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 ................................................................................................................... 1
2.GOALS AND ( SPECIFIC) OBJECTIVES: ........................................................................... 3
2.1 GOALS ................................................................................................................................. 3
2.2 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................................... 3
3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 4
3.1 Study sites – Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP ............................................................................... 4
3.1.1 Location ............................................................................................................................. 4
3.1.2 Natural conditions .............................................................................................................. 5
3.1.3 Activities in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP............................................................................. 7
3.1.4 Number of visitors and revenue of the NP ........................................................................ 7
3.2 Methods of data collection.................................................................................................... 9
3.2.1 Pre-existing data ................................................................................................................ 9
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 8 months of 2018) ............................................................... 8
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.

1


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


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


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)".

4


Source: Picture is taken by the author

It is considered one of the two largest limestone mountains in the world, with an area
over 200,000 ha (in which the core zone is 85,754 ha and a buffer zone is 195,400 ha). The
characteristic of this national park is the limestone in karsts formation with a history of
millions of years, with more than 300 caves and underground river systems.
3.1.2 Natural conditions
a. Climate
The climate in Phong Nha – Ke Bang national park is characterized by tropical
monsoon climate, hot and humid. The average annual temperature is 23-25 ° C, with the
highest temperature is 41° C in summer and the lowest at 6° C in winter.
b. Geology and geomorphology
Phong Nha - Ke Bang is considered as a huge geological museum that have value and
global significance because of its complex geological structure, gathering various types of
rocks such as sandstone, quartz, agate, marl, granodiorite, diorite, aplite, pegmatite ...
Phong Nha - Ke Bang also contains a long history of geological development, from 400
million years ago. Experiencing important tectonic stages and moving phases have created the

mountain ranges and subsurface sediment basins. These changes also contributed to the
diversity of geology, topography and geomorphology.
c. Cave systems
Phong Nha - Ke Bang has a population of more than 300 large and small caves, called
“Kingdom of Cave”, where have many mystical and fascinating potential, attracting many
science, explorers and visitors.

5


These caves can be divided into three main systems: Phong Nha cave system, Vom
Cave system and Ruc Mon cave system.
Phong Nha Cave (Wet cave) is the most typical of the cave system of Phong Nha-Ke
Bang National Park. Total length of 7,729 meters, there are 14 caves, underground river is
13,969 meters. The cave is about 10 meters high and 25 meters wide.
There is also the Paradise Caves which are rated by the Royal Caves Association as the
longest dried cave in Asia. Especially, recently, the British expedition discovered one of the
latest caves is Son Doong cave. This cave is believed to be the largest cave in the world. The
largest cave in Son Dong is over 5km of long, 200m of high and 150m of wide., Son Dong
cave passes Deer Cave in Gunung Mulu National Park in Sarawak Malaysia about the size.
d. River and mountain systems
Along with the miraculous cave system, Phong Nha-Ke Bang also has a complex
system of rivers in the region and the longest underground river. There are 3 main rivers:
Trooc River, Chay River, Son River in Phong Nha-Ke Bang area with green water flowing
through rocky mountains.
Besides, Phong Nha-Ke Bang also has many beautiful streams and waterfalls such as
Wind falls, Loan falls , Mooc tream, Trai An stream ...
Phong Nha-Ke Bang also has dozens of peaks over 1000 meters high, where
unprecedented footprints, which are attracting climbers and explorer. Typically, Co Rilata
Peak is 1,128 meters, Co Preu is 1,213 meters high. Alternating between the peaks over 1,000

meters are the valleys have potential for eco-tourism.
e. Biodiversity
In Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park, there is also a primitive tropical forest with less
impact on the forest cover of 96.2% and high biodiversity. There are 2651 species of
Tracheophyta.
Phong Nha – Ke Bang is also the habitat of 113 big mammals, most prominent is tiger
and gaur, which has the biggest gaur in the world. There are 302 species of bird include 35
species in Vietnam Red Book and 19 species in World Red Book. There are 81 species of
amphibians (18 species in Vietnam Red Book and 6 species in World Red Book); 259 species
of butterfly; 72 species of fish include 4 endemic species of Vietnam. Primate has 10 ordines
of primate, accounting for 50% of total species of primates in Vietnam. Thus, it is considered
to be a national park which have the most diverse natural system in the world.

