IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/pume6_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Willingness-to-pay for reducing air pollution in the world’ most dynamic cities: Evidence from Hanoi, Vietnam

Author

Listed:
  • Khuc, Van Quy

Abstract

To be considered one of the most dynamic cities in the world, Hanoi, the capital of Vietnam, has been facing an increasingly extreme environmental pollution. For example, in 2019, Hanoi ranked the world’s seventh most polluted capital city, which has raised serious concerns about the detrimental impacts on living environment and health of urban citizens. This study aims to examine how well urban citizens perceive, how well they take action to mitigate it, and how ready they are to contribute to reducing air pollution. A stratified sampling technique coupled with a contingent valuation and a face-to-face interview method was employed to survey 475 inhabitants who live in Hanoi, the capital of Vietnam. The results show that over two-thirds of the inhabitants surveyed are willing to pay for air environment funds and the mean value of WTP is from approximately 122.9 to 123.5 thousand VND per household per month. WTP is associated with a set of endogenous and exogenous factors including age group, level of current air pollution, income, and awareness towards environmental protection solutions. Our results reveal that urban citizens well learn about air pollution and they have a real and strong demand for reducing air pollution, which could help design a desirable policy and or solutions for improving air quality.

Suggested Citation

  • Khuc, Van Quy, 2020. "Willingness-to-pay for reducing air pollution in the world’ most dynamic cities: Evidence from Hanoi, Vietnam," OSF Preprints pume6_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:pume6_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/pume6_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5fb16ec077aa6500ac94e4a8/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/pume6_v1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Viet-Phuong La & Thanh-Hang Pham & Manh-Toan Ho & Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Khanh-Linh P. Nguyen & Thu-Trang Vuong & Hong-Kong T. Nguyen & Trung Tran & Quy Khuc & Manh-Tung Ho & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2020. "Policy Response, Social Media and Science Journalism for the Sustainability of the Public Health System Amid the COVID-19 Outbreak: The Vietnam Lessons," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-27, April.
    2. Whittington, Dale & Lauria, Donald T. & Mu, Xinming, 1991. "A study of water vending and willingness to pay for water in Onitsha, Nigeria," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 19(2-3), pages 179-198.
    3. James Hammitt & Ying Zhou, 2006. "The Economic Value of Air-Pollution-Related Health Risks in China: A Contingent Valuation Study," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 33(3), pages 399-423, March.
    4. Miu, Luciana & Hawkes, Adam D., 2020. "Private landlords and energy efficiency: Evidence for policymakers from a large-scale study in the United Kingdom," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    5. Koichiro Ito & Shuang Zhang, 2020. "Willingness to Pay for Clean Air: Evidence from Air Purifier Markets in China," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(5), pages 1627-1672.
    6. 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.
    7. Sun, Chuanwang & Yuan, Xiang & Yao, Xin, 2016. "Social acceptance towards the air pollution in China: Evidence from public's willingness to pay for smog mitigation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 313-324.
    8. Jiří Balcar & Veronika Hedija, 2019. "Influence of female managers on gender wage gap and returns to cognitive and non‐cognitive skills," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 722-737, June.
    9. Pier Mannuccio Mannucci & Massimo Franchini, 2017. "Health Effects of Ambient Air Pollution in Developing Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-8, September.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. J. Price & D. Dupont & W. Adamowicz, 2017. "As Time Goes By: Examination of Temporal Stability Across Stated Preference Question Formats," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 68(3), pages 643-662, November.
    13. Sujitra Vassanadumrongdee & Shunji Matsuoka, 2005. "Risk Perceptions and Value of a Statistical Life for Air Pollution and Traffic Accidents: Evidence from Bangkok, Thailand," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 261-287, May.
    14. Shao, Shuai & Tian, Zhihua & Fan, Meiting, 2018. "Do the rich have stronger willingness to pay for environmental protection? New evidence from a survey in China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 83-94.
    15. Vivien Foster & Susana Mourato, 2003. "Elicitation Format and Sensitivity to Scope," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 24(2), pages 141-160, February.
    16. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    17. Stevens, T. H. & Belkner, R. & Dennis, D. & Kittredge, D. & Willis, C., 2000. "Comparison of contingent valuation and conjoint analysis in ecosystem management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 63-74, January.
    18. Gary S. Becker, 1981. "A Treatise on the Family," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number beck81-1, February.
