IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecanpo/v74y2022icp432-447.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuing individuals’ preferences for air quality improvement: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in South Delhi

Author

Listed:
  • Mariel, Petr
  • Khan, Mohammad Asif
  • Meyerhoff, Jürgen

Abstract

Air pollution is one of the most pressing problems in India, taking millions of lives annually. Despite unprecedented air quality deterioration, little is known about individuals’ preferences for air quality improvement in India. As a first step, this study presents results from a discrete choice experiment eliciting the preferences for air quality improvement of inhabitants in South Delhi, India, which is part of the city of Delhi and where air pollution is causing extensive health hazards. Adequate knowledge about individuals’ preferences can help in designing more effective health and environmental policies. Overall, we find a significant willingness to pay for improving the air quality in South Delhi. As expected, people with a higher level of education and a higher income are more willing to pay to alleviate and prevent the effects of air pollution. At the same time, significant gender effects are identified; women seem to have more homogeneous preferences regarding air quality than men. Furthermore, due to income inequalities, a significant number of respondents are not willing to pay.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecanpo:v:74:y:2022:i:c:p:432-447
    DOI: 10.1016/j.eap.2022.03.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0313592622000352
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.eap.2022.03.006?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Filippin, Antonio & Crosetto, Paolo, 2014. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," IZA Discussion Papers 8184, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. repec:cup:cbooks:9781107007147 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Allen Blackman, 2010. "Alternative Pollution Control Policies in Developing Countries," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 4(2), pages 234-253, Summer.
    4. repec:ind:iegddp:61 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Hettige, Hemamala & Huq, Mainul & Pargal, Sheoli & Wheeler, David, 1996. "Determinants of pollution abatement in developing countries: Evidence from South and Southeast Asia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(12), pages 1891-1904, December.
    6. Wang, Sarah & Tarroja, Brian & Schell, Lori Smith & Shaffer, Brendan & Samuelsen, Scott, 2019. "Prioritizing among the end uses of excess renewable energy for cost-effective greenhouse gas emission reductions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 235(C), pages 284-298.
    7. Antonio Borriello & John M. Rose, 2021. "Global versus localised attitudinal responses in discrete choice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 131-165, February.
    8. Bollen, Johannes, 2015. "The value of air pollution co-benefits of climate policies: Analysis with a global sector-trade CGE model called WorldScan," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PA), pages 178-191.
    9. R.A. Muller & A.L. Robb & A. Diener, 2001. "Inferring Willingness-to-Pay for Health Attributes of Air Quality Using Information on ranking of Alternatives and Cognitive Ability of Respondents," Department of Economics Working Papers 2001-02, McMaster University.
    10. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    11. Guevara, C. Angelo & Tirachini, Alejandro & Hurtubia, Ricardo & Dekker, Thijs, 2020. "Correcting for endogeneity due to omitted crowding in public transport choice using the Multiple Indicator Solution (MIS) method," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 472-484.
    12. Stephen Hynes & Nick Hanley & Riccardo Scarpa, 2008. "Effects on Welfare Measures of Alternative Means of Accounting for Preference Heterogeneity in Recreational Demand Models," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(4), pages 1011-1027.
    13. Joffre Swait & Tülin Erdem, 2007. "Brand Effects on Choice and Choice Set Formation Under Uncertainty," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(5), pages 679-697, 09-10.
    14. Jin, Yana & Andersson, Henrik & Zhang, Shiqiu, 2020. "Do preferences to reduce health risks related to air pollution depend on illness type? Evidence from a choice experiment in Beijing, China," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    15. Morrison, Mark, 2001. "Non-market Valuation Databases: How Useful Are They?," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 33-56, March.
    16. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    17. Cropper, Maureen L. & Simon, Nathalie B. & Alberini, Anna & Sharma, P. K., 1997. "The health effects of air pollution in Delhi, India," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1860, The World Bank.
    18. Antonio Filippin, 2022. "Gender differences in risk attitudes," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 100-100, October.
    19. Gregory L. Poe & Kelly L. Giraud & John B. Loomis, 2005. "Computational Methods for Measuring the Difference of Empirical Distributions," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(2), pages 353-365.
    20. Anna Alberini & Alan Krupnick, 2000. "Cost-of-Illness and Willingness-to-Pay Estimates of the Benefits of Improved Air Quality: Evidence from Taiwan," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(1), pages 37-53.
    21. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Elina Lampi, 2010. "Dealing with Ignored Attributes in Choice Experiments on Valuation of Sweden’s Environmental Quality Objectives," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(1), pages 65-89, September.
    22. Valeri, Eva & Gatta, Valerio & Teobaldelli, Désirée & Polidori, Paolo & Barratt, Benjamin & Fuzzi, Sandro & Kazepov, Yuri & Sergi, Vittorio & Williams, Martin & Maione, Michela, 2016. "Modelling individual preferences for environmental policy drivers: Empirical evidence of Italian lifestyle changes using a latent class approach," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 65-74.
    23. Glenk, Klaus & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Akaichi, Faical & Martin-Ortega, Julia, 2019. "Revisiting cost vector effects in discrete choice experiments," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 135-155.
    24. Silvia Banfi & Massimo Filippini & Andrea Horehájová, 2012. "Using a choice experiment to estimate the benefits of a reduction of externalities in urban areas with special focus on electrosmog," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(3), pages 387-397, January.
    25. Tarfasa, Solomon & Brouwer, Roy, 2018. "Public preferences for improved urban waste management: a choice experiment," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 184-197, April.
    26. 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.
    27. Surender Kumar & D.N. Rao, 2001. "Valuing The Beneficts of Air Pollution Abatement Using a Health Production Function A Case Study of Panipat Thermal Power Station, India," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 20(2), pages 91-102, October.
    28. Cristian Angelo Guevara & Moshe E. Ben-Akiva, 2012. "Change of Scale and Forecasting with the Control-Function Method in Logit Models," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(3), pages 425-437, August.
    29. Riccardo Scarpa & Mara Thiene, 2005. "Destination Choice Models for Rock Climbing in the Northeastern Alps: A Latent-Class Approach Based on Intensity of Preferences," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(3).
    30. Navrud, StAle & Mungatana, E. D., 1994. "Environmental valuation in developing countries: The recreational value of wildlife viewing," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 135-151, November.
    31. 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.
    32. Chengxiang Tang & Yucheng Zhang, 2016. "Using discrete choice experiments to value preferences for air quality improvement: the case of curbing haze in urban China," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(8), pages 1473-1494, August.
    33. Antonio Filippin & Paolo Crosetto, 2016. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3138-3160, November.
    34. Zhengtao Li, 2019. "Valuing Acute Health Risks of Air Pollution in the Jinchuan Mining Area, China: A Choice Experiment with Perceived Exposure and Hazardousness as Co-Determinants," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-18, November.
    35. Edward B. Barbier & Mark Cox, 2003. "Does Economic Development Lead to Mangrove Loss? A Cross‐Country Analysis," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 21(4), pages 418-432, October.
    36. Srinivas Bikkina & August Andersson & Elena N. Kirillova & Henry Holmstrand & Suresh Tiwari & A. K. Srivastava & D. S. Bisht & Örjan Gustafsson, 2019. "Air quality in megacity Delhi affected by countryside biomass burning," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(3), pages 200-205, March.
    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. Li, Yuxin & Yao, Zili & Guo, Zhanfeng, 2023. "Willingness to pay and preferences for rural tourism attributes among urban residents: A discrete choice experiment in China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 460-471.

