Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Development
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envdev

Can a tourist levy protect national park resources and compensate

for wildlife crop damage? An empirical investigation
Kanesh Suresh a, e, Clevo Wilson a, Annette Quayle b, Shunsuke Managi c, *,
Uttam Khanal d
a
School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia
b
School of Accountancy, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia
c
Urban Institute & Department of Civil Engineering, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan
d
Department of Jobs, Precincts, and Regions, Agriculture Victoria, Horsham, VIC, 3400, Australia
e
Eastern University, Sri Lanka

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The nature-based tourism sector has experienced significant growth and is often promoted as a
Nature conservation mechanism for conservation. The geographical boundaries of national parks are often adjacent to
Nature-based tourism farming land which leads to animal-farmer conflict over wildlife crop damage. This leads to
Wildlife corridors
unresolved conflict in many countries where there is little or no compensation to farmers. This
Water ponds
National park
study investigates how and in what circumstances foreign tourist contributions can be utilized to
protect and foster national park-based resources and compensate for wildlife (mainly elephant)
related crop damage. We employ a novel discrete choice experiment to explore nature conser­
vation preferences from international visitors at Yala national park in Sri Lanka. We find that
tourists are willing to pay significantly more for nature conservation, especially elephant con­
servation, in the form of an embarkation tax. The findings further show visitor preferences for the
creation of wildlife corridors and the establishment of water bodies as alternative conservation
measures.

1. Introduction

Tourism in general and nature-based tourism (NBT) in particular is often promoted as a conservation mechanism (Boley and Green,
2016; Chun et al., 2020; Tisdell and Wilson, 2012). There is growing recognition of the global economic importance of the tourism
sector with annual growth rates of 10–15% significantly contributing to global GDP (Suresh et al., 2021a,b; World Travel and Tourism,
2019). In many countries, tourism, including NBT, has shown to be a key contributor to creating employment, reducing poverty and
enhancing income sources among those living close to national parks visited by tourists (for, example, see Kariyawasam et al., 2020;
Kularatne et al., 2021). However, the NTB sector has faced numerous challenges in developing its sustainability (Arnberger et al.,
2018; World Travel and Tourism, 2017; Kariyawasam et al., 2020). There are consequently moves to raise awareness of the role of
nature-based resources in tourism growth and the revenue this sector generates. But frequently revenue generated from the tourism
sector is directed to a country’s general revenue stream and utilized for non-tourism development activities (Kariyawasam et al., 2020;

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: s.kanesh@qut.edu.au (K. Suresh), clevo.wilson@qut.edu.au (C. Wilson), a.quayle@qut.edu.au (A. Quayle), managi@doc.
kyushu-u.ac.jp (S. Managi), uttam.khanal@agriculture.vic.gov.au (U. Khanal).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2021.100697
Received 12 July 2021; Received in revised form 6 October 2021; Accepted 28 December 2021
Available online 5 January 2022
2211-4645/© 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: Kanesh Suresh, Environmental Development, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2021.100697
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

Novelli and Scarth, 2007). This results in underfunding of nature conservation initiatives due to insufficient financial resources for
these activities (Pringle, 2017; Novelli and Scarth, 2007). This underlines the importance of exploring the potential complementarity
between tourist voluntary contributions and nature conservation, through utilization of these resources for nature conservation and
addressing human-wildlife (mainly elephant) conflict.
Globally, national parks typically are legally designated protected landscapes for wildlife - a form that has tripled in size over the
past 40 years (Pringle, 2017). However, anthropogenic pressures accompanied by population growth and land conversion for agri­
culture and livestock production have led to the mass extinction of wildlife populations and species worldwide (Pringle, 2017; Stoldt
et al., 2020). This decline in nature-based resources and wildlife has had detrimental effects on the future sustainability of these natural
resources and the future potential for tourism growth (Kim et al., 2020; Tisdell and Wilson, 2012; Tisdell et al., 2007). Previous studies
have flagged that the measures taken for conservation are insufficient and that, consequently, biodiversity has been depleted over time
(Chun et al., 2020; Pringle, 2017). Therefore, there is an urgent need to take immediate measures to protect a country’s natural re­
sources where its national income is heavily dependent on tourism. Understanding key stakeholder (international tourists) perspec­
tives on nature-based resources and conservation of endemic species (particularly elephants) has the potential to assist in retaining
tourism flows through preserving the future sustainability of the relevant natural resources. We therefore investigate how and in what
circumstances tourism and tourism revenue can be used as a conservation tool.
Elephants have been the flagship species of Sri Lankan tourism over many decades in a country that has been struggling to conserve
their population which has been put at risk from human-elephant conflict (HEC). As a consequence of their raiding of crops, some 250
elephants die annually at the hands of irate farmers. As well, a significant number of people (80) have also been killed each year by
marauding elephants in Sri Lanka (Dharmarathne et al., 2020). Overall, the Asian elephant population has declined by around 50%
over the last three generations, and is continuing to decline at a similar rate (Denninger Snyder and Rentsch, 2020; Sukumar, 1992).
In the case of Sri Lanka, large numbers of local and foreign tourists come specifically to view elephants in national parks an activity
which generates substantial income for a related range of entities including local hoteliers, tour guides, safari drivers, agents and park
rangers (Bandara and Tisdell, 2004). Of concern then is that HEC has become a serious constraining factor in the future sustainability of
NBT development in Sri Lanka.
NBT opportunities and the development of the sector are crucial elements in the establishment of national parks, since they create
public interest needed to ensure the economic viability of the activities (Wondirad et al., 2020). Strategies such as park enlargement,
the creation of wildlife corridors, habitat improvements and compensation for farmers for wildlife crop damage may promote nature
conservation and ensure sustainable coexistence with wildlife. However, in Sri Lanka most national parks have been surrounded by
settlements creating an urgent need for the creation of wildlife corridors to minimize HEC and ensure nature conservation (Patel,
2021). For example, in the Gal Oya national park the path of migration of elephant herds have resulted in major damage to the
croplands (Vancuylenberg, 1977). Fencing and fines in support of wildlife conservation have not delivered the desired conservation
outcomes (Stoldt et al., 2020; Ishwaran, 1993). Hence there is a need to consider alternative approaches which can promote mutual
coexistence of human settlements and wildlife. This needs to involve an appropriate choice of respective territories which ensures the
coexistence of farmers with wildlife and sustainable utilization of nature-based resources. In particular, the construction of wildlife
corridors that link dispersed habitat regions is likely to reduce HEC and improve the wildlife migration from one park to another. In
this way tourists’ encountering of wildlife can also be enhanced.
Studies on NBT have largely ignored the role of economics in the symbiotic relationship between tourism and nature conservation
(Boley and Green, 2016; Macdonald et al., 2017). This relationship is referred to as symbiotic because of the mutual benefit shared
between them (Du-Pont et al., 2020). That is, a symbiotic relationship can be demonstrated and measured by how, and in what cir­
cumstances, tourism revenue can act as a conservation tool and how nature-based resources can contribute to the tourism sector. In
such circumstances, revenue generated from tourism can be invested in nature conservation and compensate those who suffer from
crop damage by wildlife (e.g., HEC). In the case of Sri Lanka, which has an extensive endowment of nature-based resources, there is a
potential for the tourism sector to develop such a symbiotic relationship with nature conservation. This could produce a ‘win-win’
situation, especially at a time when agriculture has been subject to stress from climate change and pandemics such as COVID-19. To
date, limited attention has been paid to examining the extent to which a symbiotic relationship exists or can exist between NBT and
nature conservation. This study, therefore, examines the feasibility of creating a conservation fund from an international tourist
embarkation tax - or other means of revenue collection from international tourists – to be used to support nature conservation and
coexistence with wildlife.

