IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v232y2019icp139-147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding demand for higher quality sanitation in peri-urban Lusaka, Zambia through stated and revealed preference analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Tidwell, James B.
  • Terris-Prestholt, Fern
  • Quaife, Matthew
  • Aunger, Robert

Abstract

Poor peri-urban sanitation is a significant public health problem, likely to become more important as the world rapidly urbanizes. However, little is known about the role of consumer demand in increasing peri-urban sanitation quality, especially for tenants using shared sanitation as only their rental choices can be observed in the market. We analyzed data on existing housing markets collected between 9 Jun and 6 Jul 2017 using the Hedonic Pricing Method (HPM) to capture the percentage of rent attributable to sanitation quality (n = 933). We also conducted discrete choice experiments (DCEs) to obtain willingness to pay (WTP) estimates for specific sanitation components (n = 1087), and explored the implications by estimating the proportion of plots for which improved sanitation quality would generate a higher return on investment for landlords than building a place for an additional tenant to live. The HPM attributed 18% of rental prices to sanitation (∼US$8.10 per month), but parameters for several components were poorly specified due to collinearity and low overall prevalence of some products. DCEs revealed that tenants were willing to pay $2.20 more rent per month for flushing toilets on plots with running water and $3.39 more per month for solid toilet doors, though they were willing to pay little for simple hole covers and had negative WTP for adding locks to doors (-$1.04). Solid doors and flushing toilets had higher rent increase to cost ratios than other ways landlords commonly invested in their plots, especially as the number of tenant households on a plot increased. DCEs yielded estimates generally consistent with and better specified than HPM and may be useful to estimate demand in other settings. Interventions leveraging landlords' profit motives could lead to significant improvements in peri-urban sanitation quality, reduced diarrheal disease transmission, and increased well-being without subsidies or infrastructure investments by government or NGOs.

Suggested Citation

  • Tidwell, James B. & Terris-Prestholt, Fern & Quaife, Matthew & Aunger, Robert, 2019. "Understanding demand for higher quality sanitation in peri-urban Lusaka, Zambia through stated and revealed preference analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 232(C), pages 139-147.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:232:y:2019:i:c:p:139-147
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.04.046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953619302552
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.04.046?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. Brueckner, Jan K., 2013. "Slums in developing countries: New evidence for Indonesia," Journal of Housing Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 278-290.
    2. Burt, Zachary & Njee, Robert M. & Mbatia, Yolanda & Msimbe, Veritas & Brown, Joe & Clasen, Thomas F. & Malebo, Hamisi M. & Ray, Isha, 2017. "User preferences and willingness to pay for safe drinking water: Experimental evidence from rural Tanzania," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 63-71.
    3. Carlsson, Fredrik & Martinsson, Peter, 2001. "Do Hypothetical and Actual Marginal Willingness to Pay Differ in Choice Experiments?: Application to the Valuation of the Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 179-192, March.
    4. James Murphy & P. Allen & Thomas Stevens & Darryl Weatherhead, 2005. "A Meta-analysis of Hypothetical Bias in Stated Preference Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(3), pages 313-325, March.
    5. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2008. "How are preferences revealed?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1787-1794, August.
    6. Evans, W.D. & Pattanayak, S.K. & Young, S. & Buszin, J. & Rai, S. & Bihm, Jasmine Wallace, 2014. "Social marketing of water and sanitation products: A systematic review of peer-reviewed literature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 18-25.
    7. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    8. Johansson-Stenman , Olof & Svedsäter, Henrik, 2003. "Self Image And Choice Experiments: Hypothetical And Actual Willingness To Pay," Working Papers in Economics 94, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    9. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:3:y:2004:i:6:p:1-13 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Santos, Andreia C. & Roberts, Jennifer A. & Barreto, Mauricio L. & Cairncross, Sandy, 2011. "Demand for sanitation in Salvador, Brazil: A hybrid choice approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(8), pages 1325-1332, April.
    11. Harrison, David Jr. & Rubinfeld, Daniel L., 1978. "The distribution of benefits from improvements in urban air quality," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 313-332, December.
    12. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "A comparison of approaches to estimating confidence intervals for willingness to pay measures," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(8), pages 827-840, August.
    13. Mir Anjum Altaf & Jeffrey A. Hughes, 1994. "Measuring the Demand for Improved Urban Sanitation Services: Results of a Contingent Valuation Study in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 31(10), pages 1763-1776, December.
    14. Eric Nazindigouba KERE & Johanna CHOUMERT & Amandine Loyal LARÉ-DONDARINI, 2014. "The impact of water and sanitation access on housing values: The case of Dapaong, Togo," Working Papers 201403, CERDI.
    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. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2008. "How are preferences revealed?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1787-1794, August.
    17. Amy J. Pickering & Habiba Djebbari & Carolina Lopez & Massa Coulibaly & Maria Laura Alzua, 2015. "Effect of a community-led sanitation intervention on child diarrhoea and child growth in rural Mali: a cluster-randomised controlled trial," Post-Print hal-01456117, HAL.
    18. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    19. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
    20. Rosen, Sherwin, 1974. "Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(1), pages 34-55, Jan.-Feb..
    21. Isacsson, Gunnar, 2007. "The trade off between time and money: Is there a difference between real and hypothetical choices?," Working Papers 2007:3, Swedish National Road & Transport Research Institute (VTI).
    22. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    23. Breusch, T S & Pagan, A R, 1979. "A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(5), pages 1287-1294, September.
    24. Cameron, Trudy Ann & Poe, Gregory L. & Ethier, Robert G. & Schulze, William D., 2002. "Alternative Non-market Value-Elicitation Methods: Are the Underlying Preferences the Same?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 391-425, November.
    25. Jerry Hausman, 2012. "Contingent Valuation: From Dubious to Hopeless," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 43-56, Fall.
    26. Sumila Gulyani & Ellen M. Bassett & Debabrata Talukdar, 2012. "Living Conditions, Rents, and Their Determinants in the Slums of Nairobi and Dakar," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 251-274.
    27. Caroline Berg & Céline Nauges, 2012. "The willingness to pay for access to piped water: a hedonic analysis of house prices in Southwest Sri Lanka," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 151-166, October.
    28. Matthew Quaife & Fern Terris-Prestholt & Gian Luca Di Tanna & Peter Vickerman, 2018. "How well do discrete choice experiments predict health choices? A systematic review and meta-analysis of external validity," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(8), pages 1053-1066, November.
    29. Barrington, D.J. & Sridharan, S. & Shields, K.F. & Saunders, S.G. & Souter, R.T. & Bartram, J., 2017. "Sanitation marketing: A systematic review and theoretical critique using the capability approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 128-134.
    30. Joseph Little & Robert Berrens, 2004. "Explaining Disparities between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values: Further Investigation Using Meta-Analysis," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(6), pages 1-13.
    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. Rachel Peletz & Clara MacLeod & Joan Kones & Edinah Samuel & Alicea Easthope-Frazer & Caroline Delaire & Ranjiv Khush, 2020. "When pits fill up: Supply and demand for safe pit-emptying services in Kisumu, Kenya," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-21, September.
    2. Rachel Peletz & Caroline Delaire & Joan Kones & Clara MacLeod & Edinah Samuel & Alicea Easthope-Frazer & Ranjiv Khush, 2021. "Will Households Invest in Safe Sanitation? Results from an Experimental Demand Trial in Nakuru, Kenya," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-16, April.
    3. Sipesihle Booi & Syden Mishi & Oddgeir Andersen, 2022. "Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Review of Provisioning and Cultural Ecosystem Services in Estuaries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-29, June.
    4. Sooriyakumar Krishnapillai & Linoja Sajanthan & Sivashankar Sivakumar, 2023. "Households’ willingness to pay for sustainable sanitation and wastewater management in Jaffna municipal area, Sri Lanka," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(2), pages 312-320, June.

