IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v26y2024i12d10.1007_s10668-023-04396-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the change in the heterogeneity of public preferences for air quality improvement policies before and after the COVID-19 pandemic: comparative results from latent class model analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Nan Jiang

    (Northeast Agricultural University)

  • Changlin Ao

    (Northeast Agricultural University)

  • Yulin Long

    (Northeast Agricultural University)

  • Yuehua Wei

    (Northeast Agricultural University)

  • Lishan Xu

    (Mudanjiang Normal University)

  • Bowen Lei

    (Northeast Agricultural University)

  • Biqi Mao

    (Tarim University)

Abstract

In addition to the deadly effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, positive changes have been made in air quality. It is important for decision-makers to know whether people’s preferences change as the environment changes. This study tests the stability of public’s preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for air quality improvement before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, using a choice experiment. To explore the determinants of the public’s preference heterogeneity for air quality improvement, we introduced the risk perception psychological factor and further compared the public’s preference heterogeneity before and after the COVID-19 pandemic based on a latent class model. The results suggest that the characteristics of respondents’ preference categories are similar in the face of a public health crisis and an uncertain future, and the heterogeneous preference of respondents for air quality improvement before the COVID-19 pandemic (2019) and after the COVID-19 pandemic (2021) which can be described in terms of three classes: “sensation preferable,” “health preferable,” and “price sensitive.” However, the sources of influencing preference heterogeneity before and after the COVID-19 pandemic are different, which are reflected in risk perception and socio-economic characteristic variables. After the COVID-19 pandemic, females with stronger perceived risk effects and lower acceptability of air pollution will pay more attention to the health attributes of air quality improvements. The results also reveal that respondents show different WTP for air quality improvement attributes, with respondents before the COVID-19 pandemic showing higher WTP than those after. The contribution of this study is to provide theoretical insights to explore the effects of stability of public preferences in the context of public health emergencies, and to provide valuable guidance for policy makers to formulate governance measures in line with public demands.

