MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409418978 · doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103489

Modeling willingness to continue participation in payments for ecosystem services programs: A case of China's second phase of the grain for green program in indigenous communities

2025· article· en· W4409418978 on OpenAlex
Lingling Qiu, Weizhong Zeng

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueForest Policy and Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSichuan Province Science and Technology Support ProgramNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSichuan Agricultural UniversityUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsEcosystem servicesIndigenousChinaPaymentWillingness to payPhase (matter)BusinessEcosystemNatural resource economicsAgricultural economicsPublic economicsEconomicsEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental economicsEconomic growthEcologyGeographyFinanceMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Literature on Payments for Ecosystem Services Programs in developing countries is focused on the underlying assumption of a rational economic agent, and useful concepts from social-psychological models are ignored. The existing literature also lacks studies on indigenous communities and the differences in poor and non-poor people's participation. We proposed a Random Utility Model that integrates some concepts of the Expectation Confirmation Theory to examine the factors influencing Yi (indigenous) people's willingness to maintain their reforested land after the end of financial incentives of China's Second Phase of the Grain for Green Program. We compared the willingness and the impacts of influencing factors for poor and non-poor participants. We also analyzed preferences for financial incentive options of participants unwilling to maintain their reforested land. Findings of this study revealed that: (i) similar proportions, about 60 %, of poor as well as non-poor participants are willing to maintain their reforested land; (ii) inertia to change land use and ecological awareness are top two influencing factors for both groups and expectation is the next key factor for poor people; (iii) the signs and magnitudes of influences vary between poor and non-poor groups; (iv) 61 % of unwilling households prefer short-term and 31 % prefer long-term financial incentive options; and (v) participants who have inertia to change land use and have planted ecologically important species are more likely to choose the long-term payment option. Policy recommendations to enhance ecological awareness and inertia to change land use and reduce dependence on farm income were made. • A Random Utility model of willingness to continue participation in PESPs is proposed. • Participants' satisfaction, expectation, inertia, and ecological awareness are included in the model. • Similar proportions of poor and non-poor participants are willing to continue participation. • The impacts of influencing factors on willingness vary between poor and non-poor groups. • More unwilling participants prefer short-term than long-term payments.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it