Households’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Waste Collection Service in Gorkha Municipality of Nepal
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data Collection and Sampling Method
2.2. Questionnaire Design
2.3. Contingent Valuation Scenario
In order to provide regular waste collection service by the municipality, human resource and number of vehicles should be increased, which incur cost. The municipality can finance the program by imposing a waste collection fee. If the municipality provides regular waste collection service in the near future, are you willing to pay for the improved service considering your household income and expenditure?
How much of maximum amount per month are you willing to pay for the improved service?
2.4. Empirical Model
- Y = Respondents’ response to WTP (Yes = 1, No = 0)
- Z = Summation of explanatory variables multiplied by their coefficient, i.e.,
- β0 = Constant
- β1, …, β8 = Coefficient of explanatory variables X1, …, X8
- = Error term
- = 1 if 0, for willing to pay for improved waste collection service
- = 0 if ≤ 0, for not willing to pay for improved waste collection service
2.5. Variables Selection for Logit and Tobit Models
2.5.1. Income
2.5.2. Household Size
2.5.3. Gender
2.5.4. Age
2.5.5. Education
2.5.6. House Ownership
2.5.7. Environmental Awareness
2.5.8. Waste Collection Service
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Characteristics of Households in the Study Area
3.2. Willingness of Households to Pay for the Improved Waste Collection Service
- (i)
- To keep their surroundings clean (92%).
- (ii)
- Can dispose of their waste on a regular basis (65%).
- (iii)
- Willing to share the cost for effective waste management (63%).
- (iv)
- Willing to pay for the waste collection service as they are devoid of such a service (47%).
- (v)
- For regular waste collection service as the current service is irregular (32%).
- (i)
- Did not have to pay for the service until now and so do not want to pay (91%).
- (ii)
- Household income is less (77%).
- (iii)
- It is the responsibility of the government to provide the service (71%).
- (iv)
- Generate less amount of waste so can self-manage it (54%).
- (v)
- Pay municipal tax so the service should be free of charge (46%).
3.3. Factors Influencing Households’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Waste Collection Service
3.4. Average Amount of Money that Households Are Willing to Pay for Improved Waste Collection Service
3.5. Factors Influencing Amount of Money that Households are Willing to Pay for Improved Waste Collection Service
4. Conclusions and Policy Implication
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hoornweg, D.; Bhada-Tata, P. What a Waste: A Global Review of Solid Waste Management; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). Supporting Capacity Development for Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries: Towards Improving Solid Waste Management Capacity of Entire Society; JICA: Tokyo, Japan, 2005.
- Asian Productivity Organization (APO). Solid Waste Management: Issues and Challenges in Asia; Asian Productivity Organization: Tokyo, Japan, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Asian Development Bank (ADB). Solid Waste Management in Nepal: Current Status and Policy Recommendations; Asian Development Bank: Mandaluyong City, Philippines, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Coffey, M.; Coad, A. Collection of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries; United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT): Nairobi, Kenya, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Government of Nepal. Solid Waste Management Act, 2068 (2011). 2011. Available online: http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/nep137767.pdf (accessed on 21 July 2011).
- Alberini, A.; Cooper, J. Applications of the Contingent Valuation Method in Developing Countries: A Survey; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2000; Volume 146, ISBN 9251045275. [Google Scholar]
- Mitchell, R.C.; Carson, R.T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method; Resources for the Future: Washington, DC, USA, 1989; ISBN 0-915707-32-2. [Google Scholar]
- Damschroder, L.J.; Ubel, P.A.; Riis, J.; Smith, D.M. An alternative approach for eliciting willingness-to-pay: A randomized Internet trial. Judgm. Decis. Mak. 2007, 2, 96–106. [Google Scholar]
- Fujita, Y.; Fujii, A.; Furukawa, S.; Ogawa, T. Estimation of Willingness-to-Pay (WTP) for Water and Sanitation Services Through Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)—A Case Study in Iquitos City, The Republic of Peru. 2005. Available online: https://www.jica.go.jp/jica-ri/IFIC_and_JBICI-Studies/jica-ri/publication/archives/jbic/report/review/pdf/report10_2.pdf (accessed on 13 October 2017).
