Estimating the Economic Value of Drinking Water in Dogonbadan Using the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM)

Subject Areas : