IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/23143.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Household Demand for Solid Waste Disposal Options in Malaysia

Author

Listed:
  • Pek, Chuen Khee
  • Othman, Jamal

Abstract

This paper estimates the economic values of household preference for enhanced solid waste disposal services in Malaysia. The contingent valuation (CV) method estimates an average additional monthly willingness-to-pay (WTP) in solid waste management charges of €0.77 to 0.80 for improved waste disposal services quality. The finding of a slightly higher WTP from the generic CV question than that of label-specific, further reveals a higher WTP for sanitary landfill, at €0.90, than incineration, at €0.63. This suggests that sanitary landfill is a more preferred alternative. The logistic regression estimation procedure reveals that household’s concern of where their rubbish is disposed, age, ownership of house, household income and format of CV question are significant factors in influencing WTP.

Suggested Citation

  • Pek, Chuen Khee & Othman, Jamal, 2010. "Household Demand for Solid Waste Disposal Options in Malaysia," MPRA Paper 23143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:23143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/23143/1/MPRA_paper_23143.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christine Seller & John R. Stoll & Jean-Paul Chavas, 1985. "Validation of Empirical Measures of Welfare Change: A Comparison of Nonmarket Techniques," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(2), pages 156-175.
    2. John List & Craig Gallet, 2001. "What Experimental Protocol Influence Disparities Between Actual and Hypothetical Stated Values?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(3), pages 241-254, November.
    3. Bergstrom, John C. & Stoll, John R., 1989. "Application Of Experimentatal Economics Concepts And Precepts To Cvm Field Survey Procedures," Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, July.
    4. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    5. Yoo, Seung-Hoon & Kwak, So-Yoon, 2009. "Willingness to pay for green electricity in Korea: A contingent valuation study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5408-5416, December.
    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. Xuan Thi Dan Huynh & Tien Dung Khong & Adam Loch & Huynh Viet Khai, 2023. "Solid waste management program in developing countries: contingent valuation methodology versus choice experiment," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(11), pages 12395-12417, November.
    2. Dagnew Hagos & Alemu Mekonnen & Zenebe G/egziabhe, 2014. "Households Willingness to Pay for Improved Urban Solid Waste Management: the Case of Mekelle City, Ethiopia," Ethiopian Journal of Economics, Ethiopian Economics Association, vol. 22(1), November.
    3. Chuen Khee Pek & Fang Ee & Foo, 2022. "Agricultural Multifunctionality For Sustainable Development In Malaysia: A Contingent Valuation Method Approach," Malaysian Journal of Sustainable Agriculture (MJSA), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 6(1), pages 1-6, January.
    4. Chuen Khee, Pek & Yet Mee, Lim & Chee Keong, Choong, 2011. "The economic impact of climate change on food security in Malaysia," MPRA Paper 37199, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Raheel Anjum, 2013. "Willingness to Pay for Solid Waste Management Services: A Case Study of Islamabad," CEECC Working Paper 2013:03, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics.
    6. Olaoluwa Omilani & Adebayo Busura Abass & Victor Olusegun Okoruwa, 2019. "Smallholder Agroprocessors’ Willingness to Pay for Value-Added Solid-Waste Management Solutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-14, March.
    7. Hagos, Dagnew & Mekonnen, Alemu & Gebreegziabher, Zenebe, 2012. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Urban Waste Management in Mekelle City, Ethiopia," RFF Working Paper Series dp-12-06-efd, Resources for the Future.

    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. Chuen Khee Pek & Fang Ee & Foo, 2022. "Agricultural Multifunctionality For Sustainable Development In Malaysia: A Contingent Valuation Method Approach," Malaysian Journal of Sustainable Agriculture (MJSA), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 6(1), pages 1-6, January.
    2. Chuen Khee, Pek & Yet Mee, Lim & Chee Keong, Choong, 2011. "The economic impact of climate change on food security in Malaysia," MPRA Paper 37199, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Pek, Chuen-Khee & Tee, Chee-Hoong & Ng, Phuay-Ying, 2010. "A Contingent Valuation Estimation of Hill Recreational and Services Values in Malaysia," MPRA Paper 23125, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Chavez, Daniel E. & Palma, Marco A. & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Mjelde, James W., 2020. "Product availability in discrete choice experiments with private goods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C).
    5. Seck, Abdoulaye & Thiam, Djiby Racine, 2022. "Understanding consumer attitudes to and valuation of organic food in Sub-Saharan Africa: A double-bound contingent method applied in Dakar, Senegal," African Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, African Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(1), March.
    6. List John A. & Sinha Paramita & Taylor Michael H., 2006. "Using Choice Experiments to Value Non-Market Goods and Services: Evidence from Field Experiments," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-39, January.
    7. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    8. Nicolas Jacquemet & Alexander James & Stéphane Luchini & Jason Shogren, 2011. "Social Psychology and Environmental Economics: A New Look at ex ante Corrections of Biased Preference Evaluation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(3), pages 413-433, March.
    9. Kees Vringer & Eline van der Heijden & Daan van Soest & Herman Vollebergh & Frank Dietz, 2017. "Sustainable Consumption Dilemmas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-21, June.
    10. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2021. "On Adding-Up as a Validity Criterion for Stated-Preference Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 80(3), pages 587-601, November.
    11. Ndebele, Tom & Forgie, Vicky, 2017. "Estimating the economic benefits of a wetland restoration programme in New Zealand: A contingent valuation approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 75-89.
    12. Helga Fehr-Duda & Robin Schimmelpfennig, 2018. "Wider die Zahlengläubigkeit: Sind Befragungsergebnisse eine gute Grundlage für wirtschaftspolitische Entscheidungen?," ECON - Working Papers 297, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Dec 2018.
    13. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    14. Mandy Ryan & Verity Watson, 2009. "Comparing welfare estimates from payment card contingent valuation and discrete choice experiments," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(4), pages 389-401, April.
    15. John C. Whitehead, 2004. "Environmental Risk and Averting Behavior: Predictive Validity of Revealed and Stated Preference Data," Working Papers 04-13, Department of Economics, Appalachian State University.
    16. Bruno S. Frey & Simon Luechinger, 2005. "Measuring terrorism," Chapters, in: Alain Marciano & Jean-Michel Josselin (ed.), Law and the State, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Barrage, Lint & Lee, Min Sok, 2010. "A penny for your thoughts: Inducing truth-telling in stated preference elicitation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 106(2), pages 140-142, February.
    18. Gubanova, Tatiana & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & McMillan, Melville, 2009. "‘Pocket and Pot’: Hypothetical Bias in a No-Free-Riding Public Contribution Game," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49318, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    19. Erik Brynjolfsson & Avinash Collis & Felix Eggers, 2019. "Using massive online choice experiments to measure changes in well-being," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(15), pages 7250-7255, April.
    20. Richard C. Bishop & Kevin J. Boyle, 2019. "Reliability and Validity in Nonmarket Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(2), pages 559-582, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    contingent valuation; logistic regression; solid waste disposal; willingness-to-pay.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:23143. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.