    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. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. 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.
    3. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.
    4. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.
    5. Sooriyakumar Krishnapillai & Linoja Sajanthan & Sivashankar Sivakumar, 2023. "Households’ willingness to pay for sustainable sanitation and wastewater management in Jaffna municipal area, Sri Lanka," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 13(2), pages 312-320, June.
    6. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    7. Christian A. Vossler & Maurice Doyon & Daniel Rondeau, 2012. "Truth in Consequentiality: Theory and Field Evidence on Discrete Choice Experiments," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 145-171, November.
    8. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2019. "Reliability and Validity in Nonmarket Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(2), pages 559-582, February.
    9. Stefani, Gianluca & Scarpa, Riccardo & Lombardi, Ginevra V., 2014. "An addendum to: a meta-analysis of hypothethical bias in stated preference valuation," Bio-based and Applied Economics Journal, Italian Association of Agricultural and Applied Economics (AIEAA), vol. 3(2), pages 1-10, August.
    10. Lindhjem, Henrik, 2007. "20 years of stated preference valuation of non-timber benefits from Fennoscandian forests: A meta-analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 251-277, February.
    11. Mohammed H. Alemu & Søren B. Olsen, 2017. "Can a Repeated Opt-Out Reminder remove hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments? An application to consumer valuation of novel food products," IFRO Working Paper 2017/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    12. Buckell, John & Hess, Stephane, 2019. "Stubbing out hypothetical bias: improving tobacco market predictions by combining stated and revealed preference data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 93-102.
    13. Fifer, Simon & Rose, John M., 2016. "Can you ever be certain? Reducing hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments via respondent reported choice certaintyAuthor-Name: Beck, Matthew J," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 149-167.
    14. Schlapfer, Felix, 2008. "Contingent valuation: A new perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 729-740, February.
    15. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    16. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    17. Emmanouil Mentzakis & Jingjing Zhang, 2012. "An investigation of individual preferences: consistency across incentives and stability over time," ECON - Working Papers 070, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    18. Svensson, Mikael, 2006. "The Value of a Statistical Life in Sweden Estimates from Two Studies using the "Certainty Approach" Calibration," Working Papers 2006:6, Örebro University, School of Business, revised 12 May 2009.
    19. Stefan Eriksson & Per Johansson & Sophie Langenskiöld, 2017. "What is the right profile for getting a job? A stated choice experiment of the recruitment process," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 803-826, September.
    20. Menapace, Luisa & Raffaelli, Roberta, 2020. "Unraveling hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 416-430.

    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:socmed:v:232:y:2019:i:c:p:139-147. 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/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.