6


3.1.3 Activities in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP
Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park has been exploited to develop tourism with many
types:
- Cave exploration tourism
- Ecotourism, exploring fauna and flora
- Mountain climbing: There are dozens of peaks with elevations of over 1000 m,
rocky slopes suitable for adventurous mountain climbing.
There are many tourist routes and tourist sites are managed by Phong Nha - Ke Bang
Tourism Center:
- Explore the cave: visit Phong Nha cave, Tien Son cave
- Tourist Route: visit Chay River - Dark Cave
- Tourism Route: Discover the Nature of the Bay - Hang En
- Ecotourism site: Mooc Spring
- Tourist Route: discover the nature of living valley - Thuy Cung Cave

3.1.4 Number of visitors and revenue of the NP
The table 3.1 show that the number of visitors to Phong Nha - Ke Bang National Park
is increasing day by day. Particularly, the data of the recent years show that from 2015 to
2018, the number of tourists of the next year is higher than the previous year. Accordingly,
revenue also increases annually from 2015 to 2018.

7


Table 3.1: Total number of visitors and revenue from tourism and services of Phong Nha - Ke Bang from 2015 to 2018
(the first 8 months of 2018)
2016
No.

Quota

Unit
Quantity

1
I

2

3

Number of
tourists:
- Domestic


Tourist

tourists

arrival

- International
visitors
II

Revenue

2017

VND

2015

2016/2015 (%)

Quantity

5

6

4

The first 8 months of 2018
2017/2016

(%)
7

Quantity
8

2018*/2017*
(%)
9

702,775

695,742

101.01

759,085

108.01

704,734

108.72

616,791

614,305

100.40


629,729

102.10

579,042

104.9

85,984

81,437

105.58

129,355

150.44

125,692

130.17

164,686,879,844

124,800,000,000

131.96

216,541,312,802.23


131.49 208,869,804,918

107.6

- Entrance fees

95,204,882,535

111,568,376,359

117.19 108,195,377,589

118.17

- Services fees

23,318,900,332

37,647,220,942

161.45 100,674,427,329

98.07

2018* : The first 8 months of 2018
2017*: The first 8 months of 2017
Source: Phong Nha Ke Bang Tourism Center

8



3.2 Methods of data collection
3.2.1 Pre-existing data
a. Sampling method
Sampling means not investigate the entire units of the population in Phong Nha – Ke
Bang NP, just investigate on one of the units in order to save time, effort and cost.
In this study, the author used convenience sampling which means that sampling based
on convenience or on the accessibility of the subject, where the investigator is more likely to
meet the objects.
The main data analysis method is used for this study was logistic modeling. In order to
achieve a reliable estimation of the method, the sample size must be large enough. With the
cross-sectional data, the sample size is n ≥ 50 + 6k, of which k is the number of independent
variables (Green, 2003 and Tabanick & Fidell, 2007). In this research, logistic modeling is
used 6 independent variables. Therefore, the sample size is n ≥50 + 6×6 = 86. In this research,
the author interviewed a total of 300 visitors around the national park.
b. Survey conduct
A survey questionnaire was developed to generate respondents's basic information and
their WTP on conservation of non-marketed goods and services in Phong Nha - Ke Bang
National Park. A face-to-face survey is utilized when a specific target of population is
involved. The purpose of conducting a personal interview survey is to explore the responses
of people in order to gather more and deeper information.
The survey was conducted by personal interviews of 300 tourists in Phong Nha – Ke
Bang NP, consitsting of 207 (69%) domestic visitors and 93 (31%) international visitors. The
author used two versions of questionnaire which are Vietnamese version for domesstic
visitors and English version for international visitors. The interview was conducted only to
adult respondents with income as they were considered to be realistic in making the decision
on valuation for the WTP of conservation in Phong Nha - Ke Bang NP subject to their budget
constraint.
The questionnaire has total of 21 questions, devided into three basic parts as follows:
- Introduction: purpose and requirements of the study, researcher contact. This section

has some questions exploring the understanding of the interviewee about the topic.
- Demographic information (information on individual respondents): age, gender,
nationality, education level, occupation, income.
- Main content: Collecting visitor’s trip information and their willingness to pay for
conservation in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP and other questions related.

