IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i8p3360-d1631432.html

The Role of Italian Local Agencies for Water Management in the Mitigation of and Adaptation to Climate Change: Stated Preference Methods for Future Sustainable Strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Sofia Galeotti

    (CREA-PB Council for Agricultural Research and Economics-Policies and Bioeconomy, Via Barberini 36, 00187 Rome, Italy
    Department of Economics, Engineering, Society and Business Organization (DEIM), Tuscia University, Via del Paradiso 47, 01100 Viterbo, Italy)

  • Luca Cacchiarelli

    (Department of Economics, Engineering, Society and Business Organization (DEIM), Tuscia University, Via del Paradiso 47, 01100 Viterbo, Italy)

  • Eleonora Sofia Rossi

    (Department for Innovation in Biological, Agro-Food and Forest Systems (DIBAF), Tuscia University, Via San Camillo De Lellis snc, 01100 Viterbo, Italy)

  • Roberto Henke

    (CREA-PB Council for Agricultural Research and Economics-Policies and Bioeconomy, Via Barberini 36, 00187 Rome, Italy)

  • Raffaella Zucaro

    (Consorzio per il Canale Emiliano Romagnolo (CER), Via Masi 8, 40137 Bologna, Italy)

Abstract

Climate change affects all aspects of human life, and understanding citizens’ views from a policy perspective is crucial for policymakers to develop future financial programs. In Italy, local agencies for water management (LAWMs), historically linked to irrigation and land reclamation, have expanded their role to address environmental challenges. Their modern functions encompass multifunctional strategies aimed at guaranteeing environmental benefits such as groundwater recharge, prevention of hydrogeological disasters, restoration of biodiversity, and natural water purification. This research conducts a discrete choice experiment to analyze citizens’ awareness and willingness to pay regarding the link between LAWMs’ actions and climate change environmental benefits. The findings indicate that respondents are willing to pay a larger amount to support the prevention of hydrological disasters and the restoration of biodiversity. Additionally, over 87% of our sample chose to pay specific amounts rather than maintain the status quo. This percentage varies depending on three factors: recognizing humans as the primary cause of climate change, embracing new policies, and age. However, there is a gap between the willingness to pay for the benefits studied and the importance respondents place on the LAWMs’ actions required to achieve them. Environmental education and participatory solutions to involve citizens in climate change strategies will promote stronger awareness of sustainable policies, an essential factor to improve governance performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofia Galeotti & Luca Cacchiarelli & Eleonora Sofia Rossi & Roberto Henke & Raffaella Zucaro, 2025. "The Role of Italian Local Agencies for Water Management in the Mitigation of and Adaptation to Climate Change: Stated Preference Methods for Future Sustainable Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:8:p:3360-:d:1631432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/8/3360/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/8/3360/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alcon, Francisco & Zabala, José A. & Martínez-García, Victor & Albaladejo, José A. & López-Becerra, Erasmo I. & de-Miguel, María D. & Martínez-Paz, José M., 2022. "The social wellbeing of irrigation water. A demand-side integrated valuation in a Mediterranean agroecosystem," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    2. Guerrero-Baena, M. Dolores & Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Gómez-Limón, José A. & Glenk, Klaus, 2019. "Willingness to pay for improved irrigation water supply reliability: An approach based on probability density functions," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 217(C), pages 11-22.
    3. Gorton, Matthew & Sauer, Johannes & Peshevski, Mile & Bosev, Dane & Shekerinov, Darko & Quarrie, Steve, 2009. "Water Communities in the Republic of Macedonia: An Empirical Analysis of Membership Satisfaction and Payment Behavior," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 1951-1963, December.
    4. Andor, Mark A. & Schmidt, Christoph M. & Sommer, Stephan, 2018. "Climate Change, Population Ageing and Public Spending: Evidence on Individual Preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 173-183.
    5. Nick Hanley & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2019. "The Role of Stated Preference Valuation Methods in Understanding Choices and Informing Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(2), pages 248-266.
