IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i5p2528-d506359.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Funding Campus Sustainability through a Green Fee—Estimating Students’ Willingness to Pay

Author

Listed:
  • Jimena González-Ramírez

    (O’Malley School of Business, Manhattan College, 4513 Manhattan College Pkwy, DLS 422, Riverdale, NY 10471, USA)

  • Heyi Cheng

    (O’Malley School of Business, Manhattan College, 4513 Manhattan College Pkwy, DLS 422, Riverdale, NY 10471, USA)

  • Sierra Arral

    (O’Malley School of Business, Manhattan College, 4513 Manhattan College Pkwy, DLS 422, Riverdale, NY 10471, USA)

Abstract

Many higher education institutions promote sustainability by instilling environmental awareness within college students, the innovators of the future. As higher education institutions face budgetary constraints to achieve greener campuses, green fees have emerged as an alternative method for universities to encourage student participation and overall campus sustainability. A green fee is a mandatory student fee that funds sustainability projects on campus and is typically managed by a group of students and faculty. We are the first to assess students’ support for a mandatory green using a single dichotomous choice, contingent valuation question and estimating the willingness to pay to fund campus sustainability using a discrete choice model. Using results from a survey at a private college in New York City, we found more support for $5 and $10 green fee values. Using both parametric and non-parametric estimation methods, we found that mean and median willingness-to-pay values were between $13 and $15 and between $10 and $18, respectively. We suggest implementing a green fee between $10 and $13 following the lower values of the non-parametric median willingness to pay (WTP) range estimates that do not rely on distributional assumptions. We hope that other academic institutions follow our research steps to assess the support for a green fee and to suggest a green fee value for their institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jimena González-Ramírez & Heyi Cheng & Sierra Arral, 2021. "Funding Campus Sustainability through a Green Fee—Estimating Students’ Willingness to Pay," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:5:p:2528-:d:506359
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/5/2528/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/5/2528/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rospita Odorlina P. Situmorang & Ta-Ching Liang & Shu-Chun Chang, 2020. "The Difference of Knowledge and Behavior of College Students on Plastic Waste Problems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-11, September.
    2. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    3. Leyla Angélica Sandoval Hamón & Ana Paula Martinho & M. Rosário Ramos & Cecilia Elizabeth Bayas Aldaz, 2020. "Do Spanish Students Become More Sustainable after the Implementation of Sustainable Practices by Universities?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-21, September.
    4. Takuro Uehara & Alayna Ynacay-Nye, 2018. "How Water Bottle Refill Stations Contribute to Campus Sustainability: A Case Study in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-19, August.
    5. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    6. Yuan Ma & Jingzhi Men & Wei Cui, 2020. "Does Environmental Education Matter? Evidence from Provincial Higher Education Institutions in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-13, August.
    7. Andrew Meyer & Guanyi Yang, 2016. "How much versus who: which social norms information is more effective?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(5), pages 389-401, January.
    8. David Conner & Amanda Falkner & Nathan Lantieri & Betsy McGavisk & Bridgette McShea, 2018. "Stakeholder Perceptions of Campus Sustainability Efforts: Lessons from Vermont," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, October.
    9. Farheen Naz & Judit Oláh & Dinu Vasile & Róbert Magda, 2020. "Green Purchase Behavior of University Students in Hungary: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-21, December.
    10. Younjun Kim & Catherine L. Kling & Jinhua Zhao, 2015. "Understanding Behavioral Explanations of the WTP-WTA Divergence Through a Neoclassical Lens: Implications for Environmental Policy," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 169-187, October.
    11. Shujie Zhao & Qingbin Song & Chao Wang, 2019. "Characterizing the Energy-Saving Behaviors, Attitudes and Awareness of University Students in Macau," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-11, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Vossler, Christian A. & Holladay, J. Scott, 2018. "Alternative value elicitation formats in contingent valuation: Mechanism design and convergent validity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 133-145.
    14. Jari Kukkonen & Sirpa Kärkkäinen & Tuula Keinonen, 2018. "Examining the Relationships between Factors Influencing Environmental Behaviour among University Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-15, November.
