Willingness to pay for waste management improvement in Dhaka city, Bangladesh

Journal of Environmental Management

Volumn 90, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 492-503

  Afroz, Rafia ^a   Hanaki, Keisuke ^a   Hasegawa Kurisu, Kiyo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

Author keywords

Attitude towards waste management; Contingent valuation method; Marginal willingness to pay; Response rate of the respondents; Socio economic characteristics; Waste collection services

Indexed keywords

CONTINGENT VALUATION; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; ESTIMATION METHOD; SOCIOECONOMIC CONDITIONS; WASTE MANAGEMENT; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BANGLADESH; CONTINGENT VALUATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; EMPLOYMENT STATUS; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; FEMALE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; NORMAL HUMAN; PROSPECTIVE PAYMENT; QUESTIONNAIRE; RECYCLING; RELIGION; SEX DIFFERENCE; SOCIAL STATUS; SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT; WASTE DISPOSAL; WASTE MANAGEMENT;

ASIA; BANGLADESH; DHAKA [BANGLADESH]; EURASIA; SOUTH ASIA;

EID: 55249126411     PISSN: 03014797     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.12.012     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Adamowicz W., Louviere J., and Williams M. Combining revealed and stated preference methods for valuing environmental amenities. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 26 (1994) 271-292
2. Alberini A. Optimal designs for discrete choice contingent valuation surveys. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 28 (1995) 287-306
3. Altaf A., and Deshazo J.R. Demand for solid waste management: a case study of Gujrawala, Pakistan. World Development 24 (1996) 857-868
4. BBS, Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 1999. Population Census 1991.
5. BBS, Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, 2003. Population Census 2001.
6. Basli M., Matteo M.D., and Ferrini S. Analyzing demand for environmental quality: a willingness to pay/accept study in the province of Siena (Italy). Waste Management. 26 (2006) 209-219
7. Bishop R.C., and Romano D. Environmental Resource Valuation: Application of the Contingent Valuation Method in Italy (1998), Kluwer Academic Publisher, The Netherlands
8. Caplan A.J., Grijalva T.C., and Jakus P.M. Waste not or want not? A contingent ranking analysis of curbside waste disposal options. Ecological Economics 43 (2002) 185-197
9. Carson, R.T., Mitchell, R.C., Hanemann, W.H., Kopp, R.J., Presser, S., Ruud, P.A., 1992. A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting from the Exxon Valdez Oil pill, Report to the Attorney General of the State of Alaska, Anchorage.
10. Carson R.T., Flores N.E., Martin K.M., and Wright J.L. Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods. Land Economics 72 (1996) 80-99
11. Carson R., Flores N., and Meade N.F. Contingent valuation: controversies and evidence. Environmental and Resource Economics 19 (2001) 173-210
12. Cooper J. Optimal bid selection for dichotomous choice contingent valuation surveys. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 24 (1993) 25-40
13. Czaja R., and Blair J. Designing Survey: A Guide to Decisions and Procedures (1996), Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks, CA
14. Danso G., Drechsel P., Failor S., and Giordan M. Estimating the demand for municipal waste compost via farmers' willingness to pay in Ghana. Waste Management 26 (2006) 1400-1409
15. DCC, Dhaka City Corporation. 2005. Clean Dhaka Master Plan: the Study on the Solid Waste Management in Dhaka City, Final Report.
16. Dijkgraaf E., and Gradus R.H.J.M. Cost savings of contracting refuse collection. Empirica 30 (2003) 149-161
17. Foo T.S. Recycling of domestic waste: early experience in Singapore. Habitat International 21 (1997) 277-289
18. Fullerton D., and Kinnaman T.C. Household responses to pricing garbage by the bag. American Economic Review 86 (1996) 971-974
19. Greene W.H. Econometric Analysis. fourth ed (2000), Prentice Hall, New Jersey
20. Greene W.H. LIMDEP Version 8.0, Econometric Modeling Guide (2002), Econometric Software Inc., NY
21. Hanley N., MacMillan D., Wright R., Bullock C., Simpson I., Parsisson D., and Crabtree B. Contingent valuation versus choice experiments: estimating the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas in Scotland. Journal of Agricultural Economics 49 (1998) 1-15
22. Hanemann W.M. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete response data. Reply. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 71 (1989) 1057-1061
23. Hanemann M.W. Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: how much can they differ?. American Economic Review 81 (1991) 635-647
24. Hanemann W.M., and Kanninen B. The Statistical Analysis of Discrete Response CV Data. Working Paper 798 (1998), Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Berkeley, CA
25. Imber, D., Stevenson, G. and Wilks, L., 1993, A Contingent Valuation Survey of the Kakadu Conservation Zone, vol. 1, Reprint, RAC Research Paper No. 3, Resource Assessment Commission, Canberra.
26. Jin J., Wang Z., and Ran S. Estimating the public preferences for solid waste management programs using choice experiments in Macao. Waste Management Research 24 (2006) 301-309
27. Kassim S.M., and Ali M. Solid waste collection by the private sector: households' perspective - findings from a study in Dar er Salaam City, Tanzania. Habitat International 30 (2006) 769-780
28. Kealy M.J., Montgomery M., and Dovidio J.F. Reliability and predictive validity of contingent values: does the nature of the good matter?. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 19 (1990) 244-263
29. Louviere J.J., Hensher D.A., and Swat J.D. Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Application (2000), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
30. Linderhof V., Kooreman P., Allers M., and Wiersma D. Weight based pricing in the collection of household waste: the Oostzaan Case. Resource and Energy Economics 23 (2001) 359-371
31. Marchand, R., 1998. Marketing of solid waste management services in Tingloy, the Philippines. UWEP Working Document 9.
32. McConell, K., 1995. Issues in Estimating Benefits with Non-Market Methods. Inter American Development Bank. Working Paper Series No. 308.
33. Mcfadden D. Conditional Logit Analysis of Qualitative Choice Behaviour. In: Zarembka P. (Ed). Frontiers in Econometrics (1974), Academic Press, New York
34. Mitchell R., and Carson T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method (1989), Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
35. Morrison, M.D., Bennett, J.W., Blamey, R.K., 1998. Valuing improved wetland quality using choice modelling. Research report no. 6 April 1998.
36. Nilanthi J.G.J.B., Patrick J.A., Hettiaratchi S.C., and Pilapiiya S. Relation of waste generation and composition to socio-economic factors: a case study. Journal of Environmental Monitoring Assessment 135 (2007) 31-39
37. Othman J. Estimating Public Preferences for Waste Management in Malaysia (2002), EEPSA
38. Salequzzaman M., Awal M., and Alam M. Willingness to Pay: Community Based Solid Waste Management and its Sustainability in Bangladesh. Proceedings of the International Conference 'The Future is Here', 15-19 January 2001 (2001), RMIT, Melbourne, Victoria. http://www.mesa.edu.au/aaee_conf/Salequzzaman_Awal-Alam.PDF (accessed 24.11.02.)
39. Sarantakos S. Social Research. second ed. (1998), MacMillan Publishers, Australia, South Yarra
40. Snigdha C. Economics of Solid Waste Management: A Survey of Existing Literature (2003). http://www.isical.ac.in/eru/2003-11pdf (accessed 01.08.04.)
41. Wilks L. A Survey of the Contingent Valuation Method (1990), Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra