Skip to main content
. 2011 Aug 22;108(34):13945–13950. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1101825108

Table 4.

Regression results of the primary equation

Dependent variable
Change in shrimping income per capita
Change in fishing income per capita
Explanatory variable Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6
Change in mangrove area within SANAPA 6,052.34 (1.75) 14,872.23 (2.88) 19,429.28 (2.83)§ 5,475.83 (2.37)§ 9,366.99 (2.10)§ 13,873.98 (2.12)§
Change in mangrove area outside SANAPA 127.78 (1.56) 510.11 (2.99) 626.15 (2.88) 85.67 (2.14)§ 178.757 (1.32) 322.99 (1.70)
Change in mangrove area outside SANAPA * distance to boat ramp −8.16 (2.57)§ −12.46 (2.51)§ −2.73 (1.05) −5.55 (1.36)
Distance to boat ramp −3.23 (0.64) 0.62 (0.07) 7.817 (1.65) 13.41 (1.25)
Poorer group −269.37 (0.57) −368.68 (0.83)
Middle group 22.224 (0.04) −404.59 (0.83)
Change in mangrove area within SANAPA * poorer group −12,924.48 (1.76) 3,664.04 (0.45)
Change in mangrove area within SANAPA * middle group 3,277.62 (0.40) 881.57 (0.11)
Change in mangrove area outside SANAPA * poorer group 4.59 (0.02) −0.31 (0.00)
Change in mangrove area outside SANAPA * middle group 125.93 (0.80) 33.66 (0.19)
R2 0.26 0.46 0.56 0.39 0.43 0.46
N 31 31 31 59 59 59

Robust t statistics are in parentheses. All regression models also control for IMR in 2004 and 2009 and income levels in 2004 of respective income sources.

Significant differences at 10%, §5%, and 1%.