2. Literature review

National parks have been found to be attractive destinations and resources for wildlife-based tourism (Fernando et al., 2005; Tisdell
and Wilson, 2012). The recent expansion of the NBT sector has resulted in growing tourist visits to protected areas around the globe
over the last two decades (World Travel and Tourism, 2019). Therefore, there has been an emerging trend in NBT, and NBT, especially
wildlife tourism, is in a strategic position to contribute positively to more sustainable ways of protecting areas inhabited by wildlife.
Numerous studies on visitors at various national parks have been conducted around the globe to examine nature conservation and its
determinant factors, but these studies have only poorly investigated potential solutions for the HEC through the lense of tourism
receipts (Chun et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2020).
Preventing, or at least mitigating, the HEC have been top priorities for many countries whose national incomes and livelihoods
depend on NBT (Parr et al., 2008; Walpole and Thouless, 2005). In this regard, a shortage of financial resources has been one of the
most challenging issues faced by conservation practitioners and governments (Lindberg, 1991; Pringle, 2017). According to Pringle

2
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

(2017), most protected areas have been chronically underfunded and these areas worldwide have suffered drastic deterioration and
biodiversity loss during the past 20–30 years. On top of this, the recent global pandemic has pushed many parks into dire financial
straits in terms of feed for animals and associated administrative costs (e.g., the Oakland Zoo in the USA). Consequently, compensation
schemes can promote the efficient protection of biodiversity by maintaining positive attitudes towards and support for conservation
initiatives among stakeholders (Pechacek et al., 2013). The present study, therefore, explores how tourism earnings could be used to
mitigate or prevent the HEC in Sri Lanka, in order to achieve long-term conservation goals.
Studies have revealed that conservation outside of national parks, and people’s attitudes towards wildlife conservation and
coexistence with wildlife, have scarcely been investigated (Gadd, 2005; Stoldt et al., 2020). Hence, this study contributes to the
literature twofold: first, it seeks to understand the financial viability for nature conservation (particularly of elephants) of tourism
receipts; that is, how and under what circumstances tourists will be willing to pay more for nature conservation; and second, the study
sought to understand the potential array of perceived nature conservation attributes through novel DCE. Hence, redesigning NBT
policies to suit the expectations of tourists while achieving conservation goals is of utmost priority for future demands related to
tourism. Therefore, tourists’ perspectives on conservation efforts are essential in designing appropriate policy measures for the suc­
cessful implementation of nature conservation measures that will deliver conservation targets.

3. Material and method

3.1. Study area

The Yala national sanctuary - the oldest national park in Sri Lanka - was chosen as the study site (see, Fig. 1). This park has diverse
flora and fauna, including a significant number of elephants and is a key tourism destination (Buultjens et al., 2005). The Sri Lanka
Tourism Development Authority (SLTDA) (2019) reports that the Yala national park attracted the highest number of foreign visitors in
2019 (206,843 tourists). The study site was therefore selected for the following reasons: firstly, it has the highest number and greatest
diversity of international tourists visiting Yala national park over the past several decades (around 35% of the total tourists). Secondly,
there has been continuous HEC taking place in the adjacent areas of the park resulting significant losses of income by subsistence
farmers (Fernando et al., 2005; Horgan and Kudavidanage, 2020). Thirdly, the nation’s two of the largest national parks, namely Yala
and Udawalawa are located in close proximity (80 km) which has enabled tourists to optimize their travel time once they visit the
region. Fourthly, almost three decades of civil war in Sri Lanka has directed tourists towards the southern coast of Sri Lanka for safety
reasons. Finally, the largest highway in Sri Lanka connects the capital (Colombo) to the national park facilitating easy and comfortable
access for tourists travelling to the region. Moreover, there are other tourist attractions in the region such as Hikkaduwa coral reefs,
and whale watching in Mirissa. Hence, our park sample design encompassed a global diversity of tourists producing a heterogeneity in
NBT tourists’ preferences for nature conservation and their willingness to pay (WTP).

