Willingness to pay for renewable electricity: A contingent valuation study in Beijing, China

Energy Policy

Volumn 68, Issue , 2014, Pages 340-347

  Guo, Xiurui ^a   Liu, Haifeng ^a   Mao, Xianqiang ^b   Jin, Jianjun ^b   Chen, Dongsheng ^a   Cheng, Shuiyuan ^a  

^a BEIJING UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (China)

^b BEIJING NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Contingent valuation method (CVM); Renewable electricity; Willingness to pay (WTP)

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; PUBLIC POLICY; SURVEYS;

CONSUMER PREFERENCES; CONTINGENT VALUATION METHODS; CONTINGENT VALUATIONS; ELECTRICITY CONSUMERS; ELECTRICITY-CONSUMPTION; ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS; RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

ELECTRICITY;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; CONTINGENT VALUATION; ELECTRICITY SUPPLY; QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY; RENEWABLE RESOURCE; RESIDENTIAL ENERGY; WILLINGNESS TO PAY;

BEIJING [CHINA]; CHINA;

EID: 84895524820     PISSN: 03014215     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.032     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bishop R., Heberlein A. Measuring values of extra market goods: are indirect measures biased. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1979, 61(5):926-930.
2. BMBS (Beijing Municipal Bureau of Statistic) Beijing Statistical Yearbook 2010 2011, China Statistical Press.
3. Champ P.A., Bishop R.C. Donation payment mechanisms and contingent valuation: an empirical study of hypothetical bias. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2001, 19:383-402.
4. Cummings R., Taylor L. Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: a cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method. Am. Econ. Rev. 1999, 89(3):649-665.
5. Duffield J., Patterson D. Inference and optimal design for a welfare measure in dichotomous choice contingent valuation. Land Econ. 1991, 67(2):225-239.
6. Haab T.C., McConnell K.E. Valuing environmental and natural resources. The Econometrics of Non-Market Valuation, Paperback Edition 2002, Edward Elgar, Northampton, MA.
7. Hanemann M. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1984, 66(3):332-341.
8. Hanemann M. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete response data: reply. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 1989, 71(4):1057-1061.
9. Hanemann M. Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. J. Econ. Perspect. 1994, 8(4):19-43.
10. Hite D., Duffy P., Bransby D., Slaton C., et al. Consumer willingness-to-pay for biopower: results from focus groups. Biomass Bioenergy 2008, 32:11-17.
11. Kim J., Park J., Kim H., Heo E. Assessment of Korean customers' willingness to pay with RPS. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16:695-703.
12. Koundouri P., Kountouris Y., Remoundou K. 2009. Valuing a wind farm construction: A contingent valuation study in Greece. Energy Policy 37, 1939-1944.
13. Labao Rex, Herminia Francisco, Dieldre Harder, Florence Ivy Santos Do colored photographs affect willingness to pay responses for endangered species conservation?. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2008, 40(2):251-264.
14. Lee Choong-Ki, Mjelde James W. Valuation of ecotourism resources using a contingent valuation method: the case of the Korean DMZ. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 63:511-520.
15. Liu W.L., Wang C., Arthur P.M. Rural public acceptance of renewable energy deployment: the case of Shandong in China. Appl. Energy 2013, 102:1187-1196.
16. Nomura N., Akai M. Willingness to pay for green electricity in Japan as estimated through contingent valuation method. Appl. Energy 2004, 78:453-463.
17. Pallab M., Vásquez William F., Achla M. Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA. Energy Econ. 2011, 33(6):1119-1126.
18. Poe G.L., Clark J.E., Rondeau D., Schulze W.D. Provision point mechanisms and field validity tests of contingent valuation. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2002, 23:105-131.
19. Wiser Ryan H. Using contingent valuation to explore willingness to pay for renewable energy: a comparison of collective and voluntary payment vehicles. Ecol. Econ. 2007, 62:419-432.
20. Solomon B.D., Johnson N.H. Valuing climate protection through willingness to pay for biomass ethanol. Ecol. Econ. 2009, 68:2137-2144.
21. Vossler C.A., Ethier R.G., Poe G.L., Welsh M.P. Payment certainty in discrete choice contingent valuation responses: results from a field validity test. South. Econ. J. 2003, 69(4):886-902.
22. Whitehead J.C., Cherry L.C. Willingness to pay for a Green Energy program: a comparison of ex-ante and ex-post hypothetical bias mitigation approaches. Resour. Energy Econ. 2007, 29:247-261.
23. Whittington D. Improving the performance of contingent valuation studies in developing countries. Environ. Resour. Econ. 2002, 22:323-367.
24. Yoo S.H., Kwak S.Y. Willingness to pay for green electricity in Korea: a contingent valuation study. Energy Policy 2009, 37:5408-5416.
25. Zhang L., Wu Y. Market segmentation and willingness to pay for green electricity among urban residents in China: the case of Jiangsu Province. Energy Policy 2012, 51:514-523.
26. Zhao J., Huang Q.Y. Incentive mechanism of developing renewable energy in Beijing. J. North China Electr. Power Univ. (Soc. Sci.) 2009, 1:21-25. (in Chinese).
27. Zografakis N., Sifaki E., Pagalou M., Nikitaki G., Psarakis V., Tsagarakis K.P. Assessment of public acceptance and willingness to pay for renewable energy sources in Crete. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010, 14(3):1088-1095.