MOJ Ecology & Environmental Sciences
Research Article
Open Access
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication
for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions,
Ethiopia
Abstract
Volume 4 Issue 5 - 2019
Biodiversity has major economic value. Most of these values are often not captured
by the market. Hence, the potential of biodiversity is often underestimated. Such an
underestimation is considered as one of the factors for rapid depletion of biodiversity
and loss of habitats and species. Valuation of bio-resources would facilitate in identifying
the real value of genetic resources and obtaining a reasonably better share of the overall
benefits of genetic materials to the local communities, who are involved in its management.
Accordingly, the Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis was conducted implication for
ABS. The result of this study identified the direct and indirect use values of Lippia adoensis.
Majority of the respondents (98.33%) were willing to pay for use values of Lippia adoensis.
Moreover, (80.8%) of the respondents were willingness to pay for Conservation of Lippia
adoensis. Furthermore, 95(79.2%) of the respondents were willingness to pay for non-use
value of Lippia adoensis in the study areas. The cumulative estimates of willingness to pay
for use of values Lippia adoensis were 30,437.50 birr with an average annual willingness
to pay of 253.64±275.63 birr for Lippia adoensis. The maximum willingness to pay was
1000 birr while the minimum WTP was 125 birr with range 875 birr. The value of R2 for
linear function (model) was 0.541, semi log R2=0.452 and double log R2=0.291.From the
given result the linear regression function (R2=0.541) the one with the best performance.
The R2=0.541or 54.1%, this means that the dependent variable can be explained by the
independent variable. In this study, household size (Sig.0.000), income level (Sig.0.000),
number of Lippia adoensis (Sig.0.044) and distance of the market (Sig. 0.051) of the
respondents made a unique and statistically significant, contribution to the prediction
of willingness to pay for Lippia adoensis. Of the nine variables, household size of the
responders makes the largest unique contribution (beta=0.490), followed by income level of
the respondents (beta -0.396). Therefore, because of its prospect for the production of many
preservative, spices, aromatherapy, medicine and pharmaceuticals industry, bio prospecting
companies require to access the genetic resources following the Ethiopian legislation of
Access and Benefit Sharing.
Amare Seifu, Tesfaye Bekele, Manaye
Misganawand, Ashenafi Ayenew
Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute, Genetic Resources Access and
Benefit Sharing Directorate, Ethiopia
Correspondence: Amare Seifu, Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute,
Genetic Resources Access and Benefit Sharing Directorate,
Ethiopia, Tel +251916595709, Email
Received: October 09, 2019 | Published: October 30, 2019
Keywords: Lippia adoensis, valuation, willingness to pay, dependent and independent
variable
Abbreviations:
WTP, willingness to pay; ABS, access and
benefit sharing; ESs, ecosystem services; TVE, total economic
valuation; TEV, total economic value; UV, use value; NUV, non-use
value; DUV, direct use values; IUV, indirect use values; OV, option
values
Introduction
Biodiversity has major economic value that is both implied and
overt. Most of these values are often not captured by the market
.Biodiversity valuation normally entails measuring the economic
value of ‘biological resources’, not the intrinsic value of biodiversity.
Instead, valuation typically focuses on the economic values of
the goods and services generated by biodiversity resources and/or
functions-the so-called ecosystem services.1–3 Although all people
depend on nature for their well-being, the benefits of nature are
often neglected in policies; moreover, losses in natural capital have
direct economic consequences that are often underestimated. The
Submit Manuscript | http://medcraveonline.com
MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250.
benefits deriving from ESs and the costs of the degradation and loss
of ecosystems and biodiversity are incur incurred on the ground but
may be largely unnoticed at a larger scale.4 Valuation can be defined
as the process of attributing a certain economic or non-economic
value to something. It aims to measure, in monetary terms, people’s
preferences for the benefits they obtain from (for example) ESs.
Valuing ESs is part of informing political decision making: it can
help in balancing the trade-offs in resource allocation when designing
projects or investments and choosing among alternative land uses.5
The framework commonly used for valuing natural resources is
known as the Total Economic Value (TEV). This comprises use values
(direct, indirect and option value) and non-use values.4 Conceptually,
TEV of an environmental resource (ecosystem) consists of its Use
Value (UV) and Non-Use Value (NUV). A use value is a value (in the
form of commodities and services) arising from an actual use made
of a given resource.5,6 This might be the use of a forest for timber and
non-timber forest products, or of a wetland for recreation or fishing.
242
©2019 Seifu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and build upon your work non-commercially.
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia
Copyright:
©2019 Seifu et al.
243
Use values are further divided into Direct Use Values (DUV), which
refer to actual uses such as fishing, timber extraction and others;
Indirect Use Values (IUV), which refer to the benefits deriving from
ecosystem functions such as a forest’s function in protecting the
watershed; and Option Values (OV), which is a value approximating
an individual’s willingness to pay to safeguard an asset for the option
of using it at a future date, like an insurance value.7
environment for successful bio-prospecting.10 In this regards, Lippia
adoensis (cultivated) is rich in linalol (as much as80%), which has
many prospects for preservative, spices, aromatherapy, medicine and
pharmaceuticals, which shows the ability of this resource for access
and benefit sharing.11 Because of its prospect for the development
of these products, bio prospecting companies require accessing the
resources following the domestic legislation of ABS.
In the Access and Benefit Sharing perspective, the direct use value
of the ecosystem or biodiversity, particularly the goods that have
market potential and business scope, is significant. In brief, from an
ABS perspective, use value - particularly direct use values - in the
form of goods/resources which are tangible or visible is significant and
should be considered as paramount in working on valuation related
processes rather than using the tradition valuation methodology. These
resources, which include different genetic materials, are extracted by
local communities with the help of their unique traditional knowledge
on their use and sold to prospectors at low or negligible prices. Since
there are no proper markets for such resources at its collection point,
the existing price for the product is not revealing its actual value.
Actual value may be more than the existing market price.8,9
However, Lippia adoensis is one of the cultivated endemic plants
which have not been properly valued.12 The purpose of valuation
is to establish what the weight of biodiversity conservation should
be when the interest of the whole society is taken into account.
Economic valuation helps authorities to make informed decision
about the biodiversity conservation. Accordingly, Lippia adoensis is
being widely used for preservative, as spices for butter preparation
or flavor butter and other cultural food, traditional medicine
and income generation.13 Though the Ethno-medicinal uses and
chemical composition have been carried out on Lippia adoensis in
Ethiopia, much has not been done on economic valuation.14,15 Proper
understanding of the direct and indirect use values of this species in
the study areas contributes to the conservation, sustainable utilization,
and access and benefit sharing.16,17 Therefore, this study focused on
the economic valuation of Lippia adoensis in Sidama and West Arsi
Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions , Ethiopia and the implication
for ABS agreement.
Providers of biological/genetic resources have limited knowledge
and information about both the “price” and “value” of a product.
On the contrary, the users of bio-resources (prospectors) have better
knowledge about their potential value than the providers. However,
the providers (local communities) are often exploited since they are
little aware of about the potential of resources for value addition,
product development and subsequent commercialization. Thus,
the negotiations on determining the benefit sharing element could
be potentially compromised where the provider is unaware of the
potential use and value while the user has specific use and potential
market in mind.
In this context, the valuation of biodiversity/ecosystem goods is a
fundamental step towards determining the real value of bio-resources,
and prepared the ABS provisions under Nagoya Protocol on ABS to
capture the ‘fair and equitable’ provision of the ABS negotiations
appropriately with full and informed participation of providers of
the resources. Ethiopia is endowed with rich plant biodiversity
and associated traditional plant genetic resources which make an
Methodology
Description of the study areas
Sidama Zone is a zone in the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and
Peoples’ Region (SNNPR) of Ethiopia. It is named for the Sidama
people, whose homeland is in the zone. Sidama is bordered on the
south by the Oromia Region , on the west by the Bilate River, which
separates it from Wolayita zone, and on the north and east by the
Oromia Region. Towns in Sidama include which includes Hawassa,
the capital of Sidama and SNNPRS, Yirgalem and Wendo. West Arsi
zone is one of the zones of the Oromia Region in Ethiopia which
shares borderlines with the Regional State of Nations, Nationalities
and People of Southern Ethiopia and borderlines with East Shewa and
Bale (Figure 1)?18
Figure 1 Administrative Map of the study areas.
Projection: Transverse Mercator WGS 1984UTM Zone 37N
Citation: Seifu A, Bekele T, Misganawand M, et al. Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama and
WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2019.04.00160
Copyright:
©2019 Seifu et al.
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia
244
Sampling design/ techniques
Methods of data collection
The study areas were selected based on the abundance of Lippia
adoensis. Based on the recommendations of zonal agricultural office
six potential Lippia adoensis growing districts were selected from
Sidama and West Arsi Zones, four districts from Sidama (Bursa,
Hula, Aleta Wondo and Shebedino) and two districts from West Arsi
(Kofele and Koree) Zones. In addition, two Kebeles were selected
from each district bringing the total number of sampled Kebeles to
12 where Lippia adoensis is abundantly found Guchi, Qabete, Shire
kobolcha and Meja Yedel were selected from West Arsi. Qenqelcha,
Hoba Gangawa, Bursa Qosercha, Chelbesa, Titira, Woto, Termesa and
Fura from Sidam Zone were selected to conduct the study.
A reconnaissance survey was made to determine the initial bid
of Lippia adoensis, to select the study districts and kebeles and to
pre-test the questionnaires which were helped to make necessary
modifications according to the prevailing local circumstances.