    6. Yifei Niu & Xi Wang & Ciyun Lin, 2022. "A Study on the Impact of Organizing Environmental Awareness and Education on the Performance of Environmental Governance in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-14, October.
    7. Liam F. Beiser-McGrath & Robert A. Huber, 2018. "Assessing the relative importance of psychological and demographic factors for predicting climate and environmental attitudes," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 335-347, August.
    8. Ricks, Jacob I., 2016. "Building Participatory Organizations for Common Pool Resource Management: Water User Group Promotion in Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 34-47.
    9. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    10. Mo Zhou & Winter Maxwell Thayer & John F. P. Bridges, 2018. "Using Latent Class Analysis to Model Preference Heterogeneity in Health: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 175-187, February.
    11. Martínez-García, Víctor & Martínez-Paz, José M. & Alcon, Francisco, 2022. "The economic value of flood risk regulation by agroecosystems at semiarid areas," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    12. Arne Risa Hole, 2007. "Fitting mixed logit models by using maximum simulated likelihood," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 7(3), pages 388-401, September.
    13. Boxall, Peter C. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L. & Swait, Joffre & Williams, Michael & Louviere, Jordan, 1996. "A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 243-253, September.
    14. Cammarano, D. & Ronga, D. & Di Mola, I. & Mori, M. & Parisi, M., 2020. "Impact of climate change on water and nitrogen use efficiencies of processing tomato cultivated in Italy," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    15. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    16. Eleonora Sofia Rossi & José A. Zabala & Francesco Caracciolo & Emanuele Blasi, 2023. "The Value of Crop Diversification: Understanding the Factors Influencing Consumers’ WTP for Pasta from Sustainable Agriculture," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-18, February.
    17. Haibo Ruan & Li Qiu & Jun Chen & Shuo Liu & Zhiyuan Ma, 2022. "Government Trust, Environmental Pollution Perception, and Environmental Governance Satisfaction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-18, August.
    18. Ghanem, Samar & Ferrini, Silvia & Di Maria, Corrado, 2023. "Air pollution and willingness to pay for health risk reductions in Egypt: A contingent valuation survey of Greater Cairo and Alexandria households," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    19. Falkenmark, M. & Finlayson, Max & Gordon, L. J. & Bennett, E. M. & Chiuta, T. M. & Coates, D. & Ghosh, N. & Gopalakrishnan, M. & de Groot, R. S. & Jacks, G. & Kendy, E. & Oyebande, L. & Moore, M. & Pe, 2007. "Agriculture, water, and ecosystems: avoiding the costs of going too far," IWMI Books, Reports H040199, International Water Management Institute.
    20. Yannis, George & Antoniou, C., 2007. "A mixed logit model for the sensitivity analysis of Greek drivers' behaviour towards enforcement for road safety," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 37, pages 62-77.
    21. Nick Hanley & Sergio Colombo & Dugald Tinch & Andrew Black & Ashar Aftab, 2006. "Estimating the benefits of water quality improvements under the Water Framework Directive: are benefits transferable?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 33(3), pages 391-413, September.
    22. Fabiana Natali & Giacomo Branca, 2020. "On positive externalities from irrigated agriculture and their policy implications: An overview," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 22(2), pages 1-25.
    23. Eleonora Sofia Rossi & Luca Cacchiarelli & Simone Severini & Alessandro Sorrentino, 2024. "Consumers preferences and social sustainability: a discrete choice experiment on ‘Quality Agricultural Work’ ethical label in the Italian fruit sector," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, December.
    24. Alcon, Francisco & Marín-Miñano, Cristina & Zabala, José A. & de-Miguel, María-Dolores & Martínez-Paz, José M., 2020. "Valuing diversification benefits through intercropping in Mediterranean agroecosystems: A choice experiment approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 171(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. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    2. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    3. Bernadeta Gołębiowska & Anna Bartczak & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2020. "Energy Demand Management and Social Norms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-20, July.