    19. Elisabetta Strazzera & Riccardo Scarpa & Pinuccia Calia & Guy Garrod & Kenneth Willis, 2003. "Modelling zero values and protest responses in contingent valuation surveys," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 133-138.
    20. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Le, Hoa Thu & Nguyen, Hang Dieu & Le, Thanh Ha & Nguyen, Hong Quang, 2021. "Estimating economic benefits associated with air quality improvements in Hanoi City: An application of a choice experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 420-433.
    21. 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.
    22. Christie, Mike & Hanley, Nick & Warren, John & Murphy, Kevin & Wright, Robert & Hyde, Tony, 2006. "Valuing the diversity of biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 304-317, June.
    23. J. Lelieveld & J. S. Evans & M. Fnais & D. Giannadaki & A. Pozzer, 2015. "The contribution of outdoor air pollution sources to premature mortality on a global scale," Nature, Nature, vol. 525(7569), pages 367-371, September.
    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. Khuc, Quy Van & Nong, Duy & Phu Vu, Tri, 2022. "To pay or not to pay that is the question - for air pollution mitigation in a world’s dynamic city: An experiment in Hanoi, Vietnam," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 687-701.
    2. Patrick Lloyd-Smith & Ewa Zawojska & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2020. "Moving beyond the Contingent Valuation versus Choice Experiment Debate: Presentation Effects in Stated Preference," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 96(1), pages 1-24.
    3. Jagoda Adamus, 2023. "How Much Are Public Spaces Worth? Non-Market Valuation Methods in Valuing Public Spaces," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 2, pages 66-89.
    4. Quan-Hoang Vuong & Tri Vu Phu & Tuyet-Anh T. Le & Quy Van Khuc, 2021. "Exploring Inner-City Residents’ and Foreigners’ Commitment to Improving Air Pollution: Evidence from a Field Survey in Hanoi, Vietnam," Data, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-13, April.
    5. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Le, Hoa Thu & Nguyen, Hang Dieu & Le, Thanh Ha & Nguyen, Hong Quang, 2021. "Estimating economic benefits associated with air quality improvements in Hanoi City: An application of a choice experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 420-433.
    8. 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.
    9. Oviedo, José L. & Caparrós, Alejandro, 2015. "Information and visual attention in contingent valuation and choice modeling: field and eye-tracking experiments applied to reforestations in Spain," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 185-204.
    10. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2001. "Logit Models For Pooled Contingent Valuation And Contingent Rating And Ranking Data: Valuing Benefits From Forest Biodiversity Conservation," 2001 Annual meeting, August 5-8, Chicago, IL 20616, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. Jin, Jianjun & He, Rui & Wang, Wenyu & Gong, Haozhou, 2018. "Valuing cultivated land protection: A contingent valuation and choice experiment study in China," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 214-219.
    12. Yao, Richard T. & Scarpa, Riccardo & Turner, James A. & Barnard, Tim D. & Rose, John M. & Palma, João H.N. & Harrison, Duncan R., 2014. "Valuing biodiversity enhancement in New Zealand's planted forests: Socioeconomic and spatial determinants of willingness-to-pay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 90-101.
    13. Balmford, Ben & Bateman, Ian J. & Bolt, Katherine & Day, Brett & Ferrini, Silvia, 2019. "The value of statistical life for adults and children: Comparisons of the contingent valuation and chained approaches," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 68-84.
    14. Jesús Barreiro-Hurlé & José Gómez-Limón, 2008. "Reconsidering Heterogeneity and Aggregation Issues in Environmental Valuation: A Multi-attribute Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 551-570, August.
    15. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2006. "Discrete Choice Survey Experiments: A Comparison Using Flexible Models," RFF Working Paper Series dp-05-60, Resources for the Future.
    16. F Alpizar & F Carlsson & P Martinsson, 2003. "Using Choice Experiments for Non-Market Valuation," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 8(1), pages 83-110, March.
    17. Siikamaki, Juha & Layton, David F., 2007. "Discrete choice survey experiments: A comparison using flexible methods," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 122-139, January.
    18. Boyle, Kevin J. & Morrison, Mark & Taylor, Laura O., 2004. "Why Value Estimates Generated Using Choice Modelling Exceed Contingent Valuation: Further Experimental Evidence," 2004 Conference (48th), February 11-13, 2004, Melbourne, Australia 58370, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    19. Ouyang, Xiaoling & Zhuang, Wuxu & Sun, Chuanwang, 2019. "Haze, health, and income: An integrated model for willingness to pay for haze mitigation in Shanghai, China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    20. Tran Tuan & Stale Navrud, 2007. "Valuing cultural heritage in developing countries: comparing and pooling contingent valuation and choice modelling estimates," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 51-69, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:osfxxx:pume6_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.