Sample size determination
The main instrument of primary data collection was a structured
and pretested questionnaire. Additional data was obtained from the
agricultural office of the districts, from different books, journals and
research articles. For this study both qualitative and quantitative data
was collected from primary and secondary sources. Respondents
were selected with the help of kebeles extension agents based on
experiential ethno botanical knowledge of Lippia adoensis.
Variables determining willingness to pay
Taking into consideration cost, labor and time, the researchers
determined the sample size, using the formula:- N>50+8m where N is
sample size and m number of independent variables.19
It was assumed that the explanatory variables/factors that determine
willingness to pay of Lippia adoensis was: age, sex, income level,
marital status, household size, size of land, distance from the market
and education status following Adekunle and Agbaje (2011) (Table 1).
Table 1 Factors selected to determine willingness to pay of Lippia adoensis
S.No.
Variables
Descriptions
1
Age
Age of the respondents
Remark
2
Sex
0 : Female 1 : Male
3
Income level
0 : Low 1 : Medium 2 : High
4
Marital status
0: Married 1:Unmarried 2: Divorce 3 : Widowed
5
Household size
Number of people in the given family
6
Size of land
The size of land the respondents possess in hectare
7
Distance from the market
Distance of the market in which Lippia adoensis is sold
8
Education status
0: Non educated 1 :Informal education 2:Primary education 3:
Secondary education 4: Higher education
9
Number of individual
Lippia adoensis
Number of individual Lippia adoensis present in at the
respondents land
Amount of money Willingness to pay for Lippia adoensis
Data analysis and interpretation
The collected data was subjected to SPSS software version 21 and
analyzed and interpreted using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Regression Analysis was used to test models to predict outcomes
of variables. The predictor (independent) variables can be either
categorical or continuous, or a mix of both in the same model. An
inferential method was used for detail analysis of the variables. The
appropriate model for the nature of the dependent variable was served
as an inferential model. Mean willingness to pay, standard deviation,
confidence interval and the relationship between WTP and categorical
variables was analyzed using descriptive statistics. The WTP bids were
also regressed with various explanatory variables. The bid functions
were arrived at using multiple linear regression analysis, starting from
all the potential explanatory variables, removing the least significant
one, re-estimating the model and so on until all remaining variables
was significant at 95% level.5 The valuation function will be:
Independent variables
Dependent/ output variable
constant, β1-βn= coefficients, X1-Xn= variables influencing WTP, en=
random error or in elaborated manner :WTP = f(X1+X2+X3+X4+X5+X6+X7+……….Xn+e) (1)
Where WTP = Willingness to pay, X1=Age, X2=Sex, X3=Income
level, X4=Marital status, X5=Household size, X6=Size of land
in hectare, X7=Distance from the market, X8=Education status,
X9=number of individual Lippia adoensis, e = error term
Three functional forms was tried in order to choose the one with
the best performance.
Linear: WTP = bo+b1X1+b2X2+ - - - - - - - - b7X7+Ed (2)
(3)
Semi log: WTP = Lnbo+b1LnX1+b2LnX2+………….. b7LnX7+ LnEd
Double Log: LnWTP=Lnbo+b1Lnb1X1+b2LnX2+b7LnX7+LnEd (4)
WTP = β0+β1X1+β2X2+β3X3+β4X4+β5X5-----------βnXn+βnXn+en
Where, bo = constant, b1b2…b7 = Regression coefficient for WTP
WhereWTP= farmers willingness to pay for Lippia adoensis, β0=
Ed = Residual or error term, Ln = Natural logarithm
Citation: Seifu A, Bekele T, Misganawand M, et al. Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama and
WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2019.04.00160
Copyright:
©2019 Seifu et al.
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia
Results and discussions
Demographic characteristics of the Respondents
A total of 120 respondents, 64 female (53.3%) and 56 male
(46.7%), were interviewed from February to April 2019. The age of
respondents ranged between 20 and 72 years old with mean age of
37.9±11.99 years, and range 52years. A majority of the respondents
112(93.3%) were married, 7 (5.8%) were widowed and an insignificant
number of the respondent was divorced. Among the respondents
interviewed, 34 (28.3%) were non-educated, 8 (6.7%) had informal
education, 54 (45%) received primary education and the rest (24,20%)
were educated in secondary schools. Moreover, the income level of
the respondents were medium, low and high {71 (59.2%), 35 (29.2%)
and 14 (11.7%)} respectively.
