IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i23p10303-d1528758.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Residents’ Preferences on Green Infrastructure in Wuhan, China

Author

Listed:
  • Chang Lu

    (Graduate School of Economics, Shiga University, Hikone, Shiga 522-8522, Japan)

  • Katsuya Tanaka

    (Faculty of Economics and Research Center for Sustainability and Environment, Shiga University, Hikone, Shiga 522-8522, Japan)

  • Qulin Shen

    (Tozai Trading (Shanghai Pudong New Area) Co., Ltd., Tozai Trading Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200002, China)

Abstract

Green infrastructure (GI) provides considerable benefits, including stormwater runoff management, biodiversity conservation, and urban sustainability promotion, and thus has garnered widespread attention. However, the limited research on residents’ preferences for GI constrains further promotion in China. To address this issue, data were collected from 436 residents in Wuhan, China, through an online survey. This study employed a comprehensive analytical framework that integrates best–worst scaling (BWS) with the contingent valuation method (CVM) to assess the preferences of residents in Wuhan, China, for six types of GI and estimate their willingness to pay (WTP) for GI enhancements. The conditional model and mixed logit model results indicated that residents preferred GI facilities that offer direct benefits, such as street trees and permeable pavements, and showed a lower preference for structures less suited to a Chinese context, such as eco-roofs. Regarding heterogeneity, only permeable pavements showed significant variation in preferences. Furthermore, the average WTP for GI enhancement was 142.28 RMB/household/year. Factors including familiarity with GI, information sources, and air quality improvement perceptions positively influenced the WTP, while low income negatively impacted the WTP. These findings offer insights for urban planners to develop effective policies to enhance public support for GI and promote urban sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang Lu & Katsuya Tanaka & Qulin Shen, 2024. "Residents’ Preferences on Green Infrastructure in Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10303-:d:1528758
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10303/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10303/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, January.
    2. Liquete, Camino & Udias, Angel & Conte, Giulio & Grizzetti, Bruna & Masi, Fabio, 2016. "Integrated valuation of a nature-based solution for water pollution control. Highlighting hidden benefits," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 392-401.
    3. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    4. Richard Norman & Benjamin M. Craig & Paul Hansen & Marcel F. Jonker & John Rose & Deborah J. Street & Brendan Mulhern, 2019. "Issues in the Design of Discrete Choice Experiments," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 12(3), pages 281-285, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Minli Jin & Lihui Hu & Guang Hu & Jing Guo, 2025. "Pursuing Ecological and Social Co-Benefits: Public Hierarchical Willingness for Biodiversity Conservation in Urban Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-19, May.

    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. Grzybowski, Lukasz & Hasbi, Maude & Liang, Julienne, 2018. "Transition from copper to fiber broadband: The role of connection speed and switching costs," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1-10.
    2. Cho, Woohyun & Windle, Robert J. & Dresner, Martin E., 2017. "The impact of operational exposure and value-of-time on customer choice: Evidence from the airline industry," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 455-471.
    3. Carlos Barros, 2012. "Sustainable Tourism in Inhambane-Mozambique," CEsA Working Papers 105, CEsA - Centre for African and Development Studies.
    4. Yan, Zhen & Zhou, Jie-hong, 2015. "Measuring consumer heterogeneous preferences for pork traits under media reports: choice experiment in sixteen traceability pilot cities, China," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 212609, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Matthew J. Baker, 2014. "Adaptive Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling and estimation in Mata," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 14(3), pages 623-661, September.
    6. Johannes Geyer & Thorben Korfhage, 2015. "Long‐term Care Insurance and Carers' Labor Supply – A Structural Model," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(9), pages 1178-1191, September.
    7. Daniele Pacifico, 2012. "Fitting nonparametric mixed logit models via expectation-maximization algorithm," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 12(2), pages 284-298, June.
    8. Andrea Gauselmann & Philipp Marek, 2012. "Regional determinants of MNE’s location choice in post-transition economies," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 39(4), pages 487-511, November.
    9. Meles, Tensay Hadush & Ryan, Lisa & Mukherjee, Sanghamitra C., 2022. "Heterogeneity in preferences for renewable home heating systems among Irish households," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    10. Lippi Bruni, Matteo & Ugolini, Cristina & Verzulli, Rossella, 2021. "Should I wait or should I go? Travelling versus waiting for better healthcare," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    11. Cranford, Matthew & Mourato, Susana, 2014. "Credit-Based Payments for Ecosystem Services: Evidence from a Choice Experiment in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 503-520.
    12. Pilny, Adam & Mennicken, Roman, 2014. "Does Hospital Reputation Influence the Choice of Hospital?," Ruhr Economic Papers 516, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    13. Staus, Alexander, 2008. "Standard and Shuffled Halton Sequences in a Mixed Logit Model," Working Papers 93856, Universitaet Hohenheim, Institute of Agricultural Policy and Agricultural Markets.
    14. Gächter, Simon & Gerhards, Leonie & Nosenzo, Daniele, 2017. "The importance of peers for compliance with norms of fair sharing," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 72-86.
    15. Ana I. Sanjuán‐López & Helena Resano‐Ezcaray, 2020. "Labels for a Local Food Speciality Product: The Case of Saffron," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(3), pages 778-797, September.
    16. Wakamatsu, Mihoko & Shin, Kong Joo & Wilson, Clevo & Managi, Shunsuke, 2018. "Exploring a Gap between Australia and Japan in the Economic Valuation of Whale Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 397-407.
    17. Drake, Coleman, 2019. "What are consumers willing to pay for a broad network health plan?: Evidence from covered California," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 63-77.
    18. Shi Li & Hironobu Nakagawa, 2022. "Exchange rates and foreign direct investment: Evidence from Chinese firm‐level data," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(9), pages 2902-2923, September.
    19. Edward D. Perry & GianCarlo Moschini & David A. Hennessy, 2016. "Testing for Complementarity: Glyphosate Tolerant Soybeans and Conservation Tillage," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(3), pages 765-784.
    20. Panchalingam, Thadchaigeni & Howard, Gregory & Allen Klaiber, H. & Roe, Brian E., 2023. "Food choice behavior of adolescents under parent-child interaction in the context of US school lunch programs," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(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:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10303-:d:1528758. 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.