Table 1. Characteristics of the sites selected for this study, and sample sizes for various surveys.

Site	Fokontany, (commune) district	No. of villages	History of conservation	Enforcement of conservation rules	Compensation provided	HH survey & choice experiment sample	Agri. survey sample	Contingent valuation exercise
1. New PA with safeguard	Ampahitra (Ambohibary) MORAMANGA	8	Granted temporary status in 2006, formally gazetted in 2015	Weak	Yes (World Bank social safeguards)	102	25	62
2. New PA (no safeguard)	Sahavazina (Antenina) TOAMASINA II)	7	Granted temporary status–in 2006, formally gazetted in 2015	Very weak	No	95	40	–
3. Established PA (Zahamena)	Antevibe & Ambodivoangy (Ambodimangavalo) VAVATENINA	7	Long history of conservation (since 1927) on periphery of Zahamena National Park	Relatively strong	Park entry fees shared used to fund local development projects	152	37	–
4. Established PA (Mantadia)	Volove & Vohibazaha (Ambatavola) MORAMANGA	3	Long history of conservation (since 1989) on periphery of Mantadia National Park	Relatively strong	Park entry fees used to fund local development projects	104	–	–
		Total				453	102	62