for you to read to answer the following questions The limestone karst and cave systems in the national park are very valuable and play an important role in the ecology of the region It is also a typical feature of Phong Nha - Ke Bang National ParkIn addition, it also possesses very high biodiversity with many endemic species of Vietnam and significant forest area However, since becoming a world heritage site, the number of tourists has soared, illegal activities is constantly occurring while forest rangers quite sparse, this become a threat to Phong Nha-Ke Bang national park The increase in visitors to this national park also causes problems for the environment such as garbage, water pollution caused by tourist activities, tourists carved into caves cause aesthetic But the worst impacts are the illegal hunting, cutting down trees and illegal logging that caused habitat degradation Many bat communities in the caves are also badly affected by visitors All of this is a threat to the protection of the environment and biodiversity conservation in the national park 18 If the government wants to improve the conservation in Phong Nha - Ke Bang through increased the prices of entrance fees in the NP, expenses will be invested in infrastructure and human resources for conservation projects of the Park Which price below is your highest willingness to pay for the conservation of the national park? VND / ticket 5000 VND (0.22 $) / ticket 10000 VND (0.43 $) / ticket 15000 VND (0.65 $) / ticket 20000 VND ( 0.87 $) / ticket ( Note: This is a price will increase per ticket applies to all types of tickets in national parks) 19 If yes, please explain why you want to pay? For my own benefit For the next generation For society as a whole Other (specify) 20 If not, please explain why you not want to pay? I not believe paying will solve the problem I believe the Government should provide all the cost I feel the problem is not serious I believe the conservation still take place without my contribution I fail to understand the questions 21 Do you feel this questionnaire provides useful information? Yes No A little We would like to thank you for your useful comments and suggestions This will help the NP develop better Sincerely thank you for your kindness Have a nice trip! ... visitors are willingness to pay for the conservation in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP, 16.3% (49) of visitors are not willingness to pay Most of visitors are willingness to pay for conservation for. .. https://phongnhaexplorer.com /phong- nha/ vuon-quoc-gia -phong- nha- kebang.html Phong Nha Ke Bang Tourism Center (2018), “Report on tourists and revenue from tourism and services of Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park from... in Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park - To identify the factors influencing WTP to biodiversity conservation of visitors in Phong Nha – Ke Bang National Park 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 Study sites – Phong