Unravelling the pastoralist paradox – preferences for land tenure security and flexibility in Kenya

IF 2.2 4区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Environment and Development Economics Pub Date : 2022-10-19 DOI:10.1017/s1355770x22000298
G. Bostedt, Erlend Dancke Sandorf, S. Mureithi, Deborah Muricho
{"title":"Unravelling the pastoralist paradox – preferences for land tenure security and flexibility in Kenya","authors":"G. Bostedt, Erlend Dancke Sandorf, S. Mureithi, Deborah Muricho","doi":"10.1017/s1355770x22000298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n In this paper, we use a discrete choice experiment conducted among pastoralists in four different semi-arid counties in Kenya characterized by different land tenure regimes to analyze how pastoralists make tradeoffs between tenure security and grazing flexibility – the so-called pastoralist paradox. Results show that there is one group of respondents who are desperate for change and seem to prefer either group or private title deeds to their current situation. A second, smaller group has strong preferences for the status quo, which could be driven by their relatively short migration distances. Concerning index-based livestock insurance, the basis risk suffered by insured pastoralists due to underprediction is high, but willingness to pay (WTP) for livestock insurance should still be high enough to ensure maximum uptake, leaving current low uptakes hard to explain. The worry about climate change is high but does not translate into increased WTP for more secure tenure or formal livestock insurance.","PeriodicalId":47751,"journal":{"name":"Environment and Development Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environment and Development Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355770x22000298","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, we use a discrete choice experiment conducted among pastoralists in four different semi-arid counties in Kenya characterized by different land tenure regimes to analyze how pastoralists make tradeoffs between tenure security and grazing flexibility – the so-called pastoralist paradox. Results show that there is one group of respondents who are desperate for change and seem to prefer either group or private title deeds to their current situation. A second, smaller group has strong preferences for the status quo, which could be driven by their relatively short migration distances. Concerning index-based livestock insurance, the basis risk suffered by insured pastoralists due to underprediction is high, but willingness to pay (WTP) for livestock insurance should still be high enough to ensure maximum uptake, leaving current low uptakes hard to explain. The worry about climate change is high but does not translate into increased WTP for more secure tenure or formal livestock insurance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解开牧民悖论——肯尼亚对土地保有权保障和灵活性的偏好
在本文中,我们对肯尼亚四个不同土地权制的半干旱县的牧民进行了离散选择实验,以分析牧民如何在权制安全和放牧灵活性之间进行权衡——即所谓的牧民悖论。结果显示,有一组受访者迫切希望改变,似乎更喜欢团体或私人产权契约,而不是他们的现状。第二,人数较少的群体对现状有强烈的偏好,这可能是由于他们相对较短的迁移距离所驱动的。就基于指数的牲畜保险而言,被保险牧民因预估不足而遭受的基本风险很高,但对牲畜保险的支付意愿(WTP)仍应足够高,以确保最大程度的吸收,这使得目前的低吸收率难以解释。人们对气候变化的担忧很高,但这并没有转化为WTP的增加,从而获得更有保障的使用权或正式的牲畜保险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
4.80%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: Environment and Development Economics is positioned at the intersection of environmental, resource and development economics. The Editor and Associate Editors, supported by a distinguished panel of advisors from around the world, aim to encourage submissions from researchers in the field in both developed and developing countries. The Journal is divided into two main sections, Theory and Applications, which includes regular academic papers and Policy Options, which includes papers that may be of interest to the wider policy community. Environment and Development Economics also publishes occasional Policy Fora (discussions based on a focal paper). From time to time the journal publishes special issues based on a particular theme.
期刊最新文献
What determines respondents’ valuation uncertainty? Impact of subjective perceptions from the demand and supply sides The impact of water quality on children's education: evidence from 39 districts in the Ganges Basin of India Trade liberalization and the choice of pollution abatement Effect of foreign direct investment on firms' pollution intensity: evidence from a natural experiment in China Institutions' quality and environmental pollution in Africa
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1