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. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. 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. 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.
    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. Valente, Marica, 2023. "Policy evaluation of waste pricing programs using heterogeneous causal effect estimation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Franz Hackl & Gerald J. Pruckner, 2005. "Warm glow, free‐riding and vehicle neutrality in a health‐related contingent valuation study," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(3), pages 293-306, March.
    6. Marieka M. Klawitter & C. Leigh Anderson & Mary Kay Gugerty, 2013. "Savings And Personal Discount Rates In A Matched Savings Program For Low-Income Families," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(3), pages 468-485, July.
    7. Rodríguez, Elsa Mirta M. & Lacaze, María Victoria & Lupín, Beatriz, 2007. "Willingness to pay for organic food in Argentina: evidence from a consumer survey," Nülan. Deposited Documents 1300, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Sociales, Centro de Documentación.
    8. Van Houtven, George L. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Yang, Jui-Chen, 2017. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 126-135.
    9. Jean-Daniel Rinaudo & Stéphanie Aulong, 2014. "Defining Groundwater Remediation Objectives with Cost-benefit Analysis: Does It Work?," Post-Print hal-00934930, HAL.
    10. Acuff, Kaylee & Kaffine, Daniel T., 2013. "Greenhouse gas emissions, waste and recycling policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 74-86.
    11. Turpie, Jane K., 2003. "The existence value of biodiversity in South Africa: how interest, experience, knowledge, income and perceived level of threat influence local willingness to pay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 199-216, September.
    12. Dienes, Christian, 2015. "Actions and intentions to pay for climate change mitigation: Environmental concern and the role of economic factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 122-129.
    13. Stenger, Anne & Harou, Patrice & Navrud, Ståle, 2009. "Valuing environmental goods and services derived from the forests," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1-2), pages 1-14, January.
    14. Kiprop, Jonah Kipsaat, "undated". "An Evaluation Of Farmers Willingness To Pay For Irrigation Water In Kerio Valley Basin Kenya," Research Theses 265580, Collaborative Masters Program in Agricultural and Applied Economics.
    15. Maksym Polyakov & Morteza Chalak & Md. Sayed Iftekhar & Ram Pandit & Sorada Tapsuwan & Fan Zhang & Chunbo Ma, 2018. "Authorship, Collaboration, Topics, and Research Gaps in Environmental and Resource Economics 1991–2015," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(1), pages 217-239, September.
    16. Daniel McFadden, 2009. "The human side of mechanism design: a tribute to Leo Hurwicz and Jean-Jacque Laffont," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 13(1), pages 77-100, April.
    17. Tobias Erhardt, 2019. "Garbage In and Garbage Out? On Waste Havens in Switzerland," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 251-282, May.
    18. Jordi Jofre‐Monseny & Pilar Sorribas‐Navarro, 2024. "Landfill tax and recycling," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(4), pages 483-500, December.
    19. Elbert Dijkgraaf & Raymond Gradus, 2015. "Efficiency Effects of Unit-Based Pricing Systems and Institutional Choices of Waste Collection," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 61(4), pages 641-658, August.
    20. Henderson, James E. & Dunn, Michael A., 2007. "Investigating the Potential of Fee-Based Recreation on Private Lands in the Lower Mississippi River Delta," 2007 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2007, Mobile, Alabama 34822, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.

    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 (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.