Fig. 1. Map of Study Site of Yala National Park in Sri Lanka.

3
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

3.2. Survey procedure

The respondents were international tourists randomly selected after their visit to the Yala national park. There were 218 useable
responses for the analysis and 1308 total observation in the choice task (218 X 6 = 1308). The survey questionnaire was established
using key-informant interviews and focus group discussions with respondents (foreign nature-based visitors) and park officials
employed at the Yala national park. The principal researcher, together with trained university undergraduates, collected the data. The
questionnaires were completed by the tourists themselves with assistance from the enumerators if required.
A pilot survey was conducted among 46 international visitors in the study sample study area to ensure that all questions could be
understood and to reduce any ambiguity in the questions. The final survey was conducted from December 2019 to February 2020 in
order to cater for a diversity of tourists visiting Sri Lanka.

3.3. Empirical model

We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) in analysing tourists’ preferences for nature-based tourism attributes. The DCE is a
commonly utilized technique for the stated preference (SP) approach and has the ability to simultaneously analyse multiple attributes
of a good or service. The technique is, therefore, an effective tool for examining the trade-offs between the conservation attributes of
multiple nature-based resources.
The DCE assumes that in each choice made by the respondents, a random utility maximization procedure is generated (McFadden,
1984; Hensher et al., 2015). Respondents select the alternative that generates the greatest utility among the different alternatives
which differ in terms of attribute levels (Henser et al., 2015; Hearne and Salinas, 2002). The detailed specification of the model has
been explained in previous studies (Phong et al., 2021; Suresh et al., 2021a,b).
There are several models that can be utilied in analyzing the choice data obtained from choice experiments. In this study, we
employed the MNL model to examine tourists’ preferences for the characteristics of nature-based tourism (Hensher et al., 2015; Suresh
et al., 2021a,b) and used the random parameter logit (RPL) model, to show the distribution of individual parameters rather than at the
average preference (Hensher et al., 2015). Thus, the RPL model was utilized to identify the ‘taste’ variance of tourists for n different
alternatives of tourist preferences.
Defining the good or service to be valued in terms of its attributes and levels is the first and critical step in discrete choice ex­
periments. The study attributes and their levels (see, Table 1) were chosen from a thorough review of literature and focus group
interviews with international tourists. This was combined with expert interviews with tourism operators and national park officials
(park wardens). The attributes were pretested in the pilot study. Previous research has either not addressed these problems fully or has
come up with mixed findings on the success of conservation measures such as park enlargement, creation of wildlife corridors, creation
of water bodies in national parks and compensation for wildlife crop damage. These initiatives are seen as key nature conservation
attributes that will influence future sustainability of nature-based resources and tourism demand.
Studies have shown that park enlargement is one of the potential strategies to mitigate HEC and enhance biodiversity conservation
(Pringle, 2017; Stoldt et al., 2020). In many cases human-wildlife conflict areises due to land competition and forest land conversion
for agriculture (Ferreira and Harmse, 2014; Stoldt et al., 2020). This lead for block of the wildlife coordoors which causes conflict over
wildlife and human. Studies have clearly showed that most of the wildlife conflict areas due to lank of water bodies in and around the
protected areas (Dube and Nhamo, 2020; MacFadyen et al., 2019). Establishing water bodies within the national parks have two
pronge benefits, firstly, this would minimize the conflict wildlife to move outside the national parks for water consumption during dry

Table 1
Nature conservation attributes, descriptions, and attribute levels.
Conservation attributes Description Attribute
level

Park enlargement (see Eagles, 2002; Hearne and Salinas, 2002; Pringle, Increase in the size of national parks (area in square kilometres) <10 km2
2017; Stoldt et al., 2020; Tisdell and Wilson, 2012) 10–20 km2
>30 km2
Creation of wildlife corridors (see Ferreira and Harmse, 2014; Stoldt et al., Increase in the number of corridors and links to national parks 3 corridors
2020; Sukumar, 1992) 8 corridors
13 corridors
Habitat quality (see Dube and Nhamo, 2020; MacFadyen et al., 2019; Increase in the number of water bodies in the national parks 4 water
Pringle, 2017; Stoldt et al., 2020) (ponds) ponds
8 water
ponds
12 water
ponds
Compensation for wildlife damage for farmers to prevent wildlife deaths willingness to contribute to compensation for farmers for HEC Yes
(see Bajracharya et al., 2006; Dharmarathne et al., 2020; Mmopelwa No
et al., 2007; Thapa and Parent, 2020)
Conservation fund contribution Levy as an embarkation tax (The respondents’ contribution goes to USD $1
a conservation fund in the form of one-off payment at the point of USD $3
departure) USD $5

Note: Author’s own compilation, 2019–2020.

