IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/canjag/v67y2019i2p215-232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating willingness to pay for the temporal distribution of different air quality improvements: Is China's clean air target adequate to ensure welfare maximization?

Author

Listed:
  • Liuyang Yao
  • Junfeng Deng
  • Robert J. Johnston
  • Imran Khan
  • Minjuan Zhao

Abstract

Stated preference analyses seeking to determine the public's value for air quality improvements often estimate willingness to pay (WTP) for days at a specified minimum quality threshold (e.g., days with clean air), but do not consider the temporal distribution of pollution levels below this threshold. This paper develops a choice experiment designed to evaluate WTP for a more complete distribution of air quality improvements, including the number of days per year at multiple air quality levels. The model is applied to a case study of air quality improvement in the core districts of Xi'an City, China. Results from a linearly constrained mixed logit model demonstrate that average household WTP for improving a lightly polluted, moderately polluted, heavily polluted, or severely polluted day to a clean air day is 7.42, 8.90, 13.06, and 24.28 RMB per year, respectively. These results show that WTP depends not only on the total number of clean air days, but on the total distribution of pollution levels across all days of the year. Results are directly relevant to the development of clean air policies in China, for which benefit estimates are currently unavailable. Les analyses de préférences déclarées cherchant à déterminer la valeur qu'accorde le public a des améliorations de la qualité de l'air estiment souvent le consentement à payer (CAP) des journées à un seuil de qualité minimum spécifié (par exemple, des journées ayant une bonne qualité de l'air), mais ne tiennent pas compte de la répartition temporelle pour des niveaux de pollution inférieurs à ce seuil. Nous développons une expérimentation des choix conçue afin d’évaluer le CAP pour une distribution plus complète des améliorations de la qualité de l'air, comprenant le nombre de jours par an ayant différents niveaux de qualité de l'air. Le modèle est appliqué à une étude de cas sur l'amélioration de la qualité de l'air dans les principaux districts de la ville de Xi'an, en Chine. Les résultats d'un modèle logit mixte à contraintes linéaires démontrent que pour un ménage moyen, le CAP pour améliorer un jour faiblement pollué, moyennement pollué, fortement pollué ou gravement pollué en un jour d'air pur est respectivement de 7,42, 8,90, 13,06 et 24,28 RMB par an. Ces résultats montrent que le CAP dépend non seulement du nombre total de jours d'air pur, mais également de la répartition totale des niveaux de pollution sur tous les jours de l'année. Les résultats sont directement liés au développement de politiques d'assainissement de l'air en Chine, pour lesquelles des estimations de bénéfices ne sont actuellement pas disponibles.

Suggested Citation

  • Liuyang Yao & Junfeng Deng & Robert J. Johnston & Imran Khan & Minjuan Zhao, 2019. "Evaluating willingness to pay for the temporal distribution of different air quality improvements: Is China's clean air target adequate to ensure welfare maximization?," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 67(2), pages 215-232, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:canjag:v:67:y:2019:i:2:p:215-232
    DOI: 10.1111/cjag.12189
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/cjag.12189
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/cjag.12189?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yao, Liuyang & Sui, Bo, 2020. "Heterogeneous preferences for shale water management: Evidence from a choice experiment in Fuling shale gas field, southwest China," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    2. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Le, Hoa Thu & Nguyen, Hang Dieu & Le, Thanh Ha & Nguyen, Hong Quang, 2021. "Estimating economic benefits associated with air quality improvements in Hanoi City: An application of a choice experiment," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 420-433.
    3. Hangjian Wu & Emmanouil Mentzakis & Marije Schaafsma, 2022. "Exploring Different Assumptions about Outcome-Related Risk Perceptions in Discrete Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(3), pages 531-572, March.
    4. Lin Song & Yi Xue & Yaqiong Jing & Jincan Zhang, 2021. "Visitor’s Willingness to Pay for National Park Entrance Fees in China: Evidence from a Contingent Valuation Method," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-14, December.
    5. Mariel, Petr & Khan, Mohammad Asif & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2022. "Valuing individuals’ preferences for air quality improvement: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in South Delhi," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 432-447.

    More about this item

    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:bla:canjag:v:67:y:2019:i:2:p:215-232. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/caefmea.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.