- Menegaki, A.N.; Olsen, S.B.; Tsagarakis, K.P. Towards a common standard—A reporting checklist for web-based stated preference valuation surveys and a critique for mode surveys. J. Choice Model. 2016, 18, 18–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yamane, T. Statistics: An Introductory Analysis, 2nd ed.; Harper and Row: New York, NY, USA, 1967. [Google Scholar]
- Carson, R.T.; Flores, N.E.; Martin, K.M.; Wright, J.L. Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: Comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods. Land Econ. 1996, 72, 80–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whynes, D.K.; Frew, E.J.; Wolstenholme, J.L. Willingness-to-pay and demand curves: A comparison of results obtained using different elicitation formats. Int. J. Health Care Financ. Econ. 2005, 5, 369–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Padi, A.; Addor, J.A.; Nunfam, V.F. An econometric model of factors influencing households’ willingness to pay for improved solid waste management service within the Sekondi–Takoradi metropolis in the western region of Ghana. J. Econ. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 6, 15–29. [Google Scholar]
- Banga, M.; Lokina, R.B.; Mkenda, A.F. Households’ willingness to pay for improved solid waste collection services in Kampala City, Uganda. J. Environ. Dev. 2011, 20, 428–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Addai, K.N.; Danso-Abbeam, G. Determinants of willingness to pay for improved solid waste management in Dunkwa-on-Offin, Ghana. J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 2014, 3, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
- Bhattarai, K. Households’ willingness to pay for improved solid waste management in Banepa municipality, Nepal. Environ. Nat. Resour. J. 2015, 13, 14–25. [Google Scholar]
- Hagos, D.; Mekonnen, A.; Gebreegziabher, Z. Households’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Urban Waste Management in Mekelle City, Ethiopia. 2012. Available online: http://www.rff.org/files/sharepoint/WorkImages/Download/EfD-DP-12-06.pdf (accessed on 13 October 2017).
- Oteng-Ababio, M. Solid waste management in Ghana: Willingness-to-pay for improved services. Ghana J. Geogr. 2010, 2, 85–107. [Google Scholar]
- Awunyo-Vitor, D.; Ishak, S.; Jasaw, G.S. Urban households’ willingness to pay for improved solid waste disposal services in Kumasi metropolis, Ghana. Urban Stud. Res. 2013, 2013, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Afroz, R.; Hanaki, K.; Hasegawa-Kurisu, K. Willingness to pay for waste management improvement in Dhaka City, Bangladesh. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 492–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sumukwo, J.; Kiptui, M.; Cheserek, G.J. Economic valuation of improved solid waste management in Eldoret municipality. J. Emerg. Trends Econ. Manag. Sci. 2012, 3, 962–970. [Google Scholar]
- Mahima, S.; Thomas, S. Estimating households willingness to pay for solid waste management with special reference to Palakkad district in Kerala. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Interdiscip. Res. 2013, 2, 73–80. [Google Scholar]
- Roy, A.T.; Deb, U. Households willingness to pay for improved waste management in Silchar municipal area: A case study in Cachar District, Assam. IOSR J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 2013, 6, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anjum, R. Willingness to Pay for Solid Waste Management Services: A Case Study of Islamabad; Pakistan Institute of Development Economics: Islamabad, Pakistan, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Mary, O.; Adelayo, A. Household willingness to pay for improved solid waste management in Akinyele local government area. J. Biol. Agric. Healthc. 2014, 4, 76–82. [Google Scholar]
- Song, Q.; Wang, Z.; Li, J. Residents’ attitudes and willingness to pay for solid waste management in Macau. Procedia Environ. Sci. 2016, 31, 635–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aggrey, N.; Douglason, O.G. Determinants of willingness to pay for solid waste management in Kampala City. Curr. Res. J. Econ. Theory 2010, 2, 119–122. [Google Scholar]
- Nkansah, E.; Dafor, N.K.; Essel-Gaisey, F. Willingness to pay for improved solid waste disposal in Tema metropolis. UDS Int. J. Dev. 2015, 2, 116–127. [Google Scholar]
- Ezebilo, E.E.; Animasaun, E.D. Economic valuation of private sector waste management services. J. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 4, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nepal Rastra Bank. Foreign Exchange Rates. Available online: https://www.nrb.org.np/fxmexchangerate.php?YY=2017&MM=08&DD=31&B1=Go (accessed on 1 September 2017).
- Subhan, M.; Ghani, A.B.A.; Joarder, M.H.R. Urban community willingness to pay for improved solid waste management in Malaysian municipality: A choice modeling approach. Asian Soc. Sci. 2014, 10, 122–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). National Population and Housing Census 2011: Urban Tables; Central Bureau of Statistics: Kathmandu, Nepal, 2014; Volume 7. [Google Scholar]
- Karthigarani, R.; Elangovan, V. Household Willingness to Pay for Better Solid Waste Management in Sivagangai District, Tamil Nadu. 2016. Available online: http://www.internationalseminar.org/XVII_AIS/TS1_PDF/10.R.%20Karthigarani%20&%20V.%20Elangovan.pdf (accessed on 13 October 2017).
- Jones, N.; Evangelinos, K.; Halvadakis, C.P.; Iosifides, T.; Sophoulis, C.M. Social factors influencing perceptions and willingness to pay for a market-based policy aiming on solid waste management. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2010, 54, 533–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eshun, T.B.; Nyarko, F. Willingness to pay for improved waste management services: The case of Tarkwa-Nsuaem municipality. Asian-Afr. J. Econ. Econom. 2011, 11, 187–196. [Google Scholar]
Ward No. | No. of Household | Required Sample Size for ±5% Precision Level at 95% Confidence Level | Total Sample Selected after Additional 10% of the Required Sample | Final Sample for this Study (Response %) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Ward 1 | 518 | 21 | 23 | 22 (96%) |
Ward 2 | 538 | 22 | 24 | 22 (92%) |
Ward 3 | 594 | 25 | 28 | 25 (89%) |
Ward 4 | 786 | 33 | 36 | 35 (97%) |
Ward 5 | 469 | 19 | 21 | 21 (100%) |
Ward 6 | 678 | 28 | 31 | 30 (97%) |
Ward 7 | 450 | 19 | 21 | 19 (90%) |
Ward 8 | 910 | 38 | 42 | 40 (95%) |
Ward 9 | 760 | 32 | 35 | 33 (94%) |
Ward 10 | 653 | 27 | 30 | 29 (97%) |
Ward 11 | 723 | 30 | 33 | 32 (97%) |
Ward 12 | 456 | 19 | 21 | 20 (95%) |
Ward 13 | 430 | 18 | 20 | 19 (95%) |
Ward 14 | 693 | 29 | 32 | 31 (97%) |
Ward 15 | 578 | 24 | 26 | 23 (88%) |
Total | 9236 | 384 | 423 | 401 (95%) |
Variable | Description | Unit of Measure |
---|---|---|
Income | Total average monthly income of household | Nepalese Rupee (NRs.) (1 US$ = NRs. 102.13) * |
Household size | Total number of members currently residing in the house | Number of individuals |
Gender | Gender of household head | 1 = Male 0 = Female |
Age | Age of household head | Years |
Education | Total years of education attained by household head | Years |
House ownership | Ownership of currently resided house | 1 = Owned 0 = Rented |
Environmental awareness | Whether respondent is aware of environmental impacts of waste | 1 = Yes 0 = No |
Waste collection service | Have access to waste collection service | 1 = Yes 0 = No |
Variable | Observation | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Income | 401 | 36,854.20 | 28,509.48 | 8020 | 244,083 |
Household Size | 401 | 3.72 | 1.36 | 1 | 9 |
Age | 401 | 47.90 | 13.07 | 23 | 85 |
Education | 401 | 7.22 | 4.33 | 1 | 17 |
Variable | Observation (Percentage) |
---|---|
Gender: | |