4
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

seasons. Secondly, peranial waterbodies is a lucarative pace for tourists and attract more wildlife in and around. Many parts of the
world the state fincing for conservation especially wildlife corp damage and wildlife steawordship is insufficient (Dharmarathne et al.,
2020; Pringle, 2017). Hence, conservation fund generated from tourism reevene could potentially create coexistence between human
and wildlife. Studies have show that tourists would be WTP for flagship species conservation and would be contribute a significant
amount of money (Estifanos et al., 2019; Pringle, 2017). However, studies have over looked these attribute for wildlife conservation
using tourism receipts.
Hence, we designed our study based on the four key attributes and the monetary attribute (see, Fig. 2). We used orthogonal factorial
experimental design for our pilot study generating thirty-six choice sets that were grouped into six blocks. The study utilized the
Limdep NLOGIT 6 software for data analysis and the Ngene version 1.2.1 for generating orthogonal and D-efficient experimental
designs.The Bayesian efficient design was generated through priories deriving from orthogonal design. According to Hensher et al.
(2015) the Bayesian efficient design outperforms the Orthogonal design in terms of minimising the error. Each questionnaire consisted
of six tasks which each respondent had to choose and complete.

4. Results

A majority (54%) of respondents were male. More than half (56%) of our respondents were in the age brackets between 20 and 40,
suggesting that a younger age group was being attracted to the natural beauty and adventure found in Sri Lankan national parks (see,
Table 2). These results are in line with Sri Lanka’s tourism statistics for the past decade which indicate the majority of tourists vising Sri
Lanka replicate the age categories found in this study (SLTDA, 2019).
The questionnaire sought information on income. 48% of sampled respondents had an annual income less than USD $80,000. The
finding of the study shows that 35% of our respondents received annual income USD $120,000 and above indicating a significant
number of tourists visiting Sri Lankan are in the high income bracket. The majority (41%) of respondents had a university education,
suggesting that these tourists had at least some knowledge about nature and wildlife protection. Only 1% of sampled respondents had
only a primary school education.
The results indicate that just over half the participants were from Europe (52%), similar to the previous year’s level of 45% (SLTDA,
2019). The second largest categories were visitors from North America and Australasia (around 17% each). Hence, the sample was
representative of a heterogeneity of tourists visiting Yala national park over a sustained time period from a diverse range of countries.
The survey revealed that 55% of the respondents preferred Sri Lanka as their holiday destination because of the opportunity to see
wildlife while 21% came to enjoy pristine and unspoiled nature (see, Fig. 3). Forty-one percent of respondents expressed concern about
the endangered status of mammals and wanted to see them at the national park. 39% were ‘extremely concerned’. Many respondents
indicated they had seen more than 20 large mammal encounters (40%) with just over half (54%) indicating they preferred an
embarkation tax as a mode of payment for supporting conservation needed to sustain the accessibility of such encounters.
Table 3 shows the findings of the base multinomial logit model (MNL) which was elicited from the tourists’ choice of nature
conservation attributes at the Yala national park. According to the findings, a clear preference was shown by the tourists in their choice

Fig. 2. Sample choice task for nature conservation by international tourists.

5
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 2
Socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents (N = 218).
Characteristics %

Gender
Male 54
Female 46
Age
20–30 years 18
31–40 years 38
41–50 years 24
50–60 years 12
61 years and above 08
Average annual income (USD$)
< $60,000 37
$60,001 - $80,000 11
$80,001 - $100,000 09
$100,001 - $120,000 08
> $120,001 35
Education
Primary 02
High school 20
Diploma/vocational training 23
Undergraduate 41
Postgraduate & above 14
Region of origin
Europe 52
Asia and Middle East 14
North America 17
Australasia 17

Note: Based on survey data, 2019–2020.

Fig. 3. Respondents’ preferences for nature conservation. Note: Author’s own compilation, 2019–2020.

of nature conservation attributes and their WTP for nature Conservation. The fact that the Alternative Specific Constant (ASC) is
positive and significant implies that respondents prefer new nature conservation choices over the status quo, ceteris paribus. All the
relationships had the predicted signs and were statistically significant (p < .01). The findings showed that the tourists were more likely
to make a monetary contribution to nature conservation when the park size was large, more wildlife corridors were created, the habitat
was improved and there was adequate compensation for farmers for crop damage from wildlife.

6
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 3
Parameter estimates of the base MNL model.
Attribute Coefficient SE

ASC 2.13901*** 0.41

Park enlargement 0.05004*** 0.00
Creation of wildlife corridor 0.09701*** 0.00
Habitat improvements (water ponds) 0.08268*** 0.01
Compensation for farmers to HEC 0.13004*** 0.03
Payment for nature conservation − 0.06059*** 0.01
Log likelihood − 1349.17115
AIC 2710.3
BIC 2741.39
HQIC 2721.99
Number of observations 1308
Pseudo R2 0.286

Note. ASC = alternative specific constant; AIC = akaike information criterion; BIC = Bayesian information
criterion; HQIC = Hannan-Quinn information criterion.
***p < .01.

