Valuation of Haze Management and Prevention Using the Contingent Valuation Method with the Sure Independence Screening Algorithm
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Evaluation Methods of Haze Management and Prevention
2.1. Binary Logistic Model
2.2. SIS Algorithm
- Step 1:
- Randomly generate 10 sets of variables , with , where represents two-point distribution with probability 0.5.
- Step 2:
- Calculate and sort the correlation coefficients of these random variables with the dependent variable, and define the maximum correlation coefficient as a threshold.
- Step 3:
- Add the random variables to the survey data as the independent variables and update the data. Then, calculate the correlation coefficients for all the independent variables.
- Step 4
- Do the screening: select all the correlation coefficients that are larger than , and the corresponding independent variables are put into set as the relevant variables.
3. Results
3.1. Data Sources
3.2. Calculation of Non-Market Value of Haze Management and Prevention
3.3. Average Estimate Method (AEM)
4. Conclusions and Discussions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Zhang, R.H.; Qiang, L.I.; Zhang, R.N. Meteorological conditions for the persistent severe fog and haze event over eastern China in January 2013. Sci. China Earth Sci. 2014, 57, 26–35. [Google Scholar]
- Li, B.; Zhang, J.; Zhao, Y.; Yuan, S.; Zhao, Q.; Shen, G.; Wu, H. Seasonal variation of urban carbonaceous aerosols in a typical city Nanjing in Yangtze River Delta, China. Atmos. Environ. 2015, 106, 223–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, G.; Min, H.; Zamora, M.L.; Jianfei, P.; Dongjie, S.; Jing, Z.; Zhuofei, D.; Zhijun, W.; Min, S.; Limin, Z.; et al. Elucidating severe urban haze formation in China. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 17373–17378. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, M.E. Recessions and Health: The Impact of Economic Trends on Air Pollution in California. Am. J. Public Health 2012, 102, 1951–1956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, A.P.; Zhong, L.S.; Yong, X.; Hui, W.; Dang, L.J. Tourists’ Perception of Haze Pollution and the Potential Impacts on Travel: Reshaping the Features of Tourism Seasonality in Beijing, China. Sustainability 2015, 7, 2397–2414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, R.K. Recreation planning as an economic problem. Nat. Res. J. 1963, 3, 239–249. [Google Scholar]
- Kairu-Wanyoike, S.W.; Simeon, K.; Claire, H.; Taylor, N.M.; Gitau, G.K.; Henry, K.; Declan, M. Willingness to pay for contagious bovine pleuropneumonia vaccination in narok south district of kenya. Preve. Vet. Med. 2014, 115, 130–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cai, C.G.; Chen, G.; Qiao, X.C. Application of contingent valuation method to estimate health economic loss caused by environmental pollution. J. Environ. Health 2007, 4, 265–267. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, K.; Wu, J.; Wang, R.; Yang, Y.; Chen, R.; Maddock, J.E.; Lu, Y. Analysis of residents’ willingness to pay to reduce air pollution to improve children’s health in community and hospital settings in Shanghai, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2015, 533, 283–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huang, C.H.; Wang, C.H. Estimating the total economic value of cultivated flower land in Taiwan. Sustainability 2015, 7, 4764–4782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carson, R.T.; Flores, N.E.; Meade, N.F. Contingent valuation: Controversies and evidence. Environ. Res. Econ. 2001, 19, 173–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, G.; Li, L.; Huang, X.; Xia, P.; Li, J. A Study on the Application of Contingent Valuation Method in Public Weather Service. Meteorol. Mon. 2011, 37, 1309–1313. [Google Scholar]
- Carson, R.T. Contingent valuation: A user’s guide. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2000, 34, 1413–1418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, J.; Lv, J. Sure independence screening for ultra-high dimensional feature space (with discussion). J. R. Stat. Soc. Soc. B. 2008, 70, 849–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fan, J.; Lv, J. A selective overview of variable selection in high dimensional feature space (invited review article). Stat. Sin. 2009, 20, 101–148. [Google Scholar]
- Fan, J.; Song, R. Sure independence screening in generalized linear models with NP-dimensionality. Ann. Stat. 2009, 38, 3567–3604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferreira, S.; Rui, C.M. Contingent valuation method applied to waste management. Res. Conserv. Recycl. 2015, 99, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, C.N.; Lo, C.W.; Su, W.C.; Lai, T.Y. A study on Soil and Groundwater Pollution Remediation of the Surrounding Real Estate Prices and Tax Revenue Impact. Sustainability 2015, 7, 14618–14630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, C.; Nan, L.; Ouyang, X. Chinese Public Willingness to Pay to Avoid Having Nuclear Power Plants in the Neighborhood. Sustainability 2014, 6, 7197–7223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ke, H.E.; Zhang, J.B.; Feng, J.H. Non-market value of prevention and control of agricultural waste pollution based on contingent valuation method. Res. Environ. Yangtze Basin 2014, 23, 213–219. [Google Scholar]
- Venkatachalam, L. The contingent valuation method: A review. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2004, 24, 89–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.P.; Gang, L.I.; Chen, X.; Jin, J.X.; Zhou, W.S.; Yang, Y.D. Monetary Valuation of the Non-Use Value of Recreational Resources in Huangguoshan Scenical Resort based on WTP and WTA Methods. Res. Sci. 2008, 30, 431–439. [Google Scholar]
Summary | Variables | Definition | Assignment |
---|---|---|---|
Basic information | x1 | Sex | 1 = male, 2 = female |
x2 | Age | 1 = 18–25, 2 = 26–40, 3 = 41–55, 4 = 56–70, 5 = more than 70 years old | |
x3 | Education level | 1 = unschooled, 2 = primary school, 3 = middle school, 4 = high school or vocational school, 5 = junior college, 6 = undergraduate, 7 = master or above | |
x4 | Career | 1 = enterprises and institutions, 2 = servant, 3 = individual household, 4 = retiree, 5 = freelance work, 6 = unemployed person, 7 = student, 8 = others | |
x5 | Marital status | 1 = married, 2 = single | |
x6 | What kind of region do you live in? | 1 = city, 2 = suburb, 3 = country | |
x7 | How long have you lived there? | 1 = less than 1 year, 2 = 1–4 years, 3 = 5–9 years, 4 = 10–19 years, 5 = more than 20 years | |
x8 | Monthly income of family | 1 = under 3000 yuan, 2 = 3000–5999 yuan, 3 = 6000–10,000 yuan, 4 = 10,000–20,000 yuan, 5 = above 20,000 yuan | |
x9 | How often do you pay attention to haze? | 1 = never, 2 = seldom, 3 = occasionally, 4 = often, 5 = very | |
x10 | Do you smoke? | 1 = no, 2 = less than 0.5 package/day, 3 = 0.5–1 package/day, 4 = 1–2 package/day, 5 = more than 2 packages/day | |
x11 | Do you have any diseases? | 0 = no, 1 = 1 disease, 2 = 2 diseases, 3 = 3 diseases, 4 = 4 diseases | |
Knowledge of haze | x12 | Do you understand PM2.5? | 1 = yes, 2 = no |
x13 | What is the difference between fog and haze? | 1 = know, 2 = no distinction, 3 = Do not know | |
x14 | How did you learn about haze? | 1 = mobile phone, 2 = Internet, 3 = television, 4 = radio, 5 = friends | |
x15 | How many times have you experienced haze in the last year? | 1 = 1–3 times, 2 = more than 3 times | |
x16 | How long did the haze occurrences typically last? | 1 = 1–2 days, 2 = 3–4 days, 3 = 5–6 days, 4 = 7–9 days, 5 = more than 10 days | |
x17 | What are the causes of haze in your local region? | 1 = waste gas, 2 = exhaust, 3 = raise dust, 4 = barbecue, 5 = straw, 6 = coal, 7 = climate, 8 = fireworks/firecracker | |
x18 | How many measures is the public taking to reduce haze? | 0 = none, 1 = 1 measure, 2 = 2 measures, 3 = 3 measures, 4 = 4 measures, 5 = 5 measures | |
x19 | How many measures is the government taking to reduce haze? | 1 = 1 measure, 2 = 2 measures, 3 = 3 measures, 4 = 4 measures, 5 = 5 measures, 6 = 6 measures, 7 = 7 measures, 8 = 8 measures | |
Influence of haze | x20 | How much of an influence does haze have on your daily life? | 1 = very great, 2 = great, 3 = general, 4 = a little, 5 = no |
x21 | Has haze had an influence on any diseases you might have? | 0 = no, 1 = yes | |
x22 | How many measures do you take to protect yourself in haze weather? | 0 = none, 1 = 1 measure, 2 = 2 measures, 3 = 3 measures, 4 = 4 measures, 5 = 5 measures, 6 = 6 measures | |
x23 | How much does haze affect your travel plans? | 1 = not at all, 2 = moderately, 3 = seriously | |
x24 | Does haze affect your flight plans? | 1 = yes, 2 = no | |
x25 | Does haze affect your transport modality? | 1 = yes, 2 = no | |
Contingent valuation survey | x26 | Does the public participate in haze management and prevention? | 1 = yes, 2 = no |
x27 | Is the government capable of controlling haze? | 1 = yes, 2 = no | |
BIDmax | What is the highest degree of supporting the haze management and prevention program? | 0 = not supporting the haze management and prevention program, 1 = not supporting the program greater than bid, 2 = supporting the program greater than bid | |
BID’max | How much is your maximum WTP? | ||
BIDmin | What is the lowest degree of not supporting the haze management and prevention program? | 0 = supporting the haze management and prevention program, 1 = little influence on life and not supporting the program, 2 = great influence on life, but not supporting the program | |
BID’min | How much is your minimum WTP? | ||
y | Do you support the haze management and prevention program? | 1 = yes, 2 = no |
Variables | x1 | x2 | x3 | x4 | x5 | x6 | x7 | x8 | x9 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coefficient | 0.0458 | 0.0031 | 0.0040 | 0.0907 | 0.0061 | 0.0552 | −0.0743 | −0.0887 | −0.0677 |
Variables | x10 | x11 | x12 | x13 | x14 | x15 | x16 | x17 | x18 |
Coefficient | −0.0027 | −0.0333 | −0.0183 | −0.0061 | −0.0658 | −0.0750 | 0.0180 | −0.0003 | −0.0399 |
Variables | x19 | x20 | x21 | x22 | x23 | x24 | x25 | x26 | x27 |
Coefficient | −0.0183 | 0.0130 | −0.0107 | −0.0884 | −0.0636 | 0.0325 | 0.1046 | 0.0950 | 0.0655 |
Variables | Coefficient | STD | Wald Test | Sig | Exp(B) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
x8 | −0.189 | 0.112 | 2.851 | 0.091 | 0.828 |
x25 | 0.490 | 0.236 | 4.313 | 0.038 | 1.632 |
BIDmean | 0.803 | 0.233 | 11.840 | 0.001 | 2.233 |
Constant | −2.989 | 0.587 | 25.899 | 0.000 | 0.050 |
Bid Value | 0 | 50 | 100 | 150 | 200 | 250 | 300 | 350 | 400 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Probability (%) | 6.19 | 23.13 | 23.50 | 18.40 | 16.21 | 1.64 | 1.64 | 2.19 | 1.28 |
Bid value | 450 | 500 | 550 | 600 | 650 | 700 | 800 | 900 | 1000 |
Probability (%) | 1.28 | 0.73 | 0.91 | 1.09 | 0.36 | 0.91 | 1.09 | 0.36 | 0.36 |
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Wang, G.; Song, Y.; Chen, J.; Yu, J. Valuation of Haze Management and Prevention Using the Contingent Valuation Method with the Sure Independence Screening Algorithm. Sustainability 2016, 8, 310. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040310
Wang G, Song Y, Chen J, Yu J. Valuation of Haze Management and Prevention Using the Contingent Valuation Method with the Sure Independence Screening Algorithm. Sustainability. 2016; 8(4):310. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040310
Chicago/Turabian StyleWang, Guizhi, Yingxi Song, Jibo Chen, and Jun Yu. 2016. "Valuation of Haze Management and Prevention Using the Contingent Valuation Method with the Sure Independence Screening Algorithm" Sustainability 8, no. 4: 310. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040310