Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T17:33:37.257Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Public preferences for improved urban waste management: a choice experiment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2018

Solomon Tarfasa  and
Roy Brouwer
Solomon Tarfasa
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Hawassa University, Hawassa, Ethiopia
Roy Brouwer*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada Department of Environmental Economics, Institute for Environmental Studies, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: rbrouwer@uwaterloo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A discrete choice experiment, aiming to elicit public preferences for improvements in solid waste services, is carefully administered across socioeconomic zones in the city of Hawassa, Ethiopia. Observed and unobserved preference heterogeneity are analyzed using mixed logit choice models. The results show that there exists substantial willingness to pay to increase collection frequency and separate recyclable waste. A new issue is the focus on child labor in the waste management sector. Significant gender effects are found: women are more interested than men in increasing waste collection frequency and value the abolishment of child labor more highly, as do higher income households. As expected, respondents living in wealthier neighborhoods are more likely to pay higher service charges. Education indirectly influences preferences for waste separation. The study provides important insight into the social benefits of public investment decisions to improve the quality of solid waste management services in large cities in Ethiopia.

Keywords

Choice experimentwaste managementchild laborEthiopia
Type
Research Article
Information
Environment and Development Economics , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 184 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abera, K and Ali, A (2015) An overview of environmental health status in Ethiopia with particular emphasis to its organization, drinking water, drinking water and sanitation: a literature survey, Department of Community Health, Medical Faculty, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Adedibu, AA (1985) A comparative analysis of solid waste composition and generation in two cities of developing nations. The Environmentalist 5, 123–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adetola, A and Benedicta, O (2010) Poverty and preference for improved solid waste management attributes in Delta-State, Nigeria. Journal of Rural Economics and Development 19(1), 15–33.Google Scholar
Ahmed, SA and Ali, M (2004) Partnership for solid waste management in developing countries: linking theories to realities. Habitat International 28, 467–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altaf, MA and Deshazo, JR (1996) Household demand for improved solid waste management: a case study of Gujranwala, Pakistan. World Development 24(25), 857–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baraki, H (2003) Contingent valuation survey on household's willingness to pay for improved solid waste collection and disposal: the case of Mekele town, Working Paper Series number 6, Faculty of Business and Economics, Civil Service College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Bateman, IJ, Carson, RT, Day, B, Hanemann, WM, Hanley, N, Hett, T, Jones-Lee, M, Loomes, G, Mourato, S, Ozdemiroglu, E, Pearce, DW, Sugden, R and Swanson, S (2003) Guidelines for the Use of Stated Preference Techniques for the Valuation of Preferences for Nonmarket Goods, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Beede, DN and Bloom DE, (1995) The economics of municipal solid waste. The World Bank Research Observer 10(2), 113–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhat, CR (2001) Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model. Transportation Research Part B 35, 677–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishaw, B (2011) Household demand for improved solid waste management service in Ethiopia: the case of Bahir Dar city, Paper presented at the 9 th International Conference on the Ethiopian Economy organized by the Ethiopian Economics Association, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, July 21–23, 2011.Google Scholar
Brouwer, R and Martín-Ortega, J (2012) Modeling self-censoring of polluter pays protest votes in stated preference research to support resource damage estimations in environmental liability. Resource and Energy Economics 34(1), 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, R, Martín-Ortega, J and Berbel, J (2010a) Spatial preference heterogeneity: a choice experiment. Land Economics 86(3), 552–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, R, Dekker, T, Rolfe, J and Windle, J (2010b) Choice certainty and consistency in repeated choice experiments. Environmental and Resource Economics 46, 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buenrostro, O, Bocco, G and Bernache, G (2001) Urban solid waste generation and disposal in Mexico: a case study. Waste Management and Research 19, 169–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) (2000) Management of municipal solid waste (MSW), Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, Delhi, India.Google Scholar
Central Statistical Agency (CSA) (2012) Ethiopia Demographic and Health Survey 2011, Addis Ababa, [Available at] https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR255/FR255.pdf.Google Scholar
Dawes, R and Corrigan, B (1974) Linear models in decision-making. Psychological Bulletin 81, 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Degnet, A and Maru, A (2005) Solid waste management service. Ethiopian Journal of Economics 5, 59–61.Google Scholar
Diallo, S and Coulibaly, Y (1991) Urban waste in the slums of Bamako, in Popular Recycling Activities in the Third World, Dakar, Volume VIII, 1–2, pp. 69–88.Google Scholar
Gebreegziabeher, Z, Mekonnen, A and Hagos, D (2012) Households' willingness to pay for improved urban waste management in Mekelle city, Environment for Development Discussion Paper Series, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Gupta, S, Krishna, M, Prasad, RK and Kansal, A (1998) Solid waste management in India: options and opportunities. Resource Conservation and Recycling 24, 137–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hensher, DA, Rose, JM and Greene, WH (2005) Applied Choice Analysis. A Primer, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmes, TP and Boyle KJ, (2005) Dynamic learning and context-dependence in sequential, attribute-based stated-preference valuation questions. Land Economics 81, 114–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoyos, D (2010) The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments. Ecological Economics 69(8), 1595–1603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hynes, S, Hanley, N and Scarpa, R (2008) Effects on welfare measures of alternative means of accounting for preference heterogeneity in recreational demand models. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 90(4), 1011–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Labour Organization (ILO) (2013) Marking progress against child labour. Global estimates and trends 2000–2012, ILO Publication, International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC), Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Karousakis, K and Birol, E (2008) Investigating household preferences for kerbside recycling services in London: a choice experiment approach. Journal of Environmental Management 88(4), 1099–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krinsky, I and Robb, AL (1986) On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities. Review of Economics and Statistics 68, 715–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhfeld, WF (2005) Experimental design, efficiency, coding, and choice designs. In Kuhfeld WF (ed.). Marketing Research Methods in SAS: Experimental Design, Choice, Conjoint, and Graphical Techniques. Cary, NC, USA: SAS Institute Inc., pp. 47–97.Google Scholar
Louviere, JJ, Hensher, DA, Swait, JD and Adamowicz, WL (2000) Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchand, R (1998) Marketing of solid waste management services in Tingloy: a study on affordability and willingness to pay, Urban Waste Expertise Program Working Document 9, Waste Publications, The Philippines.Google Scholar
McFadden, D (1974) Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In Zarembka, P (ed.). Frontiers in Econometrics. New York: Academic Press, pp. 105–142.Google Scholar
Morey, ER and Rossmann KG, (2003) Using stated preference questions to investigate variations in willingness to pay for preserving marble monuments: classic heterogeneity, mixed, and mixture models. Journal of Cultural Economics 27(3), 215–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) (1994) Solid waste management in greater Bombay, Final report, Metropolitan Environmental Improvement Program, Nagpur.Google Scholar
Provencher, B and Bishop RC, (2004) Does accounting for preference heterogeneity improve the forecasting of a random utility model? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 48, 793–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahji, MA and Oloruntoba, EO (2008) Determinants of household willingness to pay for private solid waste management services in Ibidan, Nigeria. Waste Management and Research 27(3), 961–965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rathi, S (2007) Optimization model for integrated municipal solid waste management in Mumbai, India. Environment and Development Economics 12, 105–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Revelt, D and Train, K (1998) Mixed logit with repeated choices: households' choice of appliance efficiency level. Review of Economics and Statistics 53, 647–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sakata, Y (2007) A choice experiment of the residential preference of waste management services. The example of Kagoshima city, Japan. Waste Management 27(5), 639–644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scarpa, R, Willis, KG and Acutt, M (2005) Individual-specific welfare measures for public goods: a latent class approach to residential customers of Yorkshire Water. In Koundouri, P (ed.). Econometrics Informing Natural Resource Management. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishers, pp. 316–337.Google Scholar
Scheinberg, A, Wilson, DC and Rodic, L (2010) Solid Waste Management in the World's Cities (3rd edn), UN-Habitat's State of Water and Sanitation in the World's Cities Series, London and Washington, DC: Earthscan for UN-Habitat.Google Scholar
Swait, J and Louviere, J (1993) The role of the scale parameter in the estimation and comparison of multinomial logit models. Journal of Marketing Research 30(3), 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolina, T (2006) Household's willingness to pay for improved solid waste: the case of Adama town. MSc thesis, Department of Economics, Addis Ababa University, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Train, KE (2003) Discrete Choice Models with Simulation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twardowska, I and Allen HE, (2004) Solid waste origins: sources, trends, quality, quantity. In Twardowska, I, Allen, HE, Kettrup, AF and Lacy, WJ (eds), Solid Waste: Assessment, Monitoring and Remediation, Waste Management Series, Volume 4, Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 33–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walelegne, D and Alebel, B (2002) Public valuation for improved solid waste management in Addis Ababa: affordability and willingness to pay analysis. Unpublished report of the Organization for Social Science Research in Eastern and Southern Africa (OSSREA), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Google Scholar
Whittington, D (1998) Administering contingent valuation surveys in developing countries. World Development 26(1), 21–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar