IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/juipol/v76y2022ics0957178722000200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Better safe than sorry? Stated preferences and the precautionary principle for securing drinking water quality in an Italian district

Author

Listed:
  • Massarutto, Antonio
  • Roder, G.
  • Troiano, S.

Abstract

We apply Contingent Valuation (CV) to investigate individuals’ preferences concerning an alleged contaminant – asbestos contained in fibrolite pipes – which, although not identified so far as a major threat to drinking water, is raising public concern. In the district of Gorizia in Northern Italy, though contrary to the recommendations of experts, mean WTP is high enough to justify an accelerated replacement of pipes as a precautionary measure. However, interviews reveal a strong polarization, and still provide inconclusive recommendations for policy. Our analysis contributes to the debate on the applicability of stated-preference techniques to choices concerning the precautionary principle when highly emotional topics are under discussion.

Suggested Citation

  • Massarutto, Antonio & Roder, G. & Troiano, S., 2022. "Better safe than sorry? Stated preferences and the precautionary principle for securing drinking water quality in an Italian district," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:juipol:v:76:y:2022:i:c:s0957178722000200
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jup.2022.101355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957178722000200
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jup.2022.101355?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Adamowicz, Wiktor & Dupont, Diane & Krupnick, Alan & Zhang, Jing, 2011. "Valuation of cancer and microbial disease risk reductions in municipal drinking water: An analysis of risk context using multiple valuation methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 213-226, March.
    2. Arrow, Kenneth J. & Cropper, Maureen L. & Eads, George C. & Hahn, Robert W. & Lave, Lester B. & Noll, Roger G. & Portney, Paul R. & Russell, Milson & Schmalensee, Richard & Smith, V. Kerry & Stavins, , 1997. "Is there a role for benefit-cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 195-221, May.
    3. Banzhaf, H. Spencer, 2016. "Constructing markets: environmental economics and the contingent valuation controversy," MPRA Paper 78814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    5. Salvador Saz-Salazar & Miguel A. García-Rubio & Francisco González-Gómez & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2016. "Managing Water Resources Under Conditions of Scarcity: On Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Improving Water Supply Infrastructure," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 30(5), pages 1723-1738, March.
    6. Schlapfer, Felix, 2009. "Contingent valuation: confusions, problems, and solutions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(6), pages 1569-1571, April.
    7. William Fonta & H. Ichoku & Jane Kabubo-Mariara, 2010. "The effect of protest zeros on estimates of willingness to pay in healthcare contingent valuation analysis," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 8(4), pages 225-237, July.
    8. Olivier Beaumais & Anne Briand & Katrin Millock & Céline Nauges, 2010. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Better Tap Water Quality? A Cross-Country Valuation Study," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10051, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    9. Smith, Richard D. & Sach, Tracey H., 2010. "Contingent valuation: what needs to be done?," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 91-111, January.
    10. Martinez-Alier, Joan & Munda, Giuseppe & O'Neill, John, 1998. "Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 277-286, September.
    11. Stephen Littlechild, 2012. "Regulation and Customer Engagement," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    12. Jones, Nikoleta & Sophoulis, Costas M. & Malesios, Chrisovaladis, 2008. "Economic valuation of coastal water quality and protest responses: A case study in Mitilini, Greece," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 2478-2491, December.
    13. Polyzou, E. & Jones, N. & Evangelinos, K.I. & Halvadakis, C.P., 2011. "Willingness to pay for drinking water quality improvement and the influence of social capital," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 74-80, February.
    14. Ekin Birol & Katia Karousakis & Phoebe Koundouri, 2006. "Using economic valuation techniques to inform water resources management: A survey and critical appraisal of available techniques and an application," DEOS Working Papers 0607, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    15. Dale Whittington, 2010. "What Have We Learned from 20 Years of Stated Preference Research in Less-Developed Countries?," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 209-236, October.
    16. Morrall, John F, III, 2003. "Saving Lives: A Review of the Record," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 221-237, December.
    17. James Murphy & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "Is Cheap Talk Effective at Eliminating Hypothetical Bias in a Provision Point Mechanism?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 327-343, March.
    18. Beaumais, Olivier & Briand, Anne & Katrin, Millock, 2014. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Better Tap Water Quality? A Cross-Country Valuation Study," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 165794, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    19. Arild Vatn, 2004. "Environmental Valuation and Rationality," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 80(1), pages 1-18.
    20. Richard T. Carson, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: A Practical Alternative When Prices Aren't Available," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 27-42, Fall.
    21. Jesper Nielsen & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen & Ivar SØNBØ Kristiansen & JØRgen NexØE, 2003. "Impact of Socio-demographic Factors on Willingness to Pay for the Reduction of a Future Health Risk," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(1), pages 39-47.
    22. Gruenspecht, Howard K. & Lave, Lester B., 1989. "The economics of health, safety, and environmental regulation," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 26, pages 1507-1550, Elsevier.
    23. David Hensher & Nina Shore & Kenneth Train, 2005. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Water Service Attributes," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(4), pages 509-531, December.
    24. Jerry Hausman, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: From Dubious to Hopeless," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 43-56, Fall.
    25. Massarutto, Antonio & Ermano, Paolo, 2013. "Drowned in an inch of water," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 20-31.
    26. Alan Diener & Bernie O'Brien & Amiram Gafni, 1998. "Health care contingent valuation studies: a review and classification of the literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(4), pages 313-326, June.
    27. Orgill-Meyer, Jennifer & Jeuland, Marc & Albert, Jeff & Cutler, Nathan, 2018. "Comparing Contingent Valuation and Averting Expenditure Estimates of the Costs of Irregular Water Supply," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 250-264.
    28. Solomon Tarfasa & Roy Brouwer, 2013. "Estimation of the public benefits of urban water supply improvements in Ethiopia: a choice experiment," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(9), pages 1099-1108, March.
    29. Carvalho, Bruno & Rondon, Rodrigo & Marques, Rui Cunha, 2020. "Better utility regulation through RIA? Merits and implications based on the Brazilian case," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    30. Fredrik Carlsson, 2010. "Design of Stated Preference Surveys: Is There More to Learn from Behavioral Economics?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(2), pages 167-177, June.
    31. Eskesen, Anita, 2021. "A contract design perspective on balancing the goals of utility regulation," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    32. M. Genius & E. Hatzaki & E. Kouromichelaki & G. Kouvakis & S. Nikiforaki & K. Tsagarakis, 2008. "Evaluating Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Potable Water Quality and Quantity," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(12), pages 1825-1834, December.
    33. Kayaga, Sam & Calvert, John & Sansom, Kevin, 2003. "Paying for water services: effects of household characteristics," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 123-132, September.
    34. Charron, Nicholas & Rothstein, Bo, 2016. "Does education lead to higher generalized trust? The importance of quality of government," International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 59-73.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Koo, A Mi & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2022. "Household willingness to pay for a smart water metering and monitoring system: The case of South Korea," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).

