IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v39y2011i2p689-698.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What determines urban households' willingness to pay for CO2 emission reductions in Turkey: A contingent valuation survey

Author

Listed:
  • Adaman, Fikret
  • KaralI, Nihan
  • Kumbaroglu, Gürkan
  • Or, Ilhan
  • Özkaynak, Begüm
  • Zenginobuz, Ünal

Abstract

This paper explores Turkish urban households' willingness to pay (WTP) for CO2 emission reductions expected to result from improvements in power production. A face-to-face questionnaire, with a Contingent valuation (CV) module prepared using the double-bounded dichotomous choice elicitation framework, was administered to 2422 respondents representative of urban Turkey--a developing country with low but rapidly increasing greenhouse gas emissions. The determinants of WTP were identified by considering not only the impact of standard socio-economic factors but also the effects of environmental knowledge, attitudes and behaviour, the relevance of the identity of the collection agent (national versus international institutions) in terms of trust people have towards them, and the degree of perceived participation of others in the realization of the project. Our study confirms the existing literature in demonstrating that WTP figures reported by young and educated people that are active on environmental issues, and who also possess material security and environmental knowledge, are more likely to be high. However, their willingness to make contributions is hampered significantly by their belief that their fellow citizens will not contribute and the general lack of trust in institutions. Overall, this study may be taken as a call to eliminate governance-related uncertainties in climate change deals.

