IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v11y2019i3p770-d202778.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Non-Market Valuation of Water Pollution Remediation and Disaster Risk Mitigation Functions: The Case of Nakdong River Estuary in South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Hyo-Jin Kim

    (Department of Energy Policy, Graduate School of Energy & Environment, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 232 Gongreung-Ro, Nowon-Gu, Seoul 01811, Korea)

  • Jeong-In Chang

    (Ocean Economy Research Department, Korea Maritime Institute, 26, Haeyang-ro 301beon-gil, Yeongdo-gu, Busan 49111, Korea)

  • Seung-Hoon Yoo

    (Department of Energy Policy, Graduate School of Energy & Environment, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, 232 Gongreung-Ro, Nowon-Gu, Seoul 01811, Korea)

Abstract

The Nakdong river estuary in South Korea has two important functions: first, remediating water pollution from the Nakdong river; second, mitigating the risk of disaster caused by waves from the open sea. The two functions of the Nakdong river estuary have been continuously threatened due to constant development pressure. This short note tries to investigate the non-market value of the water pollution remediation and disaster risk mitigation functions. For this purpose, 1000 households throughout the country were randomly selected, and a choice experiment (CE) survey of them was implemented in September 2017. The two attributes considered here are water pollution remediation and disaster risk mitigation. An increase in the yearly income tax was also considered as an attribute. The results of applying the CE approach show that the non-market values of a 1%p increase in the water pollution remediation ability and a 1 m decrease in the wave height of the estuary are KRW 105 (USD 0.09) and KRW 501 (USD 0.44), respectively, per household per year. These figures can be used to establish and execute marine spatial planning for the estuary.

Suggested Citation

  • Hyo-Jin Kim & Jeong-In Chang & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2019. "Non-Market Valuation of Water Pollution Remediation and Disaster Risk Mitigation Functions: The Case of Nakdong River Estuary in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-9, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:770-:d:202778
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/770/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/3/770/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Kim & Hyo-Jin Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2018. "Public Value of Marine Biodiesel Technology Development in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Boxall, P.C. & Adamowicz, W.L. & Olar, M. & West, G.E. & Cantin, G., 2012. "Analysis of the economic benefits associated with the recovery of threatened marine mammal species in the Canadian St. Lawrence Estuary," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 189-197, January.
    3. Ian J. Bateman & Richard T. Carson & Brett Day & Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Tannis Hett & Michael Jones-Lee & Graham Loomes, 2002. "Economic Valuation with Stated Preference Techniques," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2639, March.
    4. Solomon Tarfasa & Roy Brouwer, 2013. "Estimation of the public benefits of urban water supply improvements in Ethiopia: a choice experiment," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(9), pages 1099-1108, March.
    5. Hensher,David A. & Rose,John M. & Greene,William H., 2015. "Applied Choice Analysis," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107465923, November.
    6. Loomis, John & Kent, Paula & Strange, Liz & Fausch, Kurt & Covich, Alan, 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 103-117, April.
    7. Marit E. Kragt & J.W. Bennett, 2011. "Using choice experiments to value catchment and estuary health in Tasmania with individual preference heterogeneity," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 55(2), pages 159-179, April.
    8. Ekin Birol & Victoria Cox, 2007. "Using choice experiments to design wetland management programmes: The case of Severn Estuary Wetland, UK," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(3), pages 363-380.
    9. Junyi Shen, 2009. "A choice experiment approachin evaluating publictransportation projects," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(6), pages 557-561.
    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. Kim, Hyo-Jin & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2019. "Social acceptance of offshore wind energy development in South Korea: Results from a choice experiment survey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Hyo-Jin Kim & Seul-Ye Lim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2020. "The South Korean public’s evaluation of the mix of power generation sources: A choice experiment study," Energy & Environment, , vol. 31(7), pages 1181-1190, November.
    3. Stoeckl, Natalie & Farr, Marina & Larson, Silva & Adams, Vanessa M. & Kubiszewski, Ida & Esparon, Michelle & Costanza, Robert, 2014. "A new approach to the problem of overlapping values: A case study in Australia׳s Great Barrier Reef," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 61-78.
    4. Gurluk, Serkan, 2006. "The estimation of ecosystem services' value in the region of Misi Rural Development Project: Results from a contingent valuation survey," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 209-218, December.
    5. Ju-Hee Kim & Younggew Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2021. "Using a choice experiment to explore the public willingness to pay for the impacts of improving energy efficiency of an apartment," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 55(5), pages 1775-1793, October.
    6. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Jette Jacobsen & Nick Hanley, 2009. "Are There Income Effects on Global Willingness to Pay for Biodiversity Conservation?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 137-160, June.
    8. Westerberg, Vanja Holmquist & Lifran, Robert & Olsen, Søren Bøye, 2010. "To restore or not? A valuation of social and ecological functions of the Marais des Baux wetland in Southern France," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2383-2393, October.
    9. Alemu Mekonnen & Zenebe Gebreegziabher & Abebe D. Beyene & Fitsum Hagos, 2019. "Valuation of Access to Irrigation Water in Rural Ethiopia: Application of Choice Experiment and Contingent Valuation Methods," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 6(01), pages 1-26, September.
    10. Miller, Sini & Tait, Peter & Saunders, Caroline, 2015. "Estimating indigenous cultural values of freshwater: A choice experiment approach to Māori values in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 207-214.
    11. Sung-Min Kim & Ju-Hee Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2020. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Substituting Natural Gas with Renewable Methane: A Contingent Valuation Experiment in South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, June.
    12. Riegel, Simone & Kuhfuss, Laure & Stojanovic, Timothy, 2023. "Nature-based solutions for climate change mitigation: Assessing the Scottish Public's preferences for saltmarsh carbon storage," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    13. Grammatikopoulou, Ioanna & Badura, Tomas & Vačkářová, Davina, 2020. "Public preferences for post 2020 agri-environmental policy in the Czech Republic: A choice experiment approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    14. Massarutto, Antonio & Troiano, Stefania, 2025. "Maintaining water service quality in the face of climate change: Can stated-preference analysis support priority setting?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    15. Catherine L. Kling & Daniel J. Phaneuf & Jinhua Zhao, 2012. "From Exxon to BP: Has Some Number Become Better Than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(4), pages 3-26, Fall.
    16. Christopher M. Fleming & Matthew Manning, 2015. "Rationing Access to Protected Natural Areas: An Australian Case Study," Tourism Economics, , vol. 21(5), pages 995-1014, October.
    17. Sardaro, Ruggiero & Faccilongo, Nicola & Roselli, Luigi, 2019. "Wind farms, farmland occupation and compensation: Evidences from landowners’ preferences through a stated choice survey in Italy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    18. Andy Choi, 2009. "Willingness to pay: how stable are the estimates?," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 33(4), pages 301-310, November.
    19. Steren, Aviv & Parag, Yael & Teschner, Na'ama & Zemah-Shamir, Shiri, 2025. "Consumer preferences and willingness to pay for EV charging: Implications for incentives to promote off-peak charging and renewables integration," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 392(C).
    20. Soliño, M. & Alía, R. & Agúndez, D., 2020. "Citizens' preferences for research programs on forest genetic resources: A case applied to Pinus pinaster Ait. in Spain," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(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:jsusta:v:11:y:2019:i:3:p:770-:d:202778. 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 (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.