\documentclass[english,german]{scrartcl}
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage{geometry}
\geometry{verbose,a4paper,tmargin=1.75cm,bmargin=2cm,lmargin=2cm,rmargin=2cm,headheight=0.8cm,headsep=0.5cm,footskip=0.5cm}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{url}
\urlstyle{same}
\newcommand\email{\begingroup \urlstyle{same}\Url}\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{units}
\usepackage{tabularx}
\usepackage{wasysym} % enable use of \permil instead of \textperthousand
\usepackage{marvosym}
\usepackage{arabtex}
\usepackage{hyphenat}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{mdwlist}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\relax}
\usepackage{index}
\newindex{key}{kdx}{knd}{Keywords}
\newindex{author}{idx}{ind}{Authors}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\pagestyle{fancy}
\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
\fancyfoot{}
\usepackage{ifpdf}
\ifpdf
%\usepackage[activate]{pdfcprot}
%\usepackage[owner=Tapioka, print=true, copy=true, edit=false, annotate=false,set]{pdfcrypt}
%encryption: not supported any more (since pdftex 1.10)
\usepackage[pdftex]{thumbpdf}
\usepackage[pdftex]{hyperref}
\hypersetup{pdftitle={Ecotourism, Protected Areas and Welfare: the Case of Nepal},pdfauthor={Yergeau Marie-Eve},pdfsubject={Tropentag 2016: Abstract},pdfkeywords={Conservation, ecotourism, multilevel model, Nepal, welfare},pdfpagemode=None,colorlinks=true}
\else
\usepackage{ae}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\fi
\begin{document}
\ifpdf
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2016.jpg}}}
\else
\parbox[b]{2.5cm}{\resizebox*{2.5cm}{!}{\includegraphics{dtt2016.eps}}}
\fi
\hfill
\parbox[b]{13.4cm}{\centering \large{\textbf{Tropentag, September 18-21, 2016, Vienna, Austria}}\\[1ex] \Large{``Solidarity in a competing world ---\\fair use of resources''\\[2ex]}}
\hspace{0.1cm}
\begin{center}
\Large{\textbf{Ecotourism, Protected Areas and Welfare: the Case of Nepal\footnote{\textbf{Contact Address:} Yergeau Marie-Eve, University of Sherbrooke, Economics, 2905 Descoteaux, J1K1N7~Sherbrooke, Canada, \mbox{e-mail}: \email{marie-eve.yergeau@usherbrooke.ca}}\\[0.8ex]}}
\normalsize{\textsc{Yergeau Marie-Eve}}
\end{center}
\begin{itemize*}
\item[]{\small{\textit{University of Sherbrooke, Economics, Canada}}}
\end{itemize*}
\index[author]{Marie-Eve, Yergeau}
\begin{center}
\vspace{1.1cm}
\textbf{Abstract}
\begin{abstract}
\normalsize{
The establishment of protected areas is a widespread practice designed to curb environmental degradation. However, it is often criticised as limiting the expansion of agriculture and natural resource extraction, especially in poor regions. Ecotourism in protected zones thus appears to be an alternative use of the land, concurrently contributing to the goals of reducing poverty and protecting ecosystems.







In the litterature, theoretical and empirical results on the relationship between protected areas and welfare diverge. The few theoretical models developed so far typically show that protected areas will reduce economic wellbeing.  However, other authors empirically showed that the establisment of protected areas contributed to economic development and poverty alleviation. They suggested that ecotourism development in the protected areas generated an income that was sufficient to compensate the loss caused by conservation without however testing this hypothesis.  Yet studies on the distributive effects of tourism are rare and typically show that the poorest benefit relatively less or not at all from tourism.







In this article we study the effect of ecotourism development in protected areas, on the welfare of local populations of Nepal.  We are also interested in the distributive effect to verify if the poor can benefit from tourism.  We use a genuine database collected specifically to answer this research question.  The sampling collected in 2013 is composed of 1563 households from three different protected areas of Nepal. 







We use a two"=level linear mixed model. This type of model is useful when data are hierarchical as relationships can be modeled at different levels.  It thus allow to examine if the effect of an individual covariate is moderated by a variable at a higher level. Therefore, our model can determine if the effect of ecotourism on welfare is explained by individual variables, group variables (ex. at the village level) of both. 



 



Our analysis shows that ecotourism development in protected areas of Nepal affects positively the welfare of local populations.  However it appears that the poor benefit relatively less from tourism.  Our results are thus consistent with the literature.  



}

\vspace{0.5cm}
\end{abstract}
\end{center}
\noindent \textbf{Keywords:} Conservation, ecotourism, multilevel model, Nepal, welfare
\index[key]{Conservation}
\index[key]{Ecotourism}
\index[key]{Multilevel model}
\index[key]{Nepal}
\index[key]{Welfare}
\end{document}