The coefficient for habitat quality improvement was positive and significant, suggesting that habitat conservation and restoration
at the national park increased the satisfaction of the tourists. Tourists were more likely to provide financial support when there were a
greater number of water bodies available at national parks and which is associated with better habitat quality. The results also revealed
that tourists were willing to pay compensation to farmers for their crop damage from wild elephants. Moreover, the findings implied
that tourists were more likely to make a significant financial contribution to the conservation of endangered taxa in national parks.
Table 4 shows the tourist’s implicit prices for nature conservation attributes at national parks. These results imply that tourists were
willing to pay more for the acquisition an extra square kilometre of land for the park - around USD $1 more. In addition, tourists
significantly valued the creation of wildlife corridors (USD $1.60). Moreover, tourists are shown to be willing to contribute around a
USD $1.50 for habitat quality improvement in the national park. Another key finding from the study suggests that tourists are prepared
to pay a significant sum (USD $2) as compensation to farmers for crop damage caused by wildlife. These findings indicate that in­
ternational tourists would support the creation of a nature conservation fund.
This study further extended its analysis by observing the differences in tourists’ enthusiasm for nature conservation attributes by
employing the random parameter logit (RPL) model (see Table 5). The RPL results were compatible with the MNL model. The RPL
model results show that it improves on the MNL model in describing the heterogeneity in the choice of conservation attribute al­
ternatives. Furthermore, the RPL model relaxes the independence of the irrelevant alternatives (IIA) assumption. It assumed that the
preference parameters were uncorrelated. This RPL model used a normal distribution with the model fit showing that it better
explained the latent variables with the pseudo R2. The findings drawn from the RPL model is depicted in Table 5.
The RPL model was estimated assuming that the various distributional assumptions such as normal, lognormal and triangular
distributions. The model used a normal distribution and for the model specification the random parameter was assumed to be
correlated. 500 Halton draws were used for the simulation. The estimated coefficient revealed the slope of the utility function of the
respondents. The results show that park enlargement, the creation of wildlife corridors, habitat improvement and compensation for
farmers for crop damage by elephants would significantly increase the utility for contribution for conservation fund via embarkation
tax. The coefficient of attributes was significant (p < .01), except the compensation to farmers for HEC. The significant standard
deviation of the parameters suggests unobserved heterogeneity in the preferences. The information criteria and McFadden R2 clearly
shows a better model fit compared to the MNL model with a lower Akaike information criterion (AIC), Bayesian information criterion
(BIC) and Hannan-Quinn information criterion (HQIC).

5. Discussion

This study examines tourists’ preferences for nature conservation and their WTP across a range of selected nature conservation
measures at a popular national park in Sri Lanka. The study finds that tourists prefer to make financial contributions for nature

Table 4
Results of conditional WTP (in USD$) by tourists for nature Conservation.
Attribute MWTP (USD$) SE Prob. |z|>Z* 95% CI LL UL

Park enlargement 0.82584** 0.33 0.0128 0.1759 1.4757

Creation of wildlife corridor 1.60107*** 0.57 0.0056 0.4675 2.7345
Habitat improvements 1.36451*** 0.50 0.0071 0.3705 2.3584
Compensation to farmers for HEC 2.14602** 1.02 0.0358 0.1421 4.1498
Wald statistic 7.990
χ2 [4] 0.091

Note. CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit.

***p < .01, **p <. 05*p < .10.

7
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 5
Estimation results: random parameter logit (RPL) model.
Attribute RPL model

Normally distributed random parameters Covariates of the random parameters’ means

M (SE) SD (SE) Estimated WTP for Conservation

Park enlargement 0.0680*** 0.1474*** − 0.0041

(0.01) (0.02) (0.01)
Creation of wildlife corridor 0.1650*** 0.1557*** 0.0331***
(0.01) (0.02) (0.01)
Habitat improvements 0.1574*** 0.1698*** − 0.0350***
(0.02) (0.02) (0.01)
Compensation to farmers for HEC 0.0190 (0.05) 0.5226*** 0.0785*
(0.10) (0.04)
Payment for nature conservation − 0.1601*** 0.3494***
(0.03) (0.07)
Log likelihood − 1277.3149
AIC 2596.60
BIC 2597.68
HQIC 2578.28
Number of observations 1308
Pseudo R2 0.295

Note. ASC = alternative specific constant; AIC = Akaike information criterion; BIC = Bayesian information criterion; HQIC = Hannan-Quinn In­
formation Criterion.
***p < .01, *p < .10.

conservation efforts, particularly compensation for wildlife (mainly elephant)-related conflict (HEC). Moreover, the study demon­
strates that tourists are willing to pay a significant amount in addition to their entry fee for various conservation governance alter­
natives. Tourists were more likely to contribute to nature conservation activities, such as adding more land for national parks, the
creation of wildlife corridors, habitat improvement through the establishment of water ponds, and in particular, reimbursing farmers
for crop destruction by wild elephants.
These findings are consistent with other studies where park enlargement and a large park size have been associated with greater
satisfaction for tourists through diversity, less congestion and large endowments of megafauna (Ferreira and Harmse, 2014; Okello
et al., 2008). The variable of creating a wildlife corridor was positive and significant and suggests that if wildlife corridors are created,
tourists are more likely to pay for nature conservation. In other words, they would be willing to pay more if there were more wildlife
corridors that connected national parks. Similar findings were observed in the study by Ferreira and Harmse (2014), which suggested
that the establishment of wildlife corridors was one of the viable solutions for ensuring an adequate carrying capacity of national parks
for tourism activities. That is, larger mammal movements between these parks is likely to be assured by linking wildlife parks.
Furthermore, connecting national parks indirectly may provide support for the mitigation of HEC by reducing elephants crossing
through villages and thereby saving the lives and livelihood of rural people.
Our findings also suggest that assuring wildlife encounters for tourists through guaranteed locations of wildlife and viewing via
water ponds, would increase their satisfaction. Similar results from a study carried out by MacFadyen et al. (2019) revealed that
droughts caused by climate change exacerbated the frequency of fires in areas where herds of elephants roam in South Africa’s Kruger
national park. This has altered elephant habitats by causing them to congregate along major rivers and therefore often changing the
locations where tourists are able to view elephants. This finding suggests that water bodies in parks are one of the key attributes needed
to facilitate wildlife encounters and grow tourism demand. Furthermore, improvement in such attributes can ensure the growth of
biodiversity and the protection of nature.
HEC has rapidly increased over the past decades in many countries and has become a serious concern from a tourism conservation
point of view. Moreover, in face of the global COVID-19 pandemic different forms of tourism activities need to be envisaged. In
particular, future tourists may search for low-touch and less crowded destinations as their choices. Hence, future tourism embedded
with nature may be more important than other forms of tourism for local and international tourists. Tourists have also been moving
towards community-based and/or NBT for health and safety reasons. Nature and wildlife (elephants) tourism may therefore be seen as
more attractive where people have these concerns. Hence in order to tap into this type of future demand for nature-based tourism, land
use planning and greater conservation efforts would be a remunerative investment while yielding long-term protection for elephants
and enhancing the livelihoods of local residents.
Farmers have been the most vulnerable group in HEC and in most cases they have not been adequately compensated for crop and
property damage in many countries and in particular in Sri Lanka. However, many countries have suffered financial constraints in
mitigating HEC and promoting coexistence with wildlife (Pringle, 2017). Our findings suggests that an alternative source of funding for
nature conservation can be in the form of a conservation fund generated from tourism receipts. Indeed, tourist’s WTP for improving the
sustainability of nature-based tourism can be crucial by not only helping to resolve HEC, but also more generally to enhance wildlife
stewardship. As noted, it is not surprising that tourists are prepared to pay more for the preservation of nature-based resources and
particularly wildlife given the added utility this can lend to wildlife parks (Mmopelwa et al., 2007; Thapa and Parent, 2020).
This study proposed that international tourists pay a modest amount (USD $1, $3 & $5) as a hypothetical conservation contribution