Suggested Citation

  • Adaman, Fikret & KaralI, Nihan & Kumbaroglu, Gürkan & Or, Ilhan & Özkaynak, Begüm & Zenginobuz, Ünal, 2011. "What determines urban households' willingness to pay for CO2 emission reductions in Turkey: A contingent valuation survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 689-698, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:2:p:689-698
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301-4215(10)00793-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Pearce, 2003. "The Social Cost of Carbon and its Policy Implications," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 19(3), pages 362-384.
    2. Tjernström, E. & Tietenberg, T., 2008. "Do differences in attitudes explain differences in national climate change policies?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 315-324, April.
    3. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 2005. "Individual option prices for climate change mitigation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 283-301, February.
    4. Paavola, Jouni, 2007. "Institutions and environmental governance: A reconceptualization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 93-103, June.
    5. Elinor Ostrom, 2014. "A Polycentric Approach For Coping With Climate Change," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 15(1), pages 97-134, May.
    6. Alvarez-Farizo, Begona & Hanley, Nick, 2002. "Using conjoint analysis to quantify public preferences over the environmental impacts of wind farms. An example from Spain," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 107-116, January.
    7. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    8. Luzar, E. Jane & Cosse, Kelli J., 1998. "Willingness to pay or intention to pay: The attitude-behavior relationship in contingent valuation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 427-444.
    9. Phoebe Koundouri, 2004. "Econometrics Informing Natural Resources Management:Selected Empirical Analyses," DEOS Working Papers 0401, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    10. Petrolia, Daniel R. & Bhattacharjee, Sanjoy & Hudson, Darren & Herndon, Cary W., 2010. "Do Americans want ethanol? A comparative contingent-valuation study of willingness to pay for E-10 and E-85," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 121-128, January.
    11. Roe, Brian & Teisl, Mario F. & Levy, Alan & Russell, Matthew, 2001. "US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 917-925, September.
    12. Clive L Spash, 2008. "Contingent Valuation Design and Data Treatment: If You Can't Shoot the Messenger, Change the Message," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 26(1), pages 34-53, February.
    13. Jin, Jianjun & Wang, Zhishi & Liu, Xuemin, 2008. "Valuing black-faced spoonbill conservation in Macao: A policy and contingent valuation study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 328-335, December.
    14. Bergmann, Ariel & Hanley, Nick & Wright, Robert, 2006. "Valuing the attributes of renewable energy investments," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 1004-1014, June.
    15. S. V. Ciriacy-Wantrup, 1947. "Capital Returns from Soil-Conservation Practices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4_Part_II), pages 1181-1196.
    16. Fatos Goksen & Fikret Adaman & Unal Zenginobuz, 2001. "On Environmental Concern, Willingness to Pay, and Postmaterialist Values: Evidence from Istanbul," Working Papers 2001/10, Bogazici University, Department of Economics.
    17. Wiser, Ryan H., 2007. "Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy: A comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 419-432, May.
    18. Nunes, Paulo A. L. D. & Schokkaert, Erik, 2003. "Identifying the warm glow effect in contingent valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 231-245, March.
    19. Patricia A. Champ & Nicholas E. Flores & Thomas C. Brown & PJames Chivers, 2002. "Contingent Valuation and Incentives," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 78(4), pages 591-604.
    20. Sugden, Robert, 1984. "Reciprocity: The Supply of Public Goods through Voluntary Contributions," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 94(376), pages 772-787, December.
    21. Roland Menges & Carsten Schroeder & Stefan Traub, 2005. "Altruism, Warm Glow and the Willingness-to-Donate for Green Electricity: An Artefactual Field Experiment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 31(4), pages 431-458, August.
    22. O'Garra, Tanya & Mourato, Susana & Garrity, Lisa & Schmidt, Patrick & Beerenwinkel, Anne & Altmann, Matthias & Hart, David & Graesel, Cornelia & Whitehouse, Simon, 2007. "Is the public willing to pay for hydrogen buses? A comparative study of preferences in four cities," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 3630-3642, July.
    23. Riccardo Scarpa & Ian Bateman, 2000. "Efficiency Gains Afforded by Improved Bid Design versus Follow-up Valuation Questions in Discrete-Choice CV Studies," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(2), pages 299-311.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Longo, Alberto & Markandya, Anil & Petrucci, Marta, 2008. "The internalization of externalities in the production of electricity: Willingness to pay for the attributes of a policy for renewable energy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 140-152, August.
    2. Alló, Maria & Loureiro, Maria L., 2014. "The role of social norms on preferences towards climate change policies: A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 563-574.
    3. Komarek, Timothy M. & Lupi, Frank & Kaplowitz, Michael D., 2011. "Valuing energy policy attributes for environmental management: Choice experiment evidence from a research institution," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(9), pages 5105-5115, September.
    4. Aravena, Claudia & Hutchinson, W. George & Longo, Alberto, 2012. "Environmental pricing of externalities from different sources of electricity generation in Chile," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 1214-1225.
    5. Grösche, Peter & Schröder, Carsten, 2011. "Eliciting public support for greening the electricity mix using random parameter techniques," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 363-370, March.
    6. Ito, Nobuyuki & Takeuchi, Kenji & Tsuge, Takahiro & Kishimoto, Atsuo, 2010. "Applying threshold models to donations to a green electricity fund," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 1819-1825, April.
    7. Uz, Dilek & Mamkhezri, Jamal, 2024. "Household willingness to pay for various attributes of residential solar panels: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    8. Gracia, Azucena & Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús & Pérez y Pérez, Luis, 2012. "Can renewable energy be financed with higher electricity prices? Evidence from a Spanish region," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 784-794.
    9. Cicia, Gianni & Cembalo, Luigi & Del Giudice, Teresa & Palladino, Andrea, 2012. "Fossil energy versus nuclear, wind, solar and agricultural biomass: Insights from an Italian national survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 59-66.
    10. Zorić, Jelena & Hrovatin, Nevenka, 2012. "Household willingness to pay for green electricity in Slovenia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 180-187.
    11. Motz, Alessandra, 2021. "Consumer acceptance of the energy transition in Switzerland: The role of attitudes explained through a hybrid discrete choice model," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    12. Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Balezentis & Ilona Alisauskaite-Seskiene & Gintare Stankuniene & Zaneta Simanaviciene, 2019. "A Review of Willingness to Pay Studies for Climate Change Mitigation in the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-38, April.
    13. Koundouri, Phoebe & Kountouris, Yiannis & Remoundou, Kyriaki, 2009. "Valuing a wind farm construction: A contingent valuation study in Greece," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 1939-1944, May.
    14. Xie, Bai-Chen & Zhao, Wei, 2018. "Willingness to pay for green electricity in Tianjin, China: Based on the contingent valuation method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 98-107.
    15. Campbell, Robert M. & Venn, Tyron J. & Anderson, Nathaniel M., 2016. "Social preferences toward energy generation with woody biomass from public forests in Montana, USA," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 58-67.
    16. Litvine, Dorian & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2011. "Helping "light green" consumers walk the talk: Results of a behavioural intervention survey in the Swiss electricity market," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(3), pages 462-474, January.
    17. Wiser, Ryan H., 2007. "Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy: A comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 419-432, May.
    18. Menegaki, Angeliki N., 2012. "A social marketing mix for renewable energy in Europe based on consumer stated preference surveys," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 30-39.
    19. Ma, Chunbo & Burton, Michael, 2016. "Warm glow from green power: Evidence from Australian electricity consumers," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 106-120.
    20. Ivan Diaz‐Rainey & John K. Ashton, 2011. "Profiling potential green electricity tariff adopters: green consumerism as an environmental policy tool?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(7), pages 456-470, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:39:y:2011:i:2:p:689-698. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.