    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. José L Oviedo & Pablo Campos & Alejandro Caparrós, 2022. "Contingent valuation of landowner demand for forest amenities: application in Andalusia, Spain," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(3), pages 615-643.
    2. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M. & Sims, Katharine R.E. & Phaneuf, Daniel J., 2019. "Using referenda to improve targeting and decrease costs of conditional cash transfers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 179-194.
    3. Giffoni, Francesco & Florio, Massimo, 2023. "Public support of science: A contingent valuation study of citizens' attitudes about CERN with and without information about implicit taxes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    4. Mikołaj Czajkowski & Ewa Zawojska & Norman Meade & Ronaldo Seroa da Motta & Mike Welsh & Ramon Arigoni Ortiz, 2022. "On the inference about willingness to pay distribution using contingent valuation data," Working Papers 2022-08, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    5. Pengfei Liu & Xiaohui Tian, 2021. "Downward Hypothetical Bias in the Willingness to Accept Measure for Private Goods: Evidence from a Field Experiment," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(5), pages 1679-1699, October.
    6. Waranan Tantiwat & Christopher Gan & Wei Yang, 2021. "The Estimation of the Willingness to Pay for Air-Quality Improvement in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    7. Thapa, Samir & Morrison, Mark & Parton, Kevin A, 2021. "Willingness to pay for domestic biogas plants and distributing carbon revenues to influence their purchase: A case study in Nepal," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    8. Imran Hossain & Maria Fekete-Farkas & Md. Nekmahmud, 2022. "Purchase Behavior of Energy-Efficient Appliances Contribute to Sustainable Energy Consumption in Developing Country: Moral Norms Extension of the Theory of Planned Behavior," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-20, June.
    9. Ndebele, Tom & Forgie, Vicky, 2017. "Estimating the economic benefits of a wetland restoration programme in New Zealand: A contingent valuation approach," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 75-89.
    10. Hyo-Jin Kim & Se-Jun Jin & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2018. "Public Assessment of Releasing a Captive Indo-Pacific Bottlenose Dolphin into the Wild in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-8, September.
    11. John C. Whitehead & Andrew Ropicki & John Loomis & Sherry Larkin & Tim Haab & Sergio Alvarez, 2023. "Estimating the benefits to Florida households from avoiding another Gulf oil spill using the contingent valuation method: Internal validity tests with probability‐based and opt‐in samples," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(2), pages 705-720, June.
    12. Ju-Hee Kim & Ga-Eun Kim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2018. "A Valuation of the Restoration of Hwangnyongsa Temple in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-7, January.
    13. Ning Geng & Zengjin Liu & Xibing Han & Xiaoyu Zhang, 2022. "Influencing Factors and Group Differences of Urban Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Low-Carbon Agricultural Products in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-19, December.
    14. Koo, A Mi & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2022. "Household willingness to pay for a smart water metering and monitoring system: The case of South Korea," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    15. Jichao Geng & Na Yang & Wei Zhang & Li Yang, 2023. "Public Willingness to Pay for Green Lifestyle in China: A Contingent Valuation Method Based on Integrated Model," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-23, January.
    16. Pappalardo, Gioacchino & West, Grant Howard & Nayga, Rodolfo M. & Toscano, Sabrina & Pecorino, Biagio, 2022. "The effect of a UNESCO world heritage site designation on willingness to pay to preserve an agri-environmental good: The case of the dry stone walls in Mt. Etna," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    17. Kassahun, Habtamu Tilahun & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl & Nicholson, Charles F., 2020. "Revisiting money and labor for valuing environmental goods and services in developing countries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    18. Li Cong & Yujun Zhang & Ching-Hui (Joan) Su & Ming-Hsiang Chen & Jinnan Wang, 2019. "Understanding Tourists’ Willingness-to-Pay for Rural Landscape Improvement and Preference Heterogeneity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-20, December.
    19. Amoah, Anthony & Ferrini, Silvia & Schaafsma, Marije, 2019. "Electricity outages in Ghana: Are contingent valuation estimates valid?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    20. Massfeller, Anna & Meraner, Manuela & Hüttel, Silke & Uehleke, Reinhard, 2022. "Farmers' acceptance of results-based agri-environmental schemes: A German perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).

    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:13:y:2021:i:5:p:2528-:d:506359. 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.