9


The data derived from this questionnaires were analyzed by using SPSS packages. Forms of
data analysis that will be performed are descriptive analysis, coefficient correlation test and
logistic regression.
3.3.Methods of data analysis
3.3.1.Statistic description
For a general overview of the research, data collected must be processed, presented
and sumarized. In this study, the author collected data on age, education level, gender,
income, trip information, perception of the subject and willingness to pay for conservation of
Phong Nha NP. Then, using descriptive statistic to describe the basic features of the data in
the study. It provide simple summaries about the sample.
This method is used to generalize the characteristics of the respondents, compare the
WTP between different groups of visitors and find out the trend of visitors's WTP.
3.3.2 Contigent valuation method
The author aplly contingent valuation method (CVM) for this study. This method has
been extensively used all over the world to estimate the value of non-marketed goods and
services through interviews using questionnaire survey (Dall Aste Brandolini and Lamberti,
2003). CVM is considered as a standardize used method for determining WTP for
conservation (Mitchell and Carson, 1989). This method elicits -marketed goods and services
by asking them how much they would be willing to pay to acquire improvement or to avoid
negative aspect in them (Mitchell and Carson, 1989).CVM is a direct method of estimating
willingness to pay. CVM is based on the simple idea that if you want to know how much a

person's willingness to pay for some kind of environment, just simply ask them.
Unlike traditional methods, CVM does not go through a real market but through a
hypothetical market in which the individuals in the sample are treated as actors participating
in the market. This method applies to public goods for both use value and unused value. The
value of WTP depends a great deal on the description of the goods, the quality of the
environment, the timing and manner of payment (belonging to the interviewer's skill), and the
factors of the interviewee's income, education level ... All the information collected is
random. In a hypothetical market, one would set up scenarios. Typically, there are two
assumptions about changing the quality of the goods. If the environment improves, people
will be asked the willing to pay this assumption is. Conversely, if the environment is
damaged, individuals will be asked whether they are willing to pay to avoid environmental
damage and, if so, what their respective WTP levels are. The question may be influenced by

10


different factors or variables such as the socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents and
some variables that measure the quality of the environment.
There are many ways or formats in obtaining WTP of respondents. They are openended questions,close-ended questions, iterative bidding or bidding game, payment card,
dichotomous or discrete choice and double-bounded dichotomous choice (Morrison et al.,
1996). This study used the formats of payment card to elicit respondents's WTP.
In the questionnaire, after the general information and environmental issues of PNKB NP were introduced, scenario was set up as follows: "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? (Because there are many types of travel and many levels of price in Phong Nha
- Ke Bang National Park, the author makes the assumption of increasing prices on all types of
tickets to achieve the most comprehensive and objective for the research).
The purpose of using this method is to to evaluate the conservation value of Phong Nha - Ke
Bang National Park with visitors, which through creating a hypothesis market

3.3.3. Logistic regression
a. General model
Logistic regression is a class of regression where the independent variable is used to predict
the dependent variable. The binary logistic regression model was used to examine the
relationship between the dependent variable as a binary variable (only two states) and the
independent variables which could be a quantitative variable or qualitative variable. In this
study, binary logistic regression was used to determine the factors influencing the visitors’s
decision on WTP for conservation in Phong Nha – Ke Bang NP and estimate the level of
influence of these factors. The general form of the model is represented as follows:
Ln

=

(1)

Of which:
Y

Dependent variable
Constant

i

index of variables
Regression coefficient of variable ( i=1-n)
Independent variables

n

Total independent variables are included in the model


11


Ln

Logarit of e ( e=2.718)

P (Y = 1) =

: The probability of occurrence of the event.

P (Y = 0) =

: The probability without occurrence of event.

The probability function above is called a logistic distribution function. In this
logistic function, when values are from -∞ to + ∞, the probability

gets a value from 0 to 1.

Because it is nonlinear for X and the parameters, Y only accept one of two values are 0 or 1
so we can not directly apply the ordinal least squares (OLS) to estimate the parameters. In this
case, the Maximum Likelihood estimation is used to estimate

.

