International Journal of Marine Science 2016, Vol.6, No.36, 1-8
5
Table 2 Hedonic model for affected fishermen
S. No
Variables
Serious
Medium
Low
1
House hold income (‘000 Rs.)
0.06**
0.029*
0.0073**
2
water quality
-0.14**
0.25**
0.06**
3
Distance of house from sea
0.004**
0.001*
0.001*
4
Amenities of house
0.62**
0.18*
0.05*
5
R
2
0.97
0.95
0.93
6
(
2
R
)
0.96
.0.95
0.93
** Significant at 1 per cent level * Significant at 5 per cent level NS Non - Significant
3.1.2.2. Moderately affected fishermen
For moderately affected fishermen, the household income, water quality, distance from sea and amenities of the
house influenced the house value (Table 2). The house hold income had positive relationship with house value and
if it increased by thousands of rupees,
ceteris paribus
, increased the house value by 2.90 per cent. The water
quality had a positive relationship with house value, if increased by one unit in water quality
ceteris paribus,
increased the house value by 25 per cent due to less pollution intensity. The distance of house from sea, if
increased by one meter,
ceteris paribus,
increased the house value by 0.10 per cent above mean level. Amenities
of the house had positive relationship to house value with 0.18 coefficient values at five per cent level significance
and if increased by one unit,
ceteris paribus,
increased the house value by 18 per cent.
3.1.2.3 Less affected fishermen
For less affecting fishermen, the household income, water quality, distance from sea and amenities of house had
influenced the house value. (Table 2).The house hold income had positive relationship with house value and if
increase by thousands of rupees, ceteris paribus, increased the house value by 0.73 per cent. The water quality had
a positive relationship with house value, if increase by one unit in water quality, ceteris paribus, increased the
house value by 6 per cent due to less pollution intensity. If the distance from sea, increased by one kilometer,
ceteris paribus, increased the house value by 0.10 per cent above mean level. Amenities of house had positive
relationship to house value with 0.05 coefficient value at five per cent level significance and if it increased by one
unit, ceteris paribus, increased the house value by 5 per cent.
Thus for all the categories of affected fishermen, the house value was positively influenced by the household
income, water quality, distance from sea and amenities of respondents excepting in seriously affected category, the
water quality had negative influence on household income due to high pollution existed in that category.
Positive externalities of coastal ecosystem
The positive externality of coastal ecosystem namely the coastal tourism was valued by travel cost model for the
two tourist spots of mangrove forest and silver beach.
3.2 Travel cost model
The estimates of the travel cost incurred by the tourists visiting the two tourist spots of mangrove forest and silver
beach are presented in Table 3. It could be inferred from the table that the travel cost incurred by the tourists
visiting mangrove forest was higher with Rs. 1562 per visit as compared to silver beach with ₹.487 per visit. The
travel cost included the travel expenditure, entry cost and wage loss. Of the total travel cost, for mangrove forest,
wage loss accounted for the highest proportion with 48 per cent. For silver beach, travel expenditure accounted for
the highest proportion with 51.00 per cent. Entry cost was present only for mangrove forest.