Male | 296 (73.82) |
Female | 105 (26.18) |
House Ownership: | |
Owned | 350 (87.28) |
Rented | 51 (12.72) |
Waste Collection Service: | |
Have service | 147 (36.66) |
Do not have service | 254 (63.34) |
Environmental Awareness: | |
Aware | 234 (58.35) |
Not aware | 167 (41.65) |
WTP | Frequency | Percentage |
---|---|---|
Yes | 244 | 60.85 |
No | 157 | 39.15 |
Total | 401 | 100 |
Independent Variables | Coefficient | Standard Error | Z-Statistics | Marginal Effect |
---|---|---|---|---|
Income | 0.000015 *** | 0.00000558 | 2.64 | 0.000296 |
Household size | −0.013933 | 0.0850556 | −0.16 | −0.0027974 |
Gender | 0.034510 | 0.2768044 | 0.12 | 0.0069288 |
Age | −0.002535 | 0.010983 | −0.23 | −0.000509 |
Education | 0.083569 ** | 0.0835693 | 2.48 | 0.016779 |
House ownership | 0.135316 | 0.3496184 | 0.39 | 0.0271687 |
Environmental awareness | 0.672828 *** | 0.2273787 | 2.96 | 0.1350899 |
Waste collection service | 1.257810 *** | 0.2523935 | 4.98 | 0.2525424 |
Constant | −1.420311 ** | 0.6871384 | −2.07 | |
Number of observations | 401 | |||
Log likelihood | −234.68687 | |||
LR chi2(8) | 67.50 | |||
Probability > chi2 | 0.0000 *** | |||
Pseudo R2 | 0.1257 |
Independent Variables | Coefficient | Standard Error | t | [95% Confidence Interval] | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Income | 0.00077 *** | 0.00016 | 4.80 | 0.00046 | 0.00109 |
Household size | 0.09660 | 3.32337 | 0.03 | −6.43720 | 6.63039 |
Gender | 0.98878 | 10.77724 | 0.09 | −20.19948 | 22.17704 |
Age | −0.17172 | 0.43021 | −0.40 | −1.01753 | 0.67409 |
Education | 1.59789 | 1.27318 | 1.26 | −0.90521 | 4.10100 |
House ownership | 8.23168 | 13.68001 | 0.60 | −18.66347 | 35.12684 |
Environmental awareness | 35.24244 *** | 8.94840 | 3.94 | 17.64972 | 52.83516 |
Waste collection service | 46.36408 *** | 9.08806 | 5.10 | 28.49678 | 64.23138 |
Constant | −58.30723 ** | 26.41487 | −2.21 | −110.23930 | −6.37511 |
/sigma | 80.18481 | 3.88383 | 72.54913 | 87.82049 | |
Number of observations | 401 | ||||
Log likelihood | −1525.5514 | ||||
LR chi2(8) | 78.06 | ||||
Probability > chi2 | 0.0000 *** | ||||
Pseudo R2 | 0.0249 | ||||
Observation summary | 157 left-censored observations at amount ≤ 0 | ||||
244 uncensored observations | |||||
0 right-censored observations |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Maskey, B.; Singh, M. Households’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Waste Collection Service in Gorkha Municipality of Nepal. Environments 2017, 4, 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments4040077
Maskey B, Singh M. Households’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Waste Collection Service in Gorkha Municipality of Nepal. Environments. 2017; 4(4):77. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments4040077
Chicago/Turabian StyleMaskey, Bijan, and Mrinila Singh. 2017. "Households’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Waste Collection Service in Gorkha Municipality of Nepal" Environments 4, no. 4: 77. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments4040077