Direct and indirect use values of Lippia adoensis
The use value of Lippia adoensis consists of direct and indirect use
values. The direct use values of this plant include use for spices, butter
preparation or as flavor, traditional medicine, and food preservative
etc.20 All of the respondents (100%) reported the use of Lippia
245
adoensis for spices, preservatives, providing good aroma for food, as
spice for butter preparation and flavoring of food. Moreover, most of
the respondents (59.2%) reported using Lippia adoensis for traditional
medicine (Table 2).
a. The willingness to payof the respondents for Lippia adoensis
A majority of the respondents (119, 98.33%) were willing to pay
for use values of Lippia adoensis. According to the respondents
reports, the main reasons of willing to pay for Lippia adoensis were
due to its different use values such as using as spice, preservative,
traditional medicine, etc... Moreover, 97(80.8%) of the respondents
were willing to pay for the conservation of Lippia adoensis (willing
to pay the minimum amount of compensation required to maintain its
original utility level), whereas 23 (19.2%) of the respondents were
not willing to pay for the conservation of Lippia adoensis in the study
areas. Furthermore, 95(79.2%) of the respondents were willing to
pay for non-use value, of Lippia adoensis (willing to pay for bequest
value/inter-generational equity concern/and altruist/intra-generational
equity concern) where as 25(20.8%) of the respondents were not
willing to pay for the non-use value of Lippia adoensis in the study
areas (Table 3).
Table 2 Respondents’ statements on the use values of Lippia adoensia in the study areas
The uses of Lippia adoensis
Yes
No
Frequency
Percentage (%)
Frequency
Percentage (%)
Spices and flavoring of food
102
85%
18
15%
Preservative & providing good smell for food
120
100%
-
---
Traditional medicine
71
59.20%
49
40.80%
Providing good smell to the surrounding
119
99.20%
1
0.83
Income source
115
95.80%
5
4.20%
Table 3 Respondents statement on willingness to payfor Lippia adoensis
Category
Willingness to pay for use values
Willingness to pay for conservation activities
Non-use values(Bequest value/Inter-generational equity concern/ and Altruist/Intra-generational equity
concern)
b. The mean willingness to pay for use values of Lippia adoensis
across different socio –economic classes
The annual mean willingness to pay of the respondents across
different socioeconomic classes (age, sex, marital and educational
status and income level) for use values of Lippia adoensis was
investigated.- In the age-related socio-economic class, the mean
willingness to pay were 245.83, 267.23, 255.77 and 244.81birr within
the ranges of 15-24, 25-44, 45-64 and 45-80 age classes respectively.
There was a very little variation in the mean willingness to pay for
use values of Lippia adoensis across different age classes. This result
suggests that the willingness to pay for use values of Lippia adoensis
did not depend on ages of the respondents.
As to gender class, the mean willingness to pay of females
respondents (275.74birr) was somewhat greater than males
Yes
No
Total
Frequency
118
2
120
Percent
98.3
1.7
100
Frequency
97
23
120
Percent
80.8
19.2
100
Frequency
95
25
120
Percent
79.2
20.8
100
respondents (230.08birr). Regarding to the impact of marital status
of the respondents on willingness to pay for Lippia adoensis, mean
willingness to pay by married, unmarried and divorce respondents
were 257.23, 234.04 and 268.96 birr respectively. This would suggest
that willingness to pay of Lippia adoensis does not depend on marital
status of the respondents. This could be because all married, widowed
and divorced respondents had almost similar views on the use values
of Lippia adoensis.
As to the educational status of the respondents, the highest mean
willingness to pay was recorded with non-educated respondents
(292.18birr), followed by respondents with informal (262.62birr) and
primary level education (237.19birr) however, the minimum average
willingness to pay was recorded at secondary school respondents
(213.66birr). This indicated as education levels increase, the average
willingness to pay of the respondents’ decrease. This could be because
Citation: Seifu A, Bekele T, Misganawand M, et al. Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama and
WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2019.04.00160
Copyright:
©2019 Seifu et al.
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia
as the educational level of the respondents increase, the consciousness
to traditional use value of the genetic resource decrease which is
directly related to the current modernization.
Regarding to the income level of the respondents, the highest mean
willingness to pay was recorded at high income level (296.26birr)
followed by respondent with medium income level (257.57birr) and
246
the lowest mean willingness to pay was recorded at low income level
of the respondents (206.41birr).This indicated that as the income
level of the respondents increases the mean willingness to pay also
increases. This could be due to as the income level of the respondents
increase, they are stressed-free to pay for the use values of the genetic
resources but as their income level decrease, they become hesitant to
pay the use value of the given genetic resources (Table 4).
Table 4 Mean Willingness to Pay for use values of Lippia adoensis per year across Different Socio –Economic Classes
No.
Socio –economic classes
Number of respondents in each socio –economic
classes
Mean willingness to pay
in Birr per year
Willing to pay
Not willing to pay
15 _ 24
8
-
245.83
25 _ 44
79
1
267.23
45 _ 64
27
1
255.77
65_80
4
-
244.81
Female
63
1
275.74
Male
55
1
231.09
110
2
257.23
Divorce
1
-
268.96
Widowed
7
-
234.04
Non-Educated
33
1
292.18
Informal Education
7
1
262.62
Primary Education
54
-
237.19
Secondary Education
24
-
213.66
Total
Age
1
120
Sex
2
120
Marital Status
3
Married
120
Educational Status
4
120
Income Level
5
Low
35
-
206.41
Medium
71
2
257.57
High
14
-
296.26
c. Average and cumulative estimates of WTP for use and non-use
values of Lippia adoensis
The cumulative estimates of WTP for use of values Lippia adoensis
were 30,437.50 birr with an average annual willingness to pay of
253.64±275.63birr. The maximum WTP was 1000 birr while the
minimum WTP for Lippia adoensis was 125 birr with range 875birr.