    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. Petr Mariel & Linda Arata, 2022. "Incorporating attitudes into the evaluation of preferences regarding agri‐environmental practices," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 430-451, June.
    2. Jin, Yana & Andersson, Henrik & Zhang, Shiqiu, 2020. "Do preferences to reduce health risks related to air pollution depend on illness type? Evidence from a choice experiment in Beijing, China," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    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. Ainhoa Vega-Bayo & Petr Mariel, 2023. "Parents’ Willingness to Pay for Bilingualism: Evidence from Spain," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 727-742, September.
    5. José de Sousa & Guillaume Hollard, 2021. "From Micro to Macro Gender Differences: Evidence from Field Tournaments," Post-Print hal-03389151, HAL.
    6. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    7. Iñigo Iturbe-Ormaetxe & Giovanni Ponti & Josefa Tomás, 2016. "Myopic Loss Aversion under Ambiguity and Gender Effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Alejandro Arrieta & Ariadna García‐Prado & Paula González & José Luis Pinto‐Prades, 2017. "Risk attitudes in medical decisions for others: An experimental approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S3), pages 97-113, December.
    9. Bernard, Kévin & Bonein, Aurélie & Bougherara, Douadia, 2020. "Consumer inequality aversion and risk preferences in community supported agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    10. Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro, 2021. "Brave boys and play-it-safe girls: Gender differences in willingness to guess in a large scale natural field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    11. Bruns, Selina & Hermann, Daniel & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2022. "Investigating inconsistencies in complex lotteries: The role of cognitive skills of low-numeracy subjects," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    12. Yating Chuang & John Chung-En Liu, 2020. "Who wears a mask? Gender differences in risk behaviors in the COVID-19 early days in Taiwan," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(4), pages 2619-2627.
    13. Jack, B. Kelsey & McDermott, Kathryn & Sautmann, Anja, 2022. "Multiple price lists for willingness to pay elicitation," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    14. Chen Liang & Jing Peng & Yili Hong & Bin Gu, 2023. "The Hidden Costs and Benefits of Monitoring in the Gig Economy," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(1), pages 297-318, March.
    15. Marco Castellani & Linda Alengoz & Niccolò Casnici & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2022. "A role-game laboratory experiment on the influence of country prospects reports on investment decisions in two artificial organizational settings," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 21(1), pages 121-149, June.
    16. Agrawal, Anjali & Green, Ellen P. & Lavergne, Lisa, 2019. "Gender effects in the credence goods market: An experimental study," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 195-199.
    17. Blake, David & Duffield, Mel & Tonks, Ian & Haig, Alistair & Blower, Dean & MacPhee, Laura, 2022. "Smart defaults: Determining the number of default funds in a pension scheme," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(4).
    18. Beine, Michel & Charness, Gary & Dupuy, Arnaud & Joxhe, Majlinda, 2020. "Shaking Things Up: On the Stability of Risk and Time Preferences," IZA Discussion Papers 13084, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Milner, Mattie & Rice, Stephen & Rice, Connor, 2019. "Support for environmentally-friendly airports influenced by political affiliation and social identity," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    20. Schmidt, Ulrich & Neyse, Levent & Aleknonyte, Milda, 2019. "Income inequality and risk taking: the impact of social comparison information," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 87(3), pages 283-297.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Air quality improvement; Discrete choice experiments; Willingness to pay; South Delhi; Individuals’ preferences;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • N55 - Economic History - - Agriculture, Natural Resources, Environment and Extractive Industries - - - Asia including Middle East
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects

    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:eee:ecanpo:v:74:y:2022:i:c:p:432-447. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/economic-analysis-and-policy .

    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.