8
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

via embarkation tax in order to measure their willingness to support nature conservation measures outlined in the study. An open-
ended question in the survey is used to explore visitors’ upper bound of their WTP: “what is the maximum amount you are willing­
ness to pay for the creation of the projected conservation the finance to instrument above stated programs and preservation of ele­
phants in Sri Lanka?“. Through the closed-ended DCE choice scenarios it is clearly demonstrated that a few visitors were willing to pay
more than USD $7 for wildlife conservation. In this way, a conservation fund can help assure the future sustainability of the park’s
wildlife and other nature based resources by providing sufficient finance for conservation-as have examples of similar types of con­
servation funds in other countries (Lindsey et al., 2020). Even though this study proposed a relatively small contribution from tourists
as a means of funding the hypothetical conservation fund, the overall annual contribution becomes significant.
It is envisaged that the additional claim for the conservation fund requested from international tourists will have no impact on their
choice of Sri Lanka as a vacation destination. Most importantly, the study proposed that a tourism conservation fund may not be
seriously affected by the elasticity of tourism arrivals and the competitive position of the present tourism sector performance and
comparative advantages of Sri Lanka. The evidence from our study supports the need for improvements to the existing level of nature
conservation in Sri Lanka’s Yala national park and for support from tourists for this objective. The findings suggested that the indi­
vidual marginal WTP is USD $6 for contributions to a nature conservation fund. Based on the overall annual tourist visits to Sri Lanka of
around 2 million the total contribution for the conservation fund would be approximately USD $12,000,000. In addition, the study
found that Sri Lankan nature-based tourists would support a number of specific nature conservation initiatives and that most would be
willing to contribute to them via an embarkation tax. Hence, there is scope for implementing an urgent policy measure which creates a
win-win solution for HEC through the creation and use of tourism receipts. In this way we demonstrate the potential for a symbiotic
relationship between tourism and nature conservation through development of a practical mechanism which importantly helps resolve
HEC and promotes human coexistence with wildlife.
Successful nature conservation efforts require stable and evidence-based stakeholder support in order to preserve and formulate
appropriate management practices. Hence, this study explores the potential for a long-lasting solution to HEC in Sri Lanka using
tourism receipts derived from tourists’ WTP for nature conservation. Tourism-based conservation efforts are likely to deliver a tangible
benefit and create a positive feedback loop that reinforces and encourages wildlife custodianship. Many countries have suffered
financial stress from the maintenance of parks as well having to deal with significant adverse effects of wildlife on the livelihoods of
residents in adjoining areas of national parks. This has imposed substantial and additional strains on governments’ capacity to mitigate
the conflicts and funding sustainable nature conservation efforts. A least preferable outcome has been the killing of animals to save
crops.

6. Conclusions and policy implications

The results of this research points to the potential for a robust symbiotic association between NBT and nature conservation by the
establishment of a conservation fund. It is clearly shown in the results of implicit prices (See, Table 4) that tourists would be willing to
pay for a set of key nature conservation activities through a preferred mode of an embarkation tax. For conservation point of view the
markt instruments could play a major role by arranging the institutional mechanism by utilizing the conservation fund which is
generated from tourism receipts. As a result, the study examined the financial sustainability of nature conservation from a tourism
standpoint, and the government and other agencies may develop a policy framework to make use of the fund. In the design of such a
nature conservation fund tourism receipts could be used as a conservation and compensation tool for nature protection and partic­
ularly for wildlife protection. However, government and policymakers will need to carefully construct an appropriate policy frame­
work to implement such a fund which incorporates an effective monitoring mechanism and a means for outcome measurement. The
fund also could be jointly managed by the government and the community (HEC affected people) thus establishing a level of com­
munity proprietorship over the resources. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no prior studies have examined the conservation
outcome associated with tourists WTP using DCE, especially in a HEC mitigation context. Future studies might validate the success of
such initiatives for mutual benefit-sharing between NBT and nature conservation using appropriate methods, such as a randomised
control trial to examine how benefit-sharing could progress nature conservation efforts and the level of HEC coexistence achieved
through tourism receipts.
Tourist destinations in protected areas can stimulate tourism demand and achieve the twin goals of income generations and nature
conservation. Effective and efficient delivery of tourists’ attribute preferences could assist in achieving this goal. Hence, the need for
policy makers’ knowledge of tourists’ preferences for nature-based resources and its conservation. This study confirms the potential for
a sustainable solution for resolving a long-term conservation issue (HEC) by exploring an avenue for conservation finance from its
stakeholders. This study is one steppingstone in the road to identifying the potential financial viability of nature conservation mea­
sures, especially long-term HEC mitigation measures such the creation of wildlife corridors, park enlargement, habitat improvement
and compensation for farmers who are affected by HEC. Hence, given this study identifies a financially viable means of conservation of
nature-based resources, future studies could focus on implementation and governance of such funding.

