IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v18y2025i17p4541-d1733861.html

Environmental Consciousness and Willingness to Pay for Carbon Emissions Reductions: Empirical Evidence from Qatar

Author

Listed:
  • Khalid S. Al-Abdulqader

    (Department of Finance and Economics, College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar)

  • Abdul-Jalil Ibrahim

    (Department of Banking and Finance, University of Professional Studies, Accra P.O. Box LG 149, Ghana)

  • Jingkai Ong

    (Department of Finance and Economics, College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar)

  • Ahmed A. Khalifa

    (Department of Finance and Economics, College of Business and Economics, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar)

Abstract

The individual’s willingness to pay (WTP) for environmental reduction programs is one way of gauging society’s environmental consciousness. We explore the determinants of an individual’s WTP for a product produced from carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technology in Qatar. A representative questionnaire sample was administered to 1012 respondents in Qatar on habits, perceptions, economic and religious attitudes related to environmental consciousness, and WTP. The findings reveal that environmental concern is significantly enhanced by environmental consciousness, awareness, and education, while environmental awareness also positively influences perceived social norms regarding others’ environmental awareness. Further, environmental consciousness, religiosity, and education are significantly positively associated with the WTP for an eco-friendly product. Also, those who earn high incomes have a greater WTP for eco-friendly products with premium prices of 10–75% higher. Respondents motivated by religious obligation have a significantly greater WTP for eco-friendly products with a 10–30% price premium. These findings imply the need for context-specific strategies that leverage cultural values, address income disparities, and effectively communicate the benefits of green choices to drive the adoption of green products.

Suggested Citation

  • Khalid S. Al-Abdulqader & Abdul-Jalil Ibrahim & Jingkai Ong & Ahmed A. Khalifa, 2025. "Environmental Consciousness and Willingness to Pay for Carbon Emissions Reductions: Empirical Evidence from Qatar," Energies, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-24, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:17:p:4541-:d:1733861
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/17/4541/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/17/4541/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. T. Ann-Chyi & L. Sheau-Ting, 2024. "Methodological influences on ecosystem valuation: a systematic review of contingent valuation studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 449-467, October.
    2. Lori M. Hunter & Alison Hatch & Aaron Johnson, 2004. "Cross‐National Gender Variation in Environmental Behaviors," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 85(3), pages 677-694, September.
    3. Reiche, Danyel, 2010. "Energy Policies of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries--possibilities and limitations of ecological modernization in rentier states," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 2395-2403, May.
    4. Shazia Kousar & Muhammad Afzal & Farhan Ahmed & Štefan Bojnec, 2022. "Environmental Awareness and Air Quality: The Mediating Role of Environmental Protective Behaviors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-20, March.
    5. Wei-Ta Fang & Eric Ng & Ching-Ming Wang & Ming-Lin Hsu, 2017. "Normative Beliefs, Attitudes, and Social Norms: People Reduce Waste as an Index of Social Relationships When Spending Leisure Time," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, September.
    6. Mira Hajj-Hassan & Rawad Chaker & Anne-Marie Cederqvist, 2024. "Environmental Education: A Systematic Review on the Use of Digital Tools for Fostering Sustainability Awareness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-25, April.
    7. Hussain Mohi Ud Din Qadri & Muhammad Bilal Zafar & Hassnian Ali & Muhammad Tahir, 2025. "Wealth, Wisdom, and the Will to Protect: An Examination of Socioeconomic Influences on Environmental Behavior," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 178(2), pages 653-683, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Chenyang Xiao & Riley E. Dunlap & Dayong Hong, 2013. "The Nature and Bases of Environmental Concern among Chinese Citizens," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 94(3), pages 672-690, September.
    10. Adaman, Fikret & KaralI, Nihan & Kumbaroglu, Gürkan & Or, Ilhan & Özkaynak, Begüm & Zenginobuz, Ünal, 2011. "What determines urban households' willingness to pay for CO2 emission reductions in Turkey: A contingent valuation survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 689-698, February.
    11. Amitrajeet A. Batabyal & Peter Nijkamp, 2011. "Introduction to Research Tools in Natural Resource and Environmental Economics," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Amitrajeet A Batabyal & Peter Nijkamp (ed.), Research Tools In Natural Resource And Environmental Economics, chapter 1, pages 3-26, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Adamowicz W. & Louviere J. & Williams M., 1994. "Combining Revealed and Stated Preference Methods for Valuing Environmental Amenities," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 271-292, May.
    13. Noor Saleh Alalawi & Osama Omar, 2024. "Towards Greener Campuses: Assessing Pro-Environmental Behaviours in the University of Bahrain Campus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-23, February.
    14. S. V. Ciriacy-Wantrup, 1947. "Capital Returns from Soil-Conservation Practices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 29(4_Part_II), pages 1181-1196.
    15. Amitrajeet A Batabyal & Peter Nijkamp (ed.), 2011. "Research Tools in Natural Resource and Environmental Economics," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 7496.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    2. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimaging," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    4. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    5. Adalja, Aaron & Hanson, James & Towe, Charles & Tselepidakis, Elina, 2015. "An Examination of Consumer Willingness to Pay for Local Products," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 253-274, December.
    6. de Koning, Koen & Filatova, Tatiana & Bin, Okmyung, 2017. "Bridging the Gap Between Revealed and Stated Preferences in Flood-prone Housing Markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1-13.
    7. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    8. Donatella Baiardi, 2021. "What do you think about climate change?," Working Papers 477, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2021.
    9. Adelina Gschwandtner & Jose Eduardo Ribeiro & Cesar Revoredo-Giha & Michael Burton, 2021. "Combining Stated and Revealed Preferences for valuing Organic Chicken Meat," Studies in Economics 2113, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    10. 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.
    11. Carina Merz, 2008. "Monetaere Bewertung der Netzzuverlaessigkeit fuer eine effiziente Qualitaetsanreizregulierung," EWI Working Papers 2008-1, Energiewirtschaftliches Institut an der Universitaet zu Koeln (EWI).
    12. Grafeld, Shanna & Oleson, Kirsten & Barnes, Michele & Peng, Marcus & Chan, Catherine & Weijerman, Mariska, 2016. "Divers' willingness to pay for improved coral reef conditions in Guam: An untapped source of funding for management and conservation?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 202-213.
    13. 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. 6(2), pages 1-39, January.
    14. Jing Ren & Chuntian Lu & Long Niu, 2025. "The Mediating Role of Gender Equality Awareness on the Environmental Willingness to Pay: An Analysis Based on CGSS2021 Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-17, March.
    15. Black, Michael A. & Ahmadiani, Mona & Bagnall, Dianna K. & Morgan, Cristine L.S. & Ogieriakhi, Macson & Woodward, Richard T., 2025. "Discrete choice experiment estimates on the value of soil health attributes in Central Texas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 235(C).
    16. Smith, V. Kerry, 2000. "JEEM and Non-market Valuation: 1974-1998," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 351-374, May.
    17. John C. Whitehead & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & George L. Van Houtven & Brett R. Gelso, 2008. "Combining Revealed And Stated Preference Data To Estimate The Nonmarket Value Of Ecological Services: An Assessment Of The State Of The Science," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 872-908, December.
    18. Jens Abildtrup & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Suzanne Elizabeth Vedel & Udo Mantau & Robert Mavsar & Davide Pettenella & Irina Prokofieva & Florian Schubert & Anne Stenger & Elsa Varela & Enrico Vidale & , 2024. "Preferences for climate change policies: the role of co-benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 110-128, January.
    19. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    20. Nobel, Anne & Lizin, Sebastien & Witters, Nele & Rineau, Francois & Malina, Robert, 2020. "The impact of wildfires on the recreational value of heathland: A discrete factor approach with adjustment for on-site sampling," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:17:p:4541-:d:1733861. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.