Concerning to the cumulative estimates of willingness to pay for
non-use values of Lippia adoensis was 23,437.70birr with an average
annual willingness to pay of 195.30±169.65birr. The maximum WTP
to pay was 500birr while the minimum WTP was 125 birr with range
375birr. The most frequent willingness to pay was 250birr.
The mean willingness to pay for conservation activities of Lippia
adoensis was 197.40±168.10 with cumulative estimates of willingness
to pay of 23,687.50birr. The maximum willingness to pay was 500
birr while the minimum WTP was 125 birr with a range of 375birr and
a mode of 250birr. The largest cumulative estimates of willingness to
pay for use values were 39,658.80birr followed by 23,687.50birr WTP
for conservation activities and 23,437.70birr for non-use values).
120
d. Results of multiple regression analysis
The independent variables show at least some relationship with the
dependent variable. In this study, household size (0.566) and income
level (-0.562) of the respondents correlate with amount of money
the respondents were willing to pay for Lippia adoensis. This was
followed by the number of individual Lippia adoensis plants present
on respondents land (0.194), the size of land (0.147), educational
status (-0.099),distance of the market from respondents home (0.081),
age(0.064), marital status (0.058) and gender (-0.001) respectively.
The correlation between each of the independent variables is not well
correlated. If two variables with a bivariate correlation of 0.7 or more
occur in the same analysis, it is probably not necessary to include
them in the given analysis. In this situation, one may need to consider
omitting one of the variables or forming a composite variable from
the scores of the two highly correlated variables.21 The correlation of
the independent variable income level with household size (-0.302),
income level /marital status (0.141), income level /educational status
(-0.073) and income level/size of land (-0.121) etc... Generally, in the
Citation: Seifu A, Bekele T, Misganawand M, et al. Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama and
WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2019.04.00160
Copyright:
©2019 Seifu et al.
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia
current study, the correlation of each of the independent variable to
each other is less than 0.7; therefore all variables were retained in the
analysis.
i. Multicollinearity
Multicollinearity exists when the independent variables are highly
correlated (r=0.9 and above); subsequently, multicollinearity did not
exist since the independent variables were not highly correlated. The
247
existence of multicollinearity can also be determined by tolerance, an
indicator of how much of the variability of the specified independent
variables are not explained by the other independent variables, and
is calculated as 1–R2. In this study, the tolerance values were large,
ranging between 0.773 and 0.918, thus indicating multicollinearity
did not exist. The variance inflation factor (VIF), which is the inverse
of tolerance, ranged between 1.089 and 1.293 which is less than 10,
indicating-multicollinearity did not exist (Table 5).
Table 5 Multiple regressions output (Coefficients, Confidence Intervals for B, Correlations and, Collinearity statistics
Un-standardized
coefficients
Model
B
Std.
Error
(Constant)
346.552
74.872
Age of the responders
-1.682
1.216
Household size
33.623
Size of land in hectares
Standardized
coefficients
Beta
95.0% Confidence
interval for B
t
Correlations
Sig.
Collinearity statistics
Part
Lower
bound
Upper
bound
Zeroorder
Partial
Tolerance
VIF
4.629
0
198.17
494.9
-0.098
-1.384
0.169
-4.091
0.727
-0.064
-0.131
-0.089
0.837
1.195
5.037
0.49
6.675
0
23.64
43.606
0.566
0.537
0.431
0.773
1.293
2.692
15.333
0.012
0.176
0.861
-27.694
33.078
0.147
0.017
0.011
0.891
1.122
Distance of the market
-10.511
5.325
-0.137
-1.974
0.051
-21.064
0.041
-0.081
-0.185
-0.127
0.869
1.151
Number of Lippia adoensis
2.735
1.341
0.142
2.04
0.044
0.078
5.393
0.194
0.191
0.132
0.863
1.159
Sex(0)
-0.989
29.491
-0.002
-0.034
0.973
-59.434
57.455
0.001
-0.003
-0.002
0.814
1.228
Educational status(0)
41.905
32.65
0.092
1.283
0.202
-22.8
106.61
-0.099
0.121
0.083
0.814
1.228
Income level(0)
-197.484
36.392
-0.396
-5.427
0
-269.605
125.363
-0.562
-0.46
-0.35
0.784
1.275
Marital status(0)
-55.57
55.547
-0.067
-1
0.319
165.651
54.512
-0.058
-0.095
-0.065
0.918
1.089
1
a. Dependent Variable: Amount of money willing to pay for Lippia adoensis
ii. Evaluating the model
The R2 value indicates how much of the dependent variable (WTP)
can be explained by the independent variables (age, sex, marital
status, educational status, household size, size of land, income level,
number of individual Lippia adoensis plants and distance from the
market).There are three functions which were attempted to choose the
one with the best performance (the dependent variable explained best
by the independent variables). Generally the function for willingness
to pay is WTP = f(X1+X2+X3+ X4 + X5 + X6 + X7 + ……….Xn+e)
(where WTP = Willingness to pay, X1 = age, X2 = sex, X3 =marital
status, X4 = educational level, X5 = household size, X6 = size of
land, X7= income level, X8=number of individual Lippia adoensis
plants,X9= distance from the market, and e = error term.
