IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i18p5053-d267665.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Acceptability of Flood Management Strategies under Climate Change Using Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)

Author

Listed:
  • Fatemeh Fadia Maghsood

    (Department of Watershed Management Engineering, College of Natural Resources, Tarbiat Modares University, Noor 46414-356, Iran
    Centre for Middle Eastern Studies & Department of Water Resources Engineering, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Hamidreza Moradi

    (Department of Watershed Management Engineering, College of Natural Resources, Tarbiat Modares University, Noor 46414-356, Iran)

  • Ronny Berndtsson

    (Centre for Middle Eastern Studies & Department of Water Resources Engineering, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Mostafa Panahi

    (Department of Environmental Economics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran 1477893855, Iran)

  • Alireza Daneshi

    (Department of Watershed Management Sciences and Engineering, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan 4918943464, Iran)

  • Hossein Hashemi

    (Centre for Middle Eastern Studies & Department of Water Resources Engineering, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Ali Reza Massah Bavani

    (Department of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, Aburaihan Campus, University of Tehran, Tehran 3391653755, Iran)

Abstract

Floods are natural hazards with serious impact on many aspects of human life. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reported that climate change already has significant impact on magnitude and frequency of flood events worldwide. Thus, it is suggested to adopt strategies to manage damage impacts of climate change. For this, involving the local community in the decision-making process, as well as experts and decision-makers, is essential. We focused on assessing the social acceptability of flood management strategies under climate change through a socio-hydrological approach using the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM). For this purpose as well, hydro-climate modelling and the Analytical Network Process (ANP) were used. Among twelve investigated flood management strategies, “river restoration”, “agricultural management and planning”, and “watershed management” were the publicly most accepted strategies. Assessment of the social acceptability of these three strategies was carried out by use of the CVM and Willingness to Pay (WTP) methodology. Generally, 50%, 38%, and 18% were willing to pay and 44%, 48%, and 52% were willing to contribute flood management strategy in zones 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Overall, peoples’ WTP for flood management strategies decreased with increasing distance from the river. Among different investigated dependent variables, household income had the highest influence on WTP.

Suggested Citation

  • Fatemeh Fadia Maghsood & Hamidreza Moradi & Ronny Berndtsson & Mostafa Panahi & Alireza Daneshi & Hossein Hashemi & Ali Reza Massah Bavani, 2019. "Social Acceptability of Flood Management Strategies under Climate Change Using Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:5053-:d:267665
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/5053/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/18/5053/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Meilan Jin & Yuxian Juan & Youngjoon Choi & Choong-Ki Lee, 2019. "Estimating the Preservation Value of World Heritage Site Using Contingent Valuation Method: The Case of the Li River, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-14, February.
    2. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2006. "Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-33987-0, September.
    3. Carraro, Carlo & Sgobbi, Alessandra, 2008. "Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Strategies In Italy. An Economic Assessment," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 6373, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    4. Gracia, Azucena & de Magistris, Tiziana, 2008. "The demand for organic foods in the South of Italy: A discrete choice model," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 386-396, October.
    5. Thomas L. Saaty, 2006. "The Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process, chapter 0, pages 1-26, Springer.
    6. Samuel Fankhauser, 2010. "The costs of adaptation," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 23-30, January.
    7. John W. Duffield & David A. Patterson, 1991. "Inference and Optimal Design for a Welfare Measure in Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(2), pages 225-239.
    8. V. Markantonis & V. Meyer & N. Lienhoop, 2013. "Evaluation of the environmental impacts of extreme floods in the Evros River basin using Contingent Valuation Method," 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. 69(3), pages 1535-1549, December.
    9. Vassilis Markantonis & Kostas Bithas, 2010. "The application of the contingent valuation method in estimating the climate change mitigation and adaptation policies in Greece. An expert-based approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 807-824, October.
    10. Nicolas Verlynde & Louinord Voltaire & Philippe Chagnon, 2019. "Exploring the link between flood risk perception and public support for funding on flood mitigation policies," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 62(13), pages 2330-2351, November.
    11. Amigues, Jean-Pierre & Boulatoff (Broadhead), Catherine & Desaigues, Brigitte & Gauthier, Caroline & Keith, John E., 2002. "The benefits and costs of riparian analysis habitat preservation: a willingness to accept/willingness to pay contingent valuation approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 17-31, November.
    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. Mustafa Hakkı Aydoğdu & Mehmet Reşit Sevinç & Mehmet Cançelik & Hatice Parlakçı Doğan & Zeliha Şahin, 2020. "Determination of Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Sustainable Agricultural Land Use in the GAP-Harran Plain of Turkey," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Hatice Parlakçı Doğan & Mustafa Hakkı Aydoğdu & Mehmet Reşit Sevinç & Mehmet Cançelik, 2020. "Farmers’ Willingness to Pay for Services to Ensure Sustainable Agricultural Income in the GAP-Harran Plain, Şanlıurfa, Turkey," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-16, May.
    3. Wan-Jiun Chen & Jihn-Fa Jan & Chih-Hsin Chung & Shyue-Cherng Liaw, 2023. "Do Eco-Based Adaptation Measures Enhance Ecosystem Adaptation Services? Economic Evidence from a Study of Hillside Forests in a Fragile Watershed in Northeastern Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-17, June.
    4. Caiubi Emanuel Souza Kuhn & Fábio Augusto Gomes Vieira Reis & Christiane Zarfl & Peter Grathwohl, 2023. "Ravines and gullies, a review about impact valuation," 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. 117(1), pages 597-624, May.