Authorship contributions

Conception and design of study: Kanesh Suresh, Clevo Wilson, Annette Quayle, Shunsuke Managi, Uttam Khanal. Acquisition of
data: Kanesh Suresh, Clevo Wilson. Analysis and/or interpretation of data: Kanesh Suresh, Clevo Wilson, Annette Quayle, Shunsuke
Managi, Uttam Khanal.

9
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

References

Arnberger, A., Ebenberger, M., Schneider, I.E., Cottrell, S., Schlueter, A.C., von Ruschkowski, E., Gobster, P.H., 2018. Visitor preferences for visual changes in bark
beetle-impacted forest recreation settings in the United States and Germany. Environ. Manag. 61 (2), 209–223.
Bajracharya, Siddhartha B., Furley, Peter A., Newton, Adrian C., 2006. Impacts of community-based conservation on local communities in the Annapurna
Conservation Area, Nepal. Biodivers. Conserv. 15 (8), 2765–2786.
Bandara, R., Tisdell, C., 2004. The net benefit of saving the Asian elephant: a policy and contingent valuation study. Ecol. Econ. 48 (1), 93–107.
Boley, B.B., Green, G.T., 2016. Ecotourism and natural resource conservation: the ‘potential’ for a sustainable symbiotic relationship. J. Ecotourism 15 (1), 36–50.
Buultjens, J., Ratnayake, I., Gnanapala, A., Aslam, M., 2005. Tourism and its implications for management in ruhuna national park (Yala), Sri Lanka. Tourism Manag.
26 (5), 733–742.
Chun, J., Kim, C.K., Kim, G.S., Jeong, J., Lee, W.K., 2020. Social big data informs spatially explicit management options for national parks with high tourism pressures.
Tourism Manag. 81, 104136.
Denninger Snyder, K., Rentsch, D., 2020. Rethinking assessment of success of mitigation strategies for elephant-induced crop damage. Conserv. Biol. 34 (4), 829–842.
Dharmarathne, C., Fernando, C., Weerasinghe, C., Corea, R., 2020. Project orange elephant is a conflict specific holistic approach to mitigating human-elephant
conflict in Sri Lanka. Commun. Biol. 3 (1), 1–3.
Dube, K., Nhamo, G., 2020. Evidence and impact of climate change on South African national parks. Potential implications for tourism in the Kruger National Park.
Environ. Develop. 33, 100485.
Du-Pont, T., Vilakazi, C.M.N., Thondhlana, G., Vedeld, P., 2020. Livestock income and household welfare for communities adjacent to the great fish river nature
reserve, South Africa. Environ. Develop. 33, 100508.
Eagles, P.F., 2002. Trends in park tourism: economics, finance and management. J. Sustain. Tourism 10 (2), 132–153.
Estifanos, T., Polyakov, M., Pandit, R., Hailu, A., Burton, M., 2019. What are tourists willing to pay for securing the survival of a flagship species? The case of
protection of the Ethiopian wolf. Tourism Econ. 27 (1), 45–69.
Fernando, P., Wikramanayake, E., Weerakoon, D., Jayasinghe, L.K.A., Gunawardene, M., Janaka, H.K., 2005. Perceptions and patterns of human–elephant conflict in
old and new settlements in Sri Lanka: insights for mitigation and management. Biodivers. Conserv. 14 (10), 2465–2481.
Ferreira, S., Harmse, A., 2014. Kruger National Park: tourism development and issues around the management of large numbers of tourists. J. Ecotourism 13 (1),
16–34.
Gadd, M.E., 2005. Conservation outside of parks: attitudes of local people in Laikipia, Kenya. Environ. Conserv. 32 (1), 50–63.
Hearne, R.R., Salinas, Z.M., 2002. The use of choice experiments in the analysis of tourist preferences for ecotourism development in Costa Rica. J. Environ. Manag. 65
(2), 153–163.
Hensher, D.A., Rose, J.M., Greene, W.H., 2015. Applied Choice Analysis. Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom.
Horgan, F.G., Kudavidanage, E.P., 2020. Farming on the edge: farmer training to mitigate human-wildlife conflict at an agricultural frontier in south Sri Lanka. Crop
Protect. 127, 104981.
Ishwaran, N., 1993. Ecology of the Asian elephant in lowland dry zone habitats of the Mahaweli River Basin, Sri Lanka. J. Trop. Ecol. 169–182.
Kariyawasam, S., Wilson, C., Rathnayaka, L.I.M., Sooriyagoda, K.G., Managi, S., 2020. Conservation versus socio-economic sustainability: a case study of the
Udawalawe National Park, Sri Lanka. Environ. Develop. 35, 100517.
Kim, Y.J., Lee, D.K., Kim, C.K., 2020. Spatial tradeoff between biodiversity and nature-based tourism: considering mobile phone-driven visitation pattern. Global Ecol.
Conserv. 21, e00899.
Kularatne, T, Wilson, C, Lee, B, Hoang, V, 2021. Tourists’ before and after experience valuations: A unique choice experiment with policy implications for the nature-
based tourism industry. Econ. Anal. Pol. 69, 529–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2021.01.002.
Lindberg, K., 1991. Policies for Maximizing Nature Tourism’s Ecological and Economic Benefits. World Resources Institute, pp. 20–21. Retrieved from. http://
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.536.5828&rep=rep1&type=pdf on 05. (Accessed June 2020).
Lindsey, P., Allan, J., Brehony, P., Dickman, A., Robson, A., Begg, C., et al., 2020. Conserving Africa’s wildlife and wildlands through the COVID-19 crisis and beyond.
Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1300–1310.
Macdonald, C., Gallagher, A.J., Barnett, A., Brunnschweiler, J., Shiffman, D.S., Hammerschlag, N., 2017. Conservation potential of apex predator tourism. Biol.
Conserv. 215, 132–141.
MacFadyen, S., Hui, C., Verburg, P.H., Van Teeffelen, A.J., 2019. Spatiotemporal distribution dynamics of elephants in response to density, rainfall, rivers and fire in
Kruger National Park, South Africa. Divers. Distrib. 25 (6), 880–894.
McFadden, D.L., 1984. Econometric analysis of qualitative response models. Handb. Econom. 2, 1395–1457.
Mmopelwa, G., Kgathi, D.L., Molefhe, L., 2007. 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 Manag. 28 (4), 1044–1056.
Novelli, M., Scarth, A., 2007. Tourism in protected areas: integrating conservation and community development in Liwonde National Park (Malawi). Tourism Hospit.
Plann. Dev. 4 (1), 47–73.
Okello, M.M., Manka, S.G., D’Amour, D.E., 2008. The relative importance of large mammal species for tourism in Amboseli National Park, Kenya. Tourism Manag. 29
(4), 751–760.
Parr, J.W., Jitvijak, S., Saranet, S., Buathong, S., 2008. Exploratory co-management interventions in Kuiburi National Park, Central Thailand, including human-
elephant conflict mitigation. Int. J. Environ. Sustain Dev. 7 (3), 293–310.
Patel, R., 2021. Paper plans and possibility: a critical analysis of landscape conservation policy in the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor. Environ. Develop. 37,
100600.
Pechacek, P., Li, G., Li, J., Wang, W., Wu, X., Xu, J., 2013. Compensation payments for downsides generated by protected areas. Ambio 42 (1), 90–99.
Phong, T, Thang, V, Hoai, N, 2021. What motivates farmers to accept good aquaculture practices in development policy? Results from choice experiment surveys with
small-scale shrimp farmers in Vietnam. Econ. Anal. Pol. 72, 454–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2021.09.015.
Pringle, R.M., 2017. Upgrading protected areas to conserve wild biodiversity. Nature 546 (7656), 91–99.
Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority, 2019. Annual Statistical Report 2019, SLTDA. Sri Lanka Tourists Board, Colombo. Retrieved from. https://sltda.gov.lk/
storage/common_media/AAnnual%20Statistical%20Report%20new%202109%20Word3889144215.pdf on 09.05.2019.
Stoldt, M., Göttert, T., Mann, C., Zeller, U., 2020. Transfrontier conservation areas and human-wildlife conflict: the case of the Namibian component of the kavango-
zambezi (KAZA) TFCA. Sci. Rep. 10 (1), 1–16.
Suresh, K., Khanal, U., Wilson, C., 2021a. Stakeholders’ use and preservation valuation of lagoon ecosystems. Econ. Anal. Pol. 71, 123–137.
Suresh, K., Wilson, C., Quayle, A., Khanal, U., Managi, S., 2021b. Which national park attributes attract international tourists? A Sri Lankan case study. Tourism Econ.
13548166211019865.
Sukumar, R., 1992. The Asian Elephant: Ecology and Management. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Thapa, B., Parent, G., 2020. Tourists’ willingness to accept/pay increased entry fees for park improvement projects. Curr. Issues Tourism 23 (3), 265–269.
Tisdell, C., Wilson, C., 2012. Nature-based Tourism and Conservation: New Economic Insights and Case Studies. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.

