Willingness of farmers to pay for reclaimed wastewater in Jordan and Tunisia

Water Science and Technology: Water Supply

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 115-122

  Abu Madi, M ^a   Braadbaart, O ^a   Al Sa'ed, R ^a   Alaerts, G ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Acceptance from farmers; Irrigated agriculture; Reclaimed wastewater; Willingness to pay

Indexed keywords

CORRELATION METHODS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; WASTEWATER RECLAMATION;

WATER SCARCITY;

WASTEWATER;

FRESH WATER;

FARMERS ATTITUDE; IRRIGATION; RECYCLING; WASTEWATER; WATER TREATMENT; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

AGRICULTURAL WORKER; ATTITUDE; CONFERENCE PAPER; COST; HUMAN; IRRIGATION (AGRICULTURE); JORDAN; NORMAL HUMAN; PROFIT; QUESTIONNAIRE; TUNISIA; WASTE WATER RECYCLING; WATER DEFICIT; WATER QUALITY;

JORDAN; TUNISIA;

EID: 0042884200     PISSN: 16069749     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2166/ws.2003.0052     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Ahmad, M. (2000). Water pricing and markets in the Near East: Policy issues and options. Wat. Policy, 2, 229-242.
2. Alberdini, A. (1995). Efficiency vs. bias of willingness-to-pay estimates: Bivariate and interval-data models. J. Env. Econ. and Manag., 29, 169-180.
3. Al-Hamdi, M. (2001). Competition for Scarce Groundwater in Sana'a Plain, Yemen: A Study on the Incentives System for Urban and Agricultural Water Use. Ph.D. Thesis, IHE-Delft, The Netherlands.
4. Angelakis, A., Marecos, M., Bontoux, L. and Asano, T. (1999). The status of wastewater reuse practice in the Mediterranean basin: Need for guidelines. Wat. Res., 33(10), 2201-2217.
5. Ardila, S., Ricardo, Q. and Vaughan, W. (1998). A review of the use of contingent valuation methods in project analysis. Env. Division, Working Paper No. ENV-126. Inter-American Development Bank. Washington DC., USA.
6. Bahri, A. and Brissaud, F. (1996). Wastewater reuse in Tunisia: assessing a national policy. Wat. Sci. Tech., 33(10-11), 87-94.
7. Cooper, J. (1993). Optimal bid selection for dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys. J. Env. Econ. and Manag., 24, 25-40.
8. Creel, M. (1998). A note on estimation of mean WTP using a misspecified logit contingent valuation model. J. Env. Econ. and Manag., 35(3), 277-284.
9. Emre, A., David, C., Charles, M. and Vladimir, N. (2002). Application of benefit transfer with contingent valuation method to the root river watershed. Technical Report No 12. May 2002. Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
10. Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R. and Black, W. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis. 5th edition. Prentice-Hall International, USA.
11. Hanely, N., Wright, R. and Mourato, S. (2001). Choice modeling approaches: A superior alternative for environmental valuation. J. Econ. Survey, 15(3).
12. Hanemann, M. and Kanninen, B. (1996). The Statistical Analysis of Discrete-response CV Data. Working Paper 794, Dept. of Agriculture and Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley.
13. Johansson, M. (1999). Economics without Markets: Four Papers on Contingent Valuation and Stated Preference Methods. Department of Economics, Umea University, Umea. Borlange.
14. Maddala, G. S. (1983). Limited-dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. New York, Cambridge University Press, NY, USA.
15. Menard, S. (1995). Applied Logistic Regression Analysis. Sage Publications. Series: Quantitative applications in the social sciences, No. 106.
16. Mills, R. and Asano, T. (1996). A retrospective assessment of water reclamation projects. Wat. Sci. Tech., 33(10-11), 59-70.
17. Sanz, L. (1999). Irrigated agriculture in the Guadian river high basin (Castilla-La Mancha, Spain): Environmental and socioeconomic impacts. Agric. Wat. Manag., 40, 171-181.
18. Snell, M. (1997). Cost-benefit Analysis for Engineers and Planners. Thomas Telford Publications, London, UK.
19. Vaughan, W., Russell, C., Rodriguez, D. and Darling, A. (1999). Willingness to Pay: Referendum Contingent Valuation and Uncertain Project Benefits. Inter-American Development Bank. Washington, D.C.
20. Whittington, D. (1998). Administering contingent valuation surveys in developing countries. Elsevier Science Ltd., UK, World Development, 26(1) 21-30.