    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. Gáfaro, Margarita & Mantilla, Cesar, 2021. "Environmental valuation using bargaining games: an application to water," OSF Preprints tcfyb, Center for Open Science.
    2. Zhang, Fan & Fogarty, James, 2015. "Nonmarket Valuation of Water Sensitive Cities: Current Knowledge and Issues," Working Papers 207694, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    3. Francesco Jacopo Pintus, 2023. "Valuing drinking water quality after a PFAS contamination event: results from a meta-analysis benefit transfer," "Marco Fanno" Working Papers 0308, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche "Marco Fanno".
    4. Zawojska, Ewa & Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Giergiczny, Marek, 2018. "Valuing tap water quality improvements using stated preference methods. Does the number of discrete choice options matter?," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274019, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    5. Veronesi, Marcella & Chawla, Fabienne & Maurer, Max & Lienert, Judit, 2014. "Climate change and the willingness to pay to reduce ecological and health risks from wastewater flooding in urban centers and the environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 1-10.
    6. Schläpfer, Felix & Getzner, Michael, 2020. "Beyond Current Guidelines: A Proposal for Bringing Behavioral Economics to the Design and Analysis of Stated Preference Surveys," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. Diriba Abdeta, 2022. "Households' willingness to pay for forest conservation in Ethiopia: A review," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(11), pages 437-451.
    8. Polyzou, E. & Jones, N. & Evangelinos, K.I. & Halvadakis, C.P., 2011. "Willingness to pay for drinking water quality improvement and the influence of social capital," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 74-80, February.
    9. Halkos, George E. & Jones, Nikoleta, 2012. "Modeling the effect of social factors on improving biodiversity protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 90-99.
    10. Aziz, Sonia & Pakhtigian, Emily L. & Akanda, Ali S. & Jutla, Antarpreet & Huq, Anwar & Alam, Munirul & Ashan, Gias U. & Colwell, Rita R., 2021. "Does improved risk information increase the value of cholera prevention? An analysis of stated vaccine demand in slum areas of urban Bangladesh," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    11. Levan Elbakidze & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2018. "The Adding-Up Test in an Incentivized Value Elicitation Mechanism: The Role of the Income Effect," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(3), pages 625-644, November.
    12. Krčál, Ondřej & Peer, Stefanie & Staněk, Rostislav & Karlínová, Bára, 2019. "Real consequences matter: Why hypothetical biases in the valuation of time persist even in controlled lab experiments," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 20(C).
    13. Groothuis, Peter A. & Cockerill, Kristan & Mohr, Tanga McDaniel, 2015. "Water does not flow up hill: determinants of willingness to pay for water conservation measures in the mountains of western North Carolina," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 88-95.
    14. Koo, A Mi & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2022. "Household willingness to pay for a smart water metering and monitoring system: The case of South Korea," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    15. Amoah, Anthony & Ferrini, Silvia & Schaafsma, Marije, 2019. "Electricity outages in Ghana: Are contingent valuation estimates valid?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    16. Hasan, Syed M. & Akram, Agha Ali & Jeuland, Marc, 2021. "Awareness of coping costs and willingness to pay for urban drinking water service: Evidence from Lahore, Pakistan," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    17. Jin, Yana & Andersson, Henrik & Zhang, Shiqiu, 2020. "Do preferences to reduce health risks related to air pollution depend on illness type? Evidence from a choice experiment in Beijing, China," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    18. Andersson, Henrik & Hole, Arne Risa & Svensson, Mikael, 2016. "Valuation of small and multiple health risks: A critical analysis of SP data applied to food and water safety," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 41-53.
    19. Jia Wang & Jiaoju Ge & Zhifeng Gao, 2018. "Consumers’ Preferences and Derived Willingness-to-Pay for Water Supply Safety Improvement: The Analysis of Pricing and Incentive Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-16, May.
    20. Mouter, Niek & Cabral, Manuel Ojeda & Dekker, Thijs & van Cranenburgh, Sander, 2019. "The value of travel time, noise pollution, recreation and biodiversity: A social choice valuation perspective," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).

    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:juipol:v:76:y:2022:i:c:s0957178722000200. 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: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/utilities-policy .

    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.