In this study, the value of R2 for the linear model was 0.541, semi
log model R2=0.452 and double log model R2=0.291. Based on R2,
the linear regression model performed the best. The R2 value indicates
that the independent variables explained54.1% of the variance in
WTP (Table 6).
Citation: Seifu A, Bekele T, Misganawand M, et al. Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama and
WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2019.04.00160
Copyright:
©2019 Seifu et al.
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia
248
Table 6 Regression results for explanatory variables that determine WTP of Lippia adoensis
X1
Regression
Bo
Age
Double-Log
X3
X4
X5
X7
X6 Size
of land in
hectare
Sex(0)
Marital
Status(0)
Education
level(0)
Household
size
-.989
(29.491)
-55.570
(55.547)
41.905 (32.650)
33.623
(5.037)
2.692
(15.333)
51.015
(60.931)
-44.878 (35.906)
114.548
(27.177)
13.269
(22.093)
0.203
-0.003
-0.415
0.022
(0.069)
-0.151
-0.089
-0.076
346.552
-1.682
-74.872
-1.216
198.049
(205.284)
-35.385
(53.076)
-11.275
(32.436)
4.901
(0.608)
0.006
(0.162)
-0.064 (0.
080)
Linear
Semi-Log
X2
From the three functional forms that were tried in order to choose
the one with the best performance, linear regression function has the
best having the highest coefficient of determination (R2) of 54.1%
which intern helped to identify the best explanatory variables that
determine WTP of Lippia adoensis (Table 6). The respondents’
household size (sig.0.000), income (sig. 0.000), number of individuals
Lippia adoensis plant (sig.0.044) and distance of the market (sig.
0.051) had significant influence on the amount of the respondents
willing to pay for Lippia adoensis. This is an indication that WTP
for Lippia adoensis might be determined through the household size,
income level, number of individuals Lippia adoensis plant present at
the respondents land and distance of the market from the respondents’
home. In constructing a regression equation, it would be used the unstandardized coefficient values in Table 5 above.
iii. Evaluating each of the independent variables
In comparing the contribution of each independent variable, the
beta values were used by finding the largest beta value (ignoring any
negative signs out the front). In this study, the largest beta coefficient
was 0.490 for household size of the responders. This means that this
variable made the strongest unique contribution in explaining the
dependent variable, followed by income level of the respondents
(-0.396), number of Lippia adoensis (0.142) and distance of the
market(-0.136).The Beta values for the other variables were lower,
indicating that they made less unique contribution to the dependent
variable. If the significance value is less than 0.05, the variable is
making a significant unique contribution to the prediction of the
dependent variable. If greater than 0.05, it can be concluded that
the variable is not making a significant unique contribution to the
prediction of the dependent variable. This may be due to overlap with
other independent variables in the model. In this study, household
size (Sig.0.000), income level (Sig.0.000), number of Lippia adoensis
plants (Sig.0.044) and distance to the market (Sig. 0.051) of the
respondents made a unique and statistically significant, contribution
to the prediction of WTP for Lippia adoensis.
In the coefficients table, the other potentially useful information
is the Part correlation coefficient which is referred as semi partial
correlation coefficients.21 The square of this value is an indication of
the contribution of that variable to the total R square. In other words,
it indicates how much of the total variance in the dependent variable
is uniquely explained by that variable and how much R square would
drop if it wasn’t included in study model. In this study, the age, sex
(0), marital status (0), educational status (0), household size, size
X8
Number
of Lippia
adoensis
X9
Distance
from the
market
2.735
-10.511
-1.341
-5.325
213.567
28.695
-34.799
-40.785
-16.854
-24.71
0.799
0.15
-0.011
-0.101
-0.05
-0.076
Income
level(0)
-197.484
(36.392)
Adj.
Sig.
