IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/renene/v112y2017icp104-112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Willingness to pay for improved energy: Evidence from Kenya

Author

Listed:
  • Osiolo, Helen Hoka

Abstract

Using a sample respondents of 3665 households and 1669 enterprises, this paper utilizes a double bound, open-ended, contingent valuation approach where those who respond positively to the willingness to pay question, were asked to state the maximum amount they were willing to pay as quality levy. The paper identifies protest responses as those respondents who are not willing to pay for the proposed program or as outliers who may state a willingness to pay value either higher or lower than the average willingness to pay value. Bidders and genuine zeros responses are respondents that either state a zero or a positive willingness to pay respectively. Heckman’s sample-selection procedure is used to test sample selection bias in and also analyze the WTP function.

Suggested Citation

  • Osiolo, Helen Hoka, 2017. "Willingness to pay for improved energy: Evidence from Kenya," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 104-112.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:renene:v:112:y:2017:i:c:p:104-112
    DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2017.05.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148117303890
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Halstead, John M. & Luloff, A.E. & Stevens, Thomas H., 1992. "Protest Bidders In Contingent Valuation," Northeastern Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 21(2), pages 1-10, October.
    2. Roe, Brian & Teisl, Mario F. & Levy, Alan & Russell, Matthew, 2001. "US consumers' willingness to pay for green electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 917-925, September.
    3. Dominika Dziegielewska & Robert Mendelsohn, 2007. "Does “No” mean “No”? A protest methodology," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 38(1), pages 71-87, September.
    4. Murakami, Kayo & Ida, Takanori & Tanaka, Makoto & Friedman, Lee, 2015. "Consumers' willingness to pay for renewable and nuclear energy: A comparative analysis between the US and Japan," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 178-189.
    5. Soliño, Mario & Prada, Albino & Vázquez, María X., 2010. "Designing a forest-energy policy to reduce forest fires in Galicia (Spain): A contingent valuation application," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 217-233, August.
    6. Meyerhoff, Jurgen & Liebe, Ulf, 2006. "Protest beliefs in contingent valuation: Explaining their motivation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 583-594, June.
    7. Arabatzis, Garyfallos & Malesios, Chrisovalantis, 2013. "Pro-environmental attitudes of users and non-users of fuelwood in a rural area of Greece," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 621-630.
    8. Oerlemans, Leon A.G. & Chan, Kai-Ying & Volschenk, Jako, 2016. "Willingness to pay for green electricity: A review of the contingent valuation literature and its sources of error," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 875-885.
    9. Timothy Haab, 1999. "Nonparticipation or Misspecification? The Impacts of Nonparticipation on Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(4), pages 443-461, December.
    10. Mozumder, Pallab & Vásquez, William F. & Marathe, Achla, 2011. "Consumers' preference for renewable energy in the southwest USA," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1119-1126.
    11. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    12. Steven F. Edwards & Glen D. Anderson, 1987. "Overlooked Biases in Contingent Valuation Surveys: Some Considerations," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 63(2), pages 168-178.
    13. Abdullah, Sabah & Jeanty, P. Wilner, 2011. "Willingness to pay for renewable energy: Evidence from a contingent valuation survey in Kenya," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 2974-2983, August.
    14. Bradley Jorgensen & Geoffrey Syme & Brian Bishop & Blair Nancarrow, 1999. "Protest Responses in Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 14(1), pages 131-150, July.
    15. Soon, Jan-Jan & Ahmad, Siti-Aznor, 2015. "Willingly or grudgingly? A meta-analysis on the willingness-to-pay for renewable energy use," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 877-887.
    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. Nkosi, Nomsa Phindile & Dikgang, Johane, 2018. "Pricing electricity blackouts among South African households," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 37-47.
    2. Nthambi, Mary & Wätzold, Frank & Markova-Nenova, Nonka, 2018. "Quantifying benefit losses from poor governance of climate change adaptation projects: A discrete choice experiment with farmers in Kenya," MPRA Paper 94678, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Karanja, Alice & Gasparatos, Alexandros, 2019. "Adoption and impacts of clean bioenergy cookstoves in Kenya," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 285-306.
    4. Zhao, Yibing & Wang, Can & Sun, Yuwei & Liu, Xianbing, 2018. "Factors influencing companies' willingness to pay for carbon emissions: Emission trading schemes in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 357-367.

    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:renene:v:112:y:2017:i:c:p:104-112. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/renewable-energy .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.