    4. Tyllianakis, Emmanouil & Martin-Ortega, Julia & Ziv, Guy & Chapman, Pippa J. & Holden, Joseph & Cardwell, Michael & Fyfe, Duncan, 2023. "A window into land managers’ preferences for new forms of agri-environmental schemes: Evidence from a post-Brexit analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    5. Natali, F. & Cacchiarelli, L. & Branca, G., 2022. "There are plenty more (sustainable) fish in the sea: A discrete choice experiment on discarded species in Italy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    6. Anastassiadis Friederike & Feil Jan-Henning & Musshoff Oliver & Schilling Philipp, 2014. "Analysing Farmers’ Use of Price Hedging Instruments: An Experimental Approach," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 181-192, January.
    7. Canessa, Carolin & Venus, Terese & Wiesmeier, Miriam & Mennig, Philipp & Sauer, Johannes, 2023. "Farmers’ preferences over alternative AECS designs. Do the ecological conditions influence the willingness to accept result-based contracts?," 97th Annual Conference, March 27-29, 2023, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 334508, Agricultural Economics Society - AES.
    8. Halkos, George & Galani, Georgia, 2016. "Assessing willingness to pay for marine and coastal ecosystems: A Case Study in Greece," MPRA Paper 68767, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Alejandra R. Enríquez & Angel Bujosa Bestard, 2020. "Measuring the economic impact of climate-induced environmental changes on sun-and-beach tourism," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(2), pages 203-217, May.
    10. Mat Alipiah, Roseliza & Anang, Zuraini & Abdul Rashid, Noorhaslinda Kulub & Smart, James C. R. & Wan Ibrahim, Wan Noorwatie, 2018. "Aquaculturists Preference Heterogeneity towards Wetland Ecosystem Services: A Latent Class Discrete Choice Model," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 52(2), pages 253-266.
    11. Lea Skræp Svenningsen, 2017. "Distributive outcomes matter: Measuring social preferences for climate policy," IFRO Working Paper 2017/11, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    12. Jan Vanstockem & Liesbet Vranken & Brent Bleys & Ben Somers & Martin Hermy, 2018. "Do Looks Matter? A Case Study on Extensive Green Roofs Using Discrete Choice Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, January.
    13. Alcon, Francisco & Zabala, José A. & Martínez-Paz, José M., 2022. "Assessment of social demand heterogeneity to inform agricultural diffuse pollution mitigation policies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    14. Allen Blackman & Sahan T. M. Dissanayake & Adan L. Martinez-Cruz & Leonardo Corral & Maja Schling, 2024. "The Benefits of Titling Indigenous Communities in the Peruvian Amazon: A Stated Preference Approach," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 100(2), pages 333-352.
    15. Marit Kragt & Jeffrey Bennett, 2012. "Attribute Framing in Choice Experiments: How Do Attribute Level Descriptions Affect Value Estimates?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(1), pages 43-59, January.
    16. Annkathrin Wahbi & Oliver Musshoff, 2024. "Unlocking rural resilience: Exploring innovative digital saving solutions for farming households in Mali," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(3), pages 931-954, September.
    17. Dissanayake,Sahan T. M. & Jha,Prakash & Adhikari,Bhim & Bista,Rajesh & Bluffstone,Randall & uintel,Harisharan & Martinsson,Peter & Paudel,Naya Sharma & Somanathan,E. & Toman,Michael A., 2015. "Community managed forest groups and preferences for REDD contract attributes: a choice experiment survey of communities in Nepal," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7326, The World Bank.
    18. Mulatu, Dawit Woubishet & Alvsilver, Jessica & Siikamäki, Juha, 2019. "Valuing Residents’ Preferences for Improved Urban Green Space Ecosystem Services in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia," EfD Discussion Paper 19-2, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    19. Faulques, Martin & Bonnet, Jean & Bourdin, Sébastien & Juge, Marine & Pigeon, Jonas & Richard, Charlotte, 2022. "Generational effect and territorial distributive justice, the two main drivers for willingness to pay for renewable energies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    20. Johnston, Robert J. & Duke, Joshua M., 2010. "Socioeconomic adjustments and choice experiment benefit function transfer: Evaluating the common wisdom," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 421-438, 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:17:y:2025:i:8:p:3360-:d:1631432. 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.