IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecanpo/v74y2022icp432-447.html

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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Haque,A. K. Enamul & Murty,M. N. & Shyamsundar,Priya, 2011. "Environmental Valuation in South Asia," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107007147.
    3. repec:ind:iegddp:61 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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).
    8. Morrison, Mark, 2001. "Non-market Valuation Databases: How Useful Are They?," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 33-56, March.
    9. 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.
    10. Daniel McFadden, 1986. "The Choice Theory Approach to Market Research," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 275-297.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Antonio Filippin, 2022. "Gender differences in risk attitudes," World of Labour, LISER, pages 100-100, October.
    17. Antonio Filippin & Paolo Crosetto, 2016. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3138-3160, November.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. 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.
    22. 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.
    23. 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.
    24. 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.
    25. Antonio Borriello & John M. Rose, 2021. "Global versus localised attitudinal responses in discrete choice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 131-165, February.
    26. 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.
    27. 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.
    28. 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.
    29. 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.
    30. 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.
    31. 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).
    32. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    33. 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.
    34. 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.
    35. 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. Bartczak, Anna Małgorzata & Budziński, Wiktor & Liebe, Ulf & Meyerhoff, Jurgen, 2025. "Distributive justice concerns when combating air pollution: The joint modelling of attitudes and preferences," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    2. Bartczak, Anna M. & Budziński, Wiktor & Jusypenko, Bartosz & Boros, Piotr W., 2024. "The Impact of Health Status and Experienced Disutility on Air Quality Valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    3. Wu, Xinrui & Liu, Ziming & Feng, Shuyi, 2025. "Social norms alleviate the disadvantaged positions of elderly people in charity markets," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 94(PB).
    4. Batabyal, Amitrajeet, 2025. "An Ecological-Economic Approach to Air Pollution Regulation in New Delhi, India," MPRA Paper 126662, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Oct 2025.
    5. Mariel, Petr & Artabe, Alaitz, 2025. "A simulation-based method for testing an abnormally high incidence of specific choice patterns in discrete choice data," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Zheng, Debin & Long, Yulin & Wei, Yuehua & Cai, Zhenyu & Cheng, Zhiwen & Ao, Changlin, 2025. "Anticipated regret and respondent uncertainty in assessing public preferences for air pollution treatment policies: A choice experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 116(C).

    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. Alcorta, Peio & Mariel, Petr, 2025. "Beyond biases: Exploring endogeneity in the allocation function of latent class models for environmental valuation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(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. Deely, J. & Hynes, S. & Curtis, J., 2019. "Are objective data a suitable replacement for subjective data in site choice analysis?," Working Papers 309602, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    6. Mara Thiene & Riccardo Scarpa & Jordan Louviere, 2015. "Addressing Preference Heterogeneity, Multiple Scales and Attribute Attendance with a Correlated Finite Mixing Model of Tap Water Choice," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(3), pages 637-656, November.
    7. Edel Doherty & Brendan Kennelly & Darragh Flannery & Stephen Kynes & John Considine, 2013. "Student preferences for assignment systems: Results from a discrete choice experiment in Irish universities," Working Papers WP052013, University of Limerick, Department of Economics, revised Sep 2013.
    8. Kemper, Nathan & Nayga, Rodolfo M. Jr. & Popp, Jennie & Bazzani, Claudia, 2016. "The Effects of Honesty Oath and Consequentiality in Choice Experiments," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235381, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Roy Brouwer & Julia Martin-Ortega & RJulio Berbel, 2010. "Spatial Preference Heterogeneity: A Choice Experiment," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(3).
    10. Scarpa, Riccardo & Notaro, Sandra & Raffaelli, Roberta & Louviere, Jordan, "undated". "Modelling attribute non-attendance in best-worst rank ordered choice data to estimate tourism benefits from Alpine pasture heritage," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 115990, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    11. repec:sss:wpaper:201407 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Franceschinis, Cristiano & Thiene, Mara & Scarpa, Riccardo & Rose, John & Moretto, Michele & Cavalli, Raffaele, 2017. "Adoption of renewable heating systems: An empirical test of the diffusion of innovation theory," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 313-326.
    13. 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).
    14. von Haefen, Roger H. & Domanski, Adam, 2018. "Estimation and welfare analysis from mixed logit models with large choice sets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 101-118.
    15. Davies, Helen J. & Wu, Hangjian & Schaafsma, Marije, 2023. "Willingness-to-pay for urban ecosystem services provision under objective and subjective uncertainty," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    16. Catalina M. Torres & Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley, 2014. "Incorrectly accounting for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments: what are the implications for welfare measurement?," DEA Working Papers 65, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.
    17. Genie, Mesfin G. & Ryan, Mandy & Krucien, Nicolas, 2021. "To pay or not to pay? Cost information processing in the valuation of publicly funded healthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    18. Angel Bujosa & Antoni Riera & Robert Hicks, 2010. "Combining Discrete and Continuous Representations of Preference Heterogeneity: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 47(4), pages 477-493, December.
    19. Ahtiainen, Heini & Pouta, Eija & Zawadzki, Wojciech & Tienhaara, Annika, 2023. "Cost vector effects in discrete choice experiments with positive status quo cost," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    20. Beharry-Borg, Nesha & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2010. "Valuing quality changes in Caribbean coastal waters for heterogeneous beach visitors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1124-1139, March.
    21. Sarrias, Mauricio & Daziano, Ricardo A., 2018. "Individual-specific point and interval conditional estimates of latent class logit parameters," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 50-61.

    More about this item

    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.