From the function (1), we can estimate the probability of the willingness to pay by the value
of


as follows:
( )

(2)

E(Y/ ): The probability that Y=1 occurs when the independent variable

has a particular

value.
=> P =

(3)

This model is apllied in this research because there are many similar studies in the
world have applied this method and and

achieved consistent results. For example, the

research on “Exploring visitor’s WTP to generate revenues for managing the National
Elephant Conservation in Center Malaysia” was conducted by Sara Kaffashi, Mohd Rusli
Yacod, Mayanrd S. Clark in 2014. In this research, variables of the final model are
respondents' income, gender, age, education, job, previous visits, and attitudinal
characteristics obtained from factor analysis. Results show that respondents' WTP is
positively associated with their income, education, age, and attitudinal factors, and negatively
associated with bidding price, and being a domestic or an international visitor.
b. Model applied in this study
In this study, WTP is dependent variable and there are total of 6 independent
variables, including gender, age, income, education, occupation and nationality. Logistic
regresstion model can be expressed by the function of these variables as follows:

Ln

P (WTP = 1) =
P(WTP = 0) =

=

: is the probability that visitors are wilingness to pay for conservation.
: the probability that visitors are not wilingness to pay for conservation.

12


Table 3.2 Variables description
No.

Variable
WTP

1

2
3
4

5

6

7


Age
Gender

Variable description
Decision on WTP of respondents
WTP = 0 if respondent is not
willingness to pay for conservation
WTP = 1 if respondent is willingness
to pay for conservation
Age of the respondents
Gender of the respondents
Gender = 0 if respondent is female
Gender = if respondent is male

Unit

Expected effect
on WTP

Year

+
+

Education Years of schooling of respondents
Year
Occupation Occupation of respondents
Occupation = 0 if respondent is Self
employed

Occupation = 1 if respondent is
Private employee
Occupation = 2 if respondent is
Gorvenment Servant
Occupation = 3 if respondent is other
occupation
Income
Monthly income of respondent
Million VND
Nationality Nationality of respondents
Nationality = 0 if respondent is
Vietnamese
Nationality = 1 if respondent is
international

13

+
+

+
+


4.STUDY RESULTS
4.1 Descriptive analysis
a. Respondents’s profile
A survey was conducted from July to August, 2018 at Phong Nha - Ke Bang National
Park. A total of 300 respondents were interviewed of which consitsting of 31% (93) of
international tourists and 69% (207) domestic tourists. The preliminary findings and statistics

of 300 respondents are presented below:
Table 4.1: Respondents’s profiles
No
1

2

3

4

5

6

Characteristics
Gender
Female
Male
Nationality
Vietnamese
International
Age
21 - 35
36 - 50
> 50
Income
≤ 2.000.000
> 2,000,000 - ≤ 5,000,000
> 5,000,000 – ≤10,000,000

> 10,000,000 – ≤ 15,000,000
> 15,000,000 – ≤ 20,000,000
> 20,000,000 – ≤ 25,000,000
Occupation
Self employed
Private employee
Government servant
Others
Education
Primary School
Secondary School
Highschool
Bachelor Degree
Master Degree/PhD

N
300
126
174
300
207
93
300
173
100
27
300
22
111
151

9
4
3
300
61
93
117
29
300
15
61
54
142
28

Source: The author's calculation based on the respondents' answers

14

Percentage ( %)
100.0
42.0
58.0
100.0
69.0
31.0
100.0
57.7
33.3
9.0

100.0
7.3
37.0
50.3
3.0
1.3
1.0
100.0
20.3
31.0
39.0
9.7
100.0
5.0
20.3
18.0
47.3
9.3


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 5 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
1

2

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

1

236

78.7

2

59

19.7

3

5

1.7

>3

0

0.0


Climbing

25

8.3

Taking Wildfile photos

17

5.7

Advanture games close to nature

69

23.0

189

63.0

0

0

Travel Cost

>1,000,000

3

4

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 1 day to visit and there is no visitor spent more than 3 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


1 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
2 The visit of people in the national park
will affect the natural resources
Yes
No
3 Concerned about conservation
Often
Sometimes
No
4 Are willingness to pay
Yes
No
5 Reason of visitors are willingness to pay
For my own benefit
For the next generation
For society as a whole
Other (specify)
6 Reason of visitors are not willingness to
pay
I do 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
0
7

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
0
49

83.7
16.3

29

59.2

11

22.4

5
4

10.2
8.2

0


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

0

49

0

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


9

17.222

> 15,000,000 – ≤ 20,000,000

4

18.75

> 20,000,000 – ≤ 25,000,000

3

20.000

No
1

2

3

4

5

6

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
1
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 3 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 3 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