10
K. Suresh et al. Environmental Development xxx (xxxx) xxx

Tisdell, C., Nantha, H.S., Wilson, C., 2007. Endangerment and likeability of wildlife species: how important are they for payments proposed for conservation. Ecol.
Econ. 60 (3), 627–633.
Vancuylenberg, B.W.B., 1977. Feeding behaviour of the Asiatic elephant in south-east Sri Lanka in relation to conservation. Biol. Conserv. 12 (1), 33–54.
Walpole, M.J., Thouless, C.R., 2005. Increasing the Value of Wildlife through Non-consumptive Use? Deconstructing the Myths of Ecotourism and Community-Based
Tourism in the Tropics, vol. 9. Conservation Biology Series, Cambridge, pp. 121–497.
Wondirad, A., Tolkach, D., King, B., 2020. Stakeholder collaboration as a major factor for sustainable ecotourism development in developing countries. Tourism
Manag. 78, 104024.
World Travel, Tourism, 2017. Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report. World Travel and Tourism Council, London. London, United Kingdom, Retrieved from.
https://www.wttc.org. on 08.04.2020.
World Travel, Tourism, 2019. Travel & Tourism Economic Impact 2019. WTTC, London, United Kingdom. Retrieved from. https://www.wttc.org. on 08.04.2020.

11