R2
F
0.541
0.504
14.413
0. 452
0.407
10.067
0.291
0.26
9.376
R2
of land in hectares, income level (0), number of individuals Lippia
adoensis and distance of the market had a part correlation co-efficient
of -0.131,-0.002,-0.065, 0.083, 0. 431, 0.011, -0.350, 0.132 and -0.127
respectively. The square of these values were 0.0172, 0.000004, 0.0042,
0.0069, 0.1858, 0.00012,0.1225,0.01742 and 0.01613 respectively,
indicating that each of the independent variable in this study (Age,
Sex (0), marital status (0), educational status (0), household size,
size of land in hectares, income level (0), number of individuals
Lippia adoensis and distance of the market) uniquely explained
1.72%, 0.0004%, 0.42%,0.69%, 18.58%, 0.012%,12.25%,1.742%
and 1.613% of the variance in the total willingness to pay for Lippia
adoensis respectively (Table 5).
The total R square value for the model (in this study,0.541, or
54.1% explained variance) did not equal all the squared part correlation
values added up (1.72% + 0.0004% + 0.42% + 0.69% + 18.58% +
0.012% + 12.25% + 1.742% + 1.613%= 37.03). This is because the
part correlation values represent only the unique contribution of each
variable, with any overlap or shared variance removed. The total R
square value (54.1%), however, includes the unique variance explained
by each variable and also that shared. However, in this study, the nine
independent variables were not strongly correlated with each other’s
which were between, r=-0.302 income level/Household size and r=
-0.003 Number of Lippia adoensis/Marital status as shown in the
coefficient Table 5; therefore, there was a small difference between all
the squared part correlation values added up (37.03%) and the total R
square value of the model (54.1%).
Finally, the model, which includes Age, Sex (0), Marital status
(0), Educational status (0), Household size, Size of land in hectares,
Income level (0), number of individuals Lippia adoensis and distance
of the market, explained 54.1% of the variance in willingness to
pay for Lippia adoensis. Of the nine variables, household size of
the responders make the largest unique contribution (beta = 0.490),
followed by income level of the respondents (beta -0.396).22
Conclusion and recommendation
Valuation of genetic resources help to identify the real value of
the resources and obtaining a reasonably better share of the overall
benefits of it related economic activities to the local communities, who
are involved in its management. Accordingly, the Economic Valuation
of Lippia adoensis was conducted implication for Access and Benefit
Sharing Agreement. The result of this study identified the direct and
indirect use values of Lippia adoensis (Spices, food flavoring, as
Citation: Seifu A, Bekele T, Misganawand M, et al. Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama and
WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2019.04.00160
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia
preservative, traditional medicine, income source, provide good smell
to the surrounding, increase soil fertility and honeybee forage).
Majority of the respondents119 (98.33%) were willing to pay for
use values of Lippia adoensis. Moreover, 97(80.8%) of the respondents
were willingness to pay for Conservation of Lippia adoensis.
Furthermore, 95(79.2%) of the respondents were willingness to pay
for non-use value of Lippia adoensis (willing to pay for Bequest value/
Inter-generational equity concern/and Altruist/Intra-generational
equity concern) in the study areas. The cumulative estimates of
willingness to pay for use of values Lippia adoensis were 30,437.50
birr with an average annual willingness to pay of 253.64±275.63 birr
for Lippia adoensis. The maximum willingness to pay was 1000 birr
while the minimum WTP for Lippia adoensis was 125 birr with range
875birr. The annual mean willingness to pay of the respondents across
different socioeconomic classes (age, sex, marital and educational
status and income level) for use values of Lippia adoensis had been
also investigated. Accordingly, the highest mean willingness to pay
was recorded in the high income socioeconomic class (296.26birr)
and the lowest mean willingness to pay was recorded at low income
status of the respondents (206.41birr).
In this study, the value of R2 for linear function (model) was
0.541, semi log R2= 0.452 and double log R2=0.291. From the given
result the linear regression function(R2=0.541) the one with the best
performance(the dependent variable explained best by the independent
variables).The R2= 0.541, this means that the model which includes
(Age, Sex, Marital status, Educational status, Household size, Size of
land in hectares, Income level, number of individual Lippia adoensis
and distance from the market) explained 54.1% of the variance in
amount of money willing to pay for Lippia adoensis or, R2=0.541or
54.1% of the dependent variable can be explained by the independent
variable.
In this study, household size (Sig.0.000), income level (Sig.0.000),
number of Lippia adoensis (Sig.0.044) and distance of the market (Sig.
0.051) of the respondents made a unique and statistically significant,
contribution to the prediction of willingness to pay for Lippia adoensis.
Of the nine variables, household size of the responders makes the
largest unique contribution (beta=0.490), followed by income level of
the respondents (beta -0.396). Consequently, because of its prospect
for the production of preservative, aromatherapy, cosmetics, medicine
and pharmaceuticals, bio prospecting companies require accessing the
resources following the domestic legislation of ABS.
