IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/waterr/v34y2020i12d10.1007_s11269-020-02653-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk, Drinking Water and Harmful Algal Blooms: A Contingent Valuation of Water Bans

Author

Listed:
  • Marie-Pier Schinck

    (HEC Montréal)

  • Chloé L’Ecuyer-Sauvageau

    (Université du Québec en Outaouais)

  • Justin Leroux

    (HEC Montréal)

  • Charlène Kermagoret

    (Université du Québec en Outaouais)

  • Jérôme Dupras

    (Université du Québec en Outaouais)

Abstract

Facilities using surface water to provide drinking water to communities must contend with the risk of cyanobacteria and cyanotoxin infiltration. Although risk management protocols can be put in place to anticipate the presence of cyanotoxins in concentrations exceeding guidelines, based on cyanobacterial cell count for example, this indicator is not infallible. The Canadian province of Quebec, among other jurisdictions, issues water bans when high concentrations of cyanotoxins are detected. While necessary, these bans are costly to communities. We perform a contingent valuation survey in areas at risk of being impacted by a water ban in the future to assess the preferences of residents and the economic value of detection and treatment tools that could eliminate cyanotoxins. The survey was completed by 240 people. Each respondent was asked a double-bounded dichotomous choice question. The scenario implied changes to the current situation regarding the possibility of predicting the presence of cyanotoxins in the facility, the average duration of water bans, the possibility of providing advance notice, all relative to the cost of these measures. The analysis of the survey responses allowed us to determine the willingness to pay (WTP) of households for diagnostic and treatment tools in drinking water facilities. Our analysis indicates that the mean WTP was $135 per household per year. Given that the experts developing the tools estimate the cost of implementation at $110 per household per year, our results suggest that implementation is economically viable.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie-Pier Schinck & Chloé L’Ecuyer-Sauvageau & Justin Leroux & Charlène Kermagoret & Jérôme Dupras, 2020. "Risk, Drinking Water and Harmful Algal Blooms: A Contingent Valuation of Water Bans," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(12), pages 3933-3947, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:waterr:v:34:y:2020:i:12:d:10.1007_s11269-020-02653-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s11269-020-02653-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11269-020-02653-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11269-020-02653-x?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. Alberini Anna, 1995. "Efficiency vs Bias of Willingness-to-Pay Estimates: Bivariate and Interval-Data Models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 169-180, September.
    2. 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.
    3. Van Houtven, George L. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Yang, Jui-Chen, 2017. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 126-135.
    4. Thomas G Poder & Jérôme Dupras & Franck Fetue Ndefo & Jie He, 2016. "The Economic Value of the Greater Montreal Blue Network (Quebec, Canada): A Contingent Choice Study Using Real Projects to Estimate Non-Market Aquatic Ecosystem Services Benefits," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-16, August.
    5. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    6. Richard Carson & Theodore Groves, 2007. "Incentive and informational properties of preference questions," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 37(1), pages 181-210, May.
    7. Lopez-Feldman, Alejandro, 2012. "Introduction to contingent valuation using Stata," MPRA Paper 41018, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Michael Hanemann & John Loomis & Barbara Kanninen, 1991. "Statistical Efficiency of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 73(4), pages 1255-1263.
    9. Jie He & Jérôme Dupras & Thomas G. Poder, 2017. "The value of wetlands in Quebec: a comparison between contingent valuation and choice experiment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 51-78, January.
    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. Olha Halytsia & Maria Vrachioli & Krzysztof Janik & Sławomir Sitek & Grzegorz Wojtal & Anne Imig & Arno Rein & Johannes Sauer, 2022. "Assessing Economic Feasibility of Managed Aquifer Recharge Schemes: Evidence from Cost-benefit Analysis in Poland," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 36(13), pages 5241-5258, October.
    2. Zhang, Jiarui & Phaneuf, Daniel J. & Schaeffer, Blake A., 2022. "Property values and cyanobacterial algal blooms: Evidence from satellite monitoring of Inland Lakes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    3. Paulino José García-Nieto & Esperanza García-Gonzalo & José Ramón Alonso Fernández & Cristina Díaz Muñiz, 2020. "A New Predictive Model for Evaluating Chlorophyll-a Concentration in Tanes Reservoir by Using a Gaussian Process Regression," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(15), pages 4921-4941, December.
    4. 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. Genius, Margarita & Strazzera, Elisabetta, 2011. "Can unbiased be tighter? Assessment of methods to reduce the bias-variance trade-off in WTP estimation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 293-314, January.
    2. M. Genius & E. Strazzera, 2005. "Modeling Elicitation effects in contingent valuation studies: a Monte Carlo Analysis of the bivariate approach," Working Paper CRENoS 200502, Centre for North South Economic Research, University of Cagliari and Sassari, Sardinia.
    3. Rihar, Miha & Hrovatin, Nevenka & Zoric, Jelena, 2015. "Household valuation of smart-home functionalities in Slovenia," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 42-53.
    4. Deutschmann, Joshua W. & Postepska, Agnieszka & Sarr, Leopold, 2021. "Measuring willingness to pay for reliable electricity: Evidence from Senegal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    5. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Meles, Tensay Hadush, 2020. "Impact of power outages on households in developing countries: Evidence from Ethiopia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    7. Dahal, Ram P. & Grala, Robert K. & Gordon, Jason S. & Petrolia, Daniel R. & Munn, Ian A., 2018. "Estimating the willingness to pay to preserve waterfront open spaces using contingent valuation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 614-626.
    8. Henrik Andersson & James K. Hammitt & Kristian Sundström, 2015. "Willingness to Pay and QALYs: What Can We Learn about Valuing Foodborne Risk?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 727-752, September.
    9. Gelo, Dambala & Koch, Steven F., 2015. "Contingent valuation of community forestry programs in Ethiopia: Controlling for preference anomalies in double-bounded CVM," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 79-89.
    10. Rodrigo Abed & Haroon Sseguya & James Flock & Silvanus Mruma & Hamisi Mwango, 2020. "An Evolving Agricultural Extension Model for Lasting Impact: How Willing Are Tanzanian Farmers to Pay for Extension Services?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-13, October.
    11. Jie He & Jérôme Dupras & Franck Ndefo & Thomas Poder, 2020. "Payment and provision consequentiality in voluntary contribution mechanism: separate or joint effects?," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 11-36, April.
    12. Jose-Luis Pinto-Prades & Veronica Farreras & Jaime de Bobadilla, 2008. "Willingness to pay for a reduction in mortality risk after a myocardial infarction: an application of the contingent valuation method to the case of eplerenone," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(1), pages 69-78, February.
    13. Timothy C. Haab & Matthew G. Interis & Daniel R. Petrolia & John C. Whitehead, 2013. "From Hopeless to Curious? Thoughts on Hausman's "Dubious to Hopeless" Critique of Contingent Valuation," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 35(4), pages 593-612.
    14. Tanvir Pavel & Pallab Mozumder, 2019. "Household Preferences for Managing Coastal Vulnerability: State vs. Federal Adaptation Fund," Economics of Disasters and Climate Change, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 281-304, October.
    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. Fabio Zagonari, 2013. "Implementing a trans-boundary flood risk management plan: a method for determining willingness to cooperate and case study for the Scheldt estuary," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 66(2), pages 1101-1133, March.
    17. Richard Carson & Jordan Louviere, 2011. "A Common Nomenclature for Stated Preference Elicitation Approaches," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 49(4), pages 539-559, August.
    18. Ghanem, Samar & Ferrini, Silvia & Di Maria, Corrado, 2023. "Air pollution and willingness to pay for health risk reductions in Egypt: A contingent valuation survey of Greater Cairo and Alexandria households," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    19. Sardana, Kavita, 2019. "Tourists' Willingness to Pay for Restoration of Traditional Agro-forest Ecosystems Providing Biodiversity: Evidence from India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 362-372.
    20. Fooks, Jacob R. & Messer, Kent D. & Duke, Joshua M. & Johnson, Janet B. & Parsons, George R., 2017. "Continuous attribute values in a simulation environment: Offshore energy production and Mid-Atlantic beach visitation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 288-302.

    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:spr:waterr:v:34:y:2020:i:12:d:10.1007_s11269-020-02653-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.