Suggested Citation

  • Nan Jiang & Changlin Ao & Yulin Long & Yuehua Wei & Lishan Xu & Bowen Lei & Biqi Mao, 2024. "Exploring the change in the heterogeneity of public preferences for air quality improvement policies before and after the COVID-19 pandemic: comparative results from latent class model analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(12), pages 31121-31145, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:12:d:10.1007_s10668-023-04396-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-023-04396-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-023-04396-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-023-04396-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luan, Siliang & Yang, Qingfang & Jiang, Zhongtai & Wang, Wei, 2021. "Exploring the impact of COVID-19 on individual's travel mode choice in China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 271-280.
    2. Stephen Hynes & Isaac Ankamah-Yeboah & Stephen O’Neill & Katherine Needham & Bui Bich Xuan & Claire Armstrong, 2021. "The impact of nature documentaries on public environmental preferences and willingness to pay: entropy balancing and the blue planet II effect," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(8), pages 1428-1456, June.
    3. Meldrum, James R., 2015. "Comparing different attitude statements in latent class models of stated preferences for managing an invasive forest pathogen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 13-22.
    4. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Barczak, Anna & Budziński, Wiktor & Giergiczny, Marek & Hanley, Nick, 2016. "Preference and WTP stability for public forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 11-22.
    5. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    6. Duersch, Peter & Römer, Daniel & Roth, Benjamin, 2017. "Intertemporal stability of uncertainty preferences," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 7-20.
    7. Hynes, Stephen & Armstrong, Claire W. & Xuan, Bui Bich & Ankamah-Yeboah, Isaac & Simpson, Katherine & Tinch, Robert & Ressurreição, Adriana, 2021. "Have environmental preferences and willingness to pay remained stable before and during the global Covid-19 shock?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    8. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    9. Lew, Daniel K. & Wallmo, Kristy, 2017. "Temporal stability of stated preferences for endangered species protection from choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 87-97.
    10. Gisela Wachinger & Ortwin Renn & Chloe Begg & Christian Kuhlicke, 2013. "The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1049-1065, June.
    11. Schaafsma, Marije & Brouwer, Roy & Liekens, Inge & De Nocker, Leo, 2014. "Temporal stability of preferences and willingness to pay for natural areas in choice experiments: A test–retest," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 243-260.
    12. Singh, Ajay S. & Zwickle, Adam & Bruskotter, Jeremy T. & Wilson, Robyn, 2017. "The perceived psychological distance of climate change impacts and its influence on support for adaptation policy," Environmental Science & Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 93-99.
    13. Gregory, Robin, 1986. "Interpreting measures of economic loss: Evidence from contingent valuation and experimental studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 325-337, December.
    14. Völker, Marc & Lienhoop, Nele, 2016. "Exploring group dynamics in deliberative choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 57-67.
    15. González, Rosa Marina & Román, Concepción & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2019. "Preferences for sustainable mobility in natural areas: The case of Teide National Park," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 42-51.
    16. Chengxiang Tang & Yucheng Zhang, 2016. "Using discrete choice experiments to value preferences for air quality improvement: the case of curbing haze in urban China," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(8), pages 1473-1494, August.
    17. Connor, Jade & Madhavan, Sarina & Mokashi, Mugdha & Amanuel, Hanna & Johnson, Natasha R. & Pace, Lydia E. & Bartz, Deborah, 2020. "Health risks and outcomes that disproportionately affect women during the Covid-19 pandemic: A review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 266(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. Wunsch, Andrea & Meyerhoff, Jürgen & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2022. "A test–retest analysis of stated preferences in uncertain times," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 725-736.
    2. Sardaro, Ruggiero & La Sala, Piermichele & De Pascale, Gianluigi & Faccilongo, Nicola, 2021. "The conservation of cultural heritage in rural areas: Stakeholder preferences regarding historical rural buildings in Apulia, southern Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    3. Balaine, Lorraine & Gallai, Nicola & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2020. "Trading off environmental goods for compensations: Insights from traditional and deliberative valuation methods in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    4. Faccioli, Michela & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Glenk, Klaus & Martin-Ortega, Julia, 2020. "Environmental attitudes and place identity as determinants of preferences for ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    5. Perni, Ángel & Barreiro-Hurlé, Jesús & Martínez-Paz, José Miguel, 2020. "When policy implementation failures affect public preferences for environmental goods: Implications for economic analysis in the European water policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    6. Matthews, Yvonne & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan, 2017. "Stability of Willingness-to-Pay for Coastal Management: A Choice Experiment Across Three Time Periods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 64-73.
    7. Hynes, Stephen & Armstrong, Claire W. & Xuan, Bui Bich & Ankamah-Yeboah, Isaac & Simpson, Katherine & Tinch, Robert & Ressurreição, Adriana, 2021. "Have environmental preferences and willingness to pay remained stable before and during the global Covid-19 shock?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    8. Rolfe, John & Dyack, Brenda, 2019. "Testing Temporal Stability of Recreation Values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 75-83.
    9. Marco Costanigro & Yuko Onozaka, 2020. "A Belief‐Preference Model of Choice for Experience and Credence Goods," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(1), pages 70-95, February.
    10. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    11. Ahmad Adeel & Bruno Notteboom & Ansar Yasar & Kris Scheerlinck & Jeroen Stevens, 2021. "Sustainable Streetscape and Built Environment Designs around BRT Stations: A Stated Choice Experiment Using 3D Visualizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-21, June.
    12. Emmanouil Mentzakis & Mandy Ryan & Paul McNamee, 2011. "Using discrete choice experiments to value informal care tasks: exploring preference heterogeneity," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(8), pages 930-944, August.
    13. Goedele Van den Broeck & Kaat Van Hoyweghen & Miet Maertens, 2016. "Employment Conditions in the Senegalese Horticultural Export Industry: A Worker Perspective," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 34(2), pages 301-319, March.
    14. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, 2020. "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(01), March.
    15. Bui Bich Xuan & Erlend Dancke Sandorf, 2020. "Potential for Sustainable Aquaculture: Insights from Discrete Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(2), pages 401-421, October.
    16. Su, Jie & Gasparatos, Alexandros, 2024. "Assessing the heterogeneity of public acceptability for mangrove restoration through a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    17. J Blasch & B van der Kroon & P van Beukering & R Munster & S Fabiani & P Nino & S Vanino, 2022. "Farmer preferences for adopting precision farming technologies: a case study from Italy," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(1), pages 33-81.
    18. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    19. Christoph Schulze & Katarzyna Zagórska & Kati Häfner & Olimpia Markiewicz & Mikołaj Czajkowski & Bettina Matzdorf, 2024. "Using farmers' ex ante preferences to design agri‐environmental contracts: A systematic review," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(1), pages 44-83, February.
    20. S. Ceolotto & E. Denny, 2024. "Putting a New ‘Spin’ on Energy Information: Measuring the Impact of Reframing Energy Efficiency Information on Tumble Dryer Choices in a Multi-country Experiment," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 51-108, March.

    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:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:12:d:10.1007_s10668-023-04396-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.