    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. Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili & Elio Padoano & Antonella Longo & Antonio Ficarella, 2022. "The Risky-Opportunity Analysis Method (ROAM) to Support Risk-Based Decisions in a Case-Study of Critical Infrastructure Digitization," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-22, February.
    2. Ester Guijarro & Cristina Santadreu-Mascarell & Beatriz Blasco-Gallego & Lourdes Canós-Darós & Eugenia Babiloni, 2021. "On the Identification of the Key Factors for a Successful Use of Twitter as a Medium from a Social Marketing Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-15, June.
    3. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh & Asil Oztekin & Joseph Ekong & Ali Dag, 2019. "Measuring the efficiency of hospitals: a fully-ranking DEA–FAHP approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 278(1), pages 361-378, July.
    4. Clara Champalle & James D. Ford & Mya Sherman, 2015. "Prioritizing Climate Change Adaptations in Canadian Arctic Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-25, July.
    5. Afsaneh Afzali & Soheil Sabri & M. Rashid & Jamal Mohammad Vali Samani & Ahmad Ludin, 2014. "Inter-Municipal Landfill Site Selection Using Analytic Network Process," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(8), pages 2179-2194, June.
    6. Baffoe, Gideon, 2019. "Exploring the utility of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in ranking livelihood activities for effective and sustainable rural development interventions in developing countries," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 197-204.
    7. Sedigheh Meimandi Parizi & Mohammad Taleai & Ayyoob Sharifi, 2022. "A GIS-Based Multi-Criteria Analysis Framework to Evaluate Urban Physical Resilience against Earthquakes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-31, April.
    8. Nikola Kadoić & Nina Begičević Ređep & Blaženka Divjak, 2018. "A new method for strategic decision-making in higher education," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(3), pages 611-628, September.
    9. Chi-Yo Huang & Pei-Han Chung & Joseph Z. Shyu & Yao-Hua Ho & Chao-Hsin Wu & Ming-Che Lee & Ming-Jenn Wu, 2018. "Evaluation and Selection of Materials for Particulate Matter MEMS Sensors by Using Hybrid MCDM Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-35, September.
    10. Oryani, Bahareh & Koo, Yoonmo & Rezania, Shahabaldin & Shafiee, Afsaneh, 2021. "Barriers to renewable energy technologies penetration: Perspective in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 971-983.
    11. Ravi Kumar Gedela & K. Krishna Mohan & V. Kamakshi Prasad, 2018. "Application of BOCR models in service oriented architecture (SOA): study on model validation through quantification for QoS considerations," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 9(6), pages 1346-1354, December.
    12. Roberto Cervelló-Royo & Marina Segura & Regina García-Pérez & Baldomero Segura-García del Río, 2021. "An Analysis of Preferences in Housing Demand by Means of a Multicriteria Methodology (AHP). A More Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    13. Jing-Wei Liu & Che-Wei Chang & Yao-Ji Wang & Yi-Hui Liu, 2022. "Constructing a Decision Model for Health Club Members to Purchase Coaching Programs during the COVID-19 Epidemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-13, October.
    14. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2022. "A Strategic Approach for Promoting Sustainable Crowdshipping in Last-Mile Deliveries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-17, October.
    15. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh & Kazim Topuz & Ali Dag & Asil Oztekin, 2019. "An AHP-IFT Integrated Model for Performance Evaluation of E-Commerce Web Sites," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 21(6), pages 1345-1355, December.
    16. Starr, Morgan & Joshi, Omkar & Will, Rodney E. & Zou, Chris B., 2019. "Perceptions regarding active management of the Cross-timbers forest resources of Oklahoma, Texas, and Kansas: A SWOT-ANP analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 523-530.
    17. Kuliš Marija Šiško, 2020. "Selection of Project Managers: An Overview," Business Systems Research, Sciendo, vol. 11(2), pages 99-116, October.
    18. J. Hummel & John Bridges & Maarten IJzerman, 2014. "Group Decision Making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process in Benefit-Risk Assessment: A Tutorial," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(2), pages 129-140, June.
    19. Thomas Saaty & Luis Vargas, 2012. "The possibility of group choice: pairwise comparisons and merging functions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(3), pages 481-496, March.
    20. Shahid Rasheed & ChangFeng Wang & Bruno Lucena, 2015. "Risk Leveling in Program Environments—A Structured Approach for Program Risk Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-24, May.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:18:p:5053-:d:267665. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.