Acknowledgments
The people of Sidama and West Arsi Zones, SNNPR and
Oromia Regions, Ethiopia who gave us information are gratefully
acknowledged. We are grateful to Ethiopian Biodiversity Institute
(EBI) for financial support during fieldwork. We are also grateful
to Agricultural workers in Hula,Aleta Wondo,Shebedino,Kofele
and Koree districts for their translation Afan Oromo and Sidamgna
language and kind assistance during the fieldwork.
Funding
None.
Conflicts of interest
Copyright:
©2019 Seifu et al.
249
References
1. Convention on Biological Diversity. An exploration of tools and
methodologies for valuation of biodiversity and biodiversity resources
and functions. technical series no. 28, Montreal, Canada; 2007. 71 p.
2. Moran D, Bann C. The valuation of biological diversity for National
biodiversity action plans and strategies: a guide for trainers. Prepared
for the United Nations Environment Programme, Physica-VerlagHeidelberg, Pearce; 2000.
3. Nijkamp P. Economic valuation of biodiversity: A comparative study.
Ecological Economics. 2008;67(2):217–231.
4. TEEB. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: TEEB for local
and regional policy makers. United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP); 2010.
5. Horton B, Colarullo G, Bateman IJ, et al. Evaluating non user
willingness to pay for a large scale conservation program in Amazonia:
a UK/Italian contingent valuation study. Environmental conservation.
2003;30(2):139–146.
6. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment – MEA. Ecosystem and human wellbeing: a framework for assessment. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
Series, Island Press; 2003.
7. Masiero M, Pettenella D, Boscolo M, et al. Valuing forest ecosystem
services a training manual for planners and project developers. Rome,
Italy: FAO; 2019.
8. Pearce D, Moran D. The economic value of biodiversity. London:
Earthscan Publication; 1994.
9. Anil M. the role of economic rent and its valuation in the context of
access to genetic resources and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits
arising out of their utilization. Presentation in Adhoc Open-ended
Working Group on ABS of CBD; 2008.
10. Nelliyat P, Pisupati P. Economic valuation of bio-resources for access
and benefit sharing. Chennai, India: National Biodiversity Authority;
2003.
11. Gemeda N, Woldeamanuel Y, Asrat D, et al. Assessment of Lippia
adoensis hochst. var. koseret, rosmarinus officinalis l and ruta chalepensis
l. essential oils as a potential source of fungitoxic and mycosporicidal
activity against toxigenic aspergillus species. Pharmacology on Linevol.
2015;2:85–94.
12. Ermias Dagne. Natural Database for Africa (NAD). Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia; 2009.
13. Gemechu AB, Abdella GD, Dessalegn E. AntimicrobialActivity of
Lippia adoensis var. koseret Against Human Pathogenic Bacteria and
Fungi. American Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine.
2015;3(3):118–123.
14. Jigam AA, Akanya HO, Ogbadoyi EO, et al. In vivo anti plasmodial,
analgesic and anti-inflammatory activities of the leaf extract of Lippia
multiflora mold. J Med Plants Res. 2009;3(3):148–154.
15. Abena AA, Atipo-Ebata JK, Hondi AT, et al. Psychopharmacological
properties of crude extract and essential oil of Lippia multiflora.
Encephale. 2001;27(4):360–364.
16. Kumar P. Valuation of medicinal plants for pharmaceutical uses. Current
Science, Review Articles. 2004;86(7):930–937.
17. Acquaye D, Smith M, Letchamo W, et al. Lippiatea centre for new use
agriculture and natural products. New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA:
Rutgers University; 2001.
The authors declared that there no conflicts of interest.
Citation: Seifu A, Bekele T, Misganawand M, et al. Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama and
WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2019.04.00160
Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama
and WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia
18. Asfaw Negesse. Determinants of smallholder farmers’ commercialization
of head cabbage (Case Study in Kofale District, West Arsi Zone, Oromia
Regional State, Ethiopia). International Journal of Agriculture &
Agribusiness. 2018;1(1):74–85.
19. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 5th ed. Boston:
Pearson Education. Edition, Allen & Unwin, Berkshire; 2007.
Copyright:
©2019 Seifu et al.
250
21. Pallant J. SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis
using the SPSS program. 4th ed. 2011.
22. Adekunle MF, Agbaje BM. Public willingness to pay for ecosystem
service functions of a peri-urban forest in Abeokuta, Ogun State,
Nigeria. 2011.
20. Mwangi JW. Pharmacognostical and biological studies of Kenyan
Lippia species with special reference to their essential oil content. Ph.D
thesis, Kenya: University of Nairobi; 1990.
Citation: Seifu A, Bekele T, Misganawand M, et al. Economic Valuation of Lippia adoensis, implication for Access and Benefit Sharing agreement in Sidama and
WestArsi Zones, SNNPR and Oromia Regions, Ethiopia. MOJ Eco Environ Sci. 2019;4(5):242‒250. DOI: 10.15406/mojes.2019.04.00160