IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i23p10204-d1526591.html

Willingness to Pay for Domestic Waste of Rural Households Under Low-Carbon Society Transition: A Case Study of Underdeveloped Mountainous Areas in Shaanxi, China

Author

Listed:
  • Siqi Lu

    (School of Economics and Management, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, China
    School of Journalism and Communication, Northwest University of Political Science and Law, Xi’an 710122, China)

  • Feng Wang

    (School of Economics and Management, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, China)

  • Ruikun An

    (School of Economics and Management, Northwest University, Xi’an 710127, China)

Abstract

A low-carbon society aims to achieve sustainable social development through innovative technologies and mechanisms, promoting low-carbon economic models and lifestyles. In light of China’s commitment to achieving carbon neutrality and transitioning to a low-carbon society, it is crucial to control waste generation at its source, as the waste management sector is highly polluting and contributes substantially to carbon emissions. Adopting the 3R (reduce, reuse, and recycle) approach, reducing the quantity of waste is the priority in waste management. Therefore, exploring rural residents’ willingness to adopt the “pay as you throw” (PAYT) policy in underdeveloped mountainous areas and the factors influencing this willingness is highly valuable. This paper adopts the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) with a face-to-face questionnaire survey, involving 1429 farmers from six cities around the underdeveloped mountainous area in Northwestern China. It measures their willingness to pay (WTP) and preferred payment levels for the PAYT policy. Based on the theory of planned behavior, the paper finds that farmers’ environmental knowledge, environmental awareness and social trust positively influence their WTP, while farmers’ perception of pollution and daily waste disposal do not significantly impact their WTP. Additionally, social trust negatively moderates the relationship between environmental knowledge and WTP. This paper provides empirical results that can support the implementation of a nationwide waste fee management system and the promotion of volume-based waste fee management. It also offers targeted suggestions for the government to establish PAYT and improve the efficiency of rural household waste management in rural China.

Suggested Citation

  • Siqi Lu & Feng Wang & Ruikun An, 2024. "Willingness to Pay for Domestic Waste of Rural Households Under Low-Carbon Society Transition: A Case Study of Underdeveloped Mountainous Areas in Shaanxi, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-17, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10204-:d:1526591
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10204/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10204/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas C. Kinnaman, 2006. "Policy Watch: Examining the Justification for Residential Recycling," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 219-232, Fall.
    2. George L. Van Houtven & Glenn E. Morris, 1999. "Household Behavior under Alternative Pay-as-You-Throw Systems for Solid Waste Disposal," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 75(4), pages 515-537.
    3. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    4. Xiangsheng Dou & Huanying Cui, 2017. "Low-carbon society creation and socio-economic structural transition in China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 1577-1599, October.
    5. Richardson, Robert A. & Havlicek, Joseph Jr., 1978. "Economic analysis of the composition of household solid wastes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 103-111, March.
    6. Niklitschek+, Mario & Leon+, Javier, 1996. "Combining Intended Demand and Yes/No Responses in the Estimation of Contingent Valuation Models," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 387-402, November.
    7. Zhang, Yang & Zhang, Kun & Liu, Congyan & Li, Fangshu & Xu, Bing, 2023. "Influence of the perceived neighborhood environment on Paying for domestic waste management services in rural China: Evidence from the Xiangtan Prefecture," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    8. Di Foggia, Giacomo & Beccarello, Massimo, 2023. "Designing circular economy-compliant municipal solid waste management charging schemes," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    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. Valente, Marica, 2023. "Policy evaluation of waste pricing programs using heterogeneous causal effect estimation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    2. Antonella Tomasi & Giovanna Messina, 2021. "Wasted in waste? The benefits of switching from taxes to Pay-As-You-Throw fees: The Italian case," ECONOMIA PUBBLICA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2021(2), pages 7-38.
    3. Viscusi, W. Kip & Huber, Joel & Bell, Jason, 2023. "Changes in household recycling behavior: Evidence from panel data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    4. Leonzio Rizzo & Riccardo Secomandi, 2020. "Pay as you throw: evidence on the incentive to recycle," Working papers 88, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    5. Bueno, Matheus & Valente, Marica, 2019. "The effects of pricing waste generation: A synthetic control approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 274-285.
    6. Abbott, Andrew & Nandeibam, Shasikanta & O'Shea, Lucy, 2011. "Explaining the variation in household recycling rates across the UK," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2214-2223, September.
    7. Bohara, Alok K. & Caplan, Arthur J. & Grijalva, Therese, 2007. "The effect of experience and quantity-based pricing on the valuation of a curbside recycling program," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 433-443, December.
    8. Germà Bel & Raymond Gradus, 2014. "“Effects of unit-based pricing on the waste collection demand: a meta-regression analysis”," IREA Working Papers 201420, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Jun 2014.
    9. Ju-Chin Huang, & John M. Halstead, & Shanna B. Saunders, 2011. "Managing Municipal Solid Waste with Unit-Based Pricing: Policy Effects and Responsiveness to Pricing," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 87(4), pages 645-660.
    10. David Hoyos & Petr Mariel, 2010. "Contingent Valuation: Past, Present and Future," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2010(4), pages 329-343.
    11. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2008. "Environmental regulation of households: An empirical review of economic and psychological factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(4), pages 559-574, July.
    12. Takehiro Usui & Kenji Takeuchi, 2014. "Evaluating Unit-Based Pricing of Residential Solid Waste: A Panel Data Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(2), pages 245-271, June.
    13. Bel, Germà & Gradus, Raymond, 2016. "Effects of unit-based pricing on household waste collection demand: A meta-regression analysis," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 169-182.
    14. Somers, Jackson C., 2025. "Household landfill diversion and the impact on methane emissions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    15. Mikhail Miklyaev & Glenn P. Jenkins & Precious P. Adeshina, 2022. "Ex-Post Evaluation of The Algerian SWRO Desalination PPP Program," Development Discussion Papers 2022-14, JDI Executive Programs.
    16. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    17. Maarten A. Allers & Corine Hoeben, 2010. "Effects of Unit-Based Garbage Pricing: A Differences-in-Differences Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 45(3), pages 405-428, March.
    18. Mohammed Saleh Al.Ansari, 2015. "Effective Governance Policies for Water and Sanitation," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(6), pages 326-326, June.
    19. Jenkins, Robin R. & Martinez, Salvador A. & Palmer, Karen & Podolsky, Michael J., 2003. "The determinants of household recycling: a material-specific analysis of recycling program features and unit pricing," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 294-318, March.
    20. Garfield Wayne Hunter & Gideon Sagoe & Daniele Vettorato & Ding Jiayu, 2019. "Sustainability of Low Carbon City Initiatives in China: A Comprehensive Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-37, August.

    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:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10204-:d:1526591. 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.