IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Households’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Urban Waste Management in Mekelle City, Ethiopia

  • Hagos, Dagnew
  • Mekonnen, Alemu
  • Gebreegziabher, Zenebe
Registered author(s):

    Cities in developing countries experiencing rapid urbanization and population growth too often lack the financial resources and institutional capacity to provide needed municipal infrastructure for adequate solid waste management, despite citizens’ demand for it. This paper uses a cross-sectional survey of 226 randomly selected households in Mekelle City, Ethiopia, to assess the current municipal sanitation fees and the willingness to pay (WTP) of residents for improved urban waste management, and suggests mechanisms for cost recovery. We used Tobit and probit models in the empirical analysis to determine the factors that influence households’ WTP for improved solid waste management. Results reveal that residents’ WTP for improved solid waste management is significantly related to income and awareness of environmental quality, among other factors. Study results reveal that the current city fee for sanitation is far below the WTP of the residents. The mean WTP we found can be a guide for municipal officials in setting a more appropriate fee that can finance improvements in city SWM, where all households receive collection services, waste is disposed of properly, and recycling and composting features are added.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Resources For the Future in its series Discussion Papers with number dp-12-06-efd.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 27 Apr 2012
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-12-06-efd
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Weldesilassie, Alebel B. & Fror, Oliver & Boelee, Eline & Dabbert, Stephan, 2009. "The Economic Value of Improved Wastewater Irrigation: A Contingent Valuation Study in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 34(3), December.
    2. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design And Contingent Valuation: The Noaa Panel'S No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(3), pages 484-487, August.
    3. W. Michael Hanemann, 1984. "Welfare Evaluations in Contingent Valuation Experiments with Discrete Responses," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 66(3), pages 332-341.
    4. Richard Carson & Nicholas Flores & Norman Meade, 2001. "Contingent Valuation: Controversies and Evidence," Environmental & Resource Economics, European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(2), pages 173-210, June.
    5. Peter Tait & Lana Friesen & Ross Cullen, 2005. "Will unit pricing reduce domestic waste? Lessons from a contingent valuation study," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 83-103.
    6. Altaf, Mir Anjum & Deshazo, J. R., 1996. "Household demand for improved solid waste management: A case study of Gujranwala, Pakistan," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 857-868, May.
    7. Pek, Chuen Khee & Othman, Jamal, 2010. "Household Demand for Solid Waste Disposal Options in Malaysia," MPRA Paper 23143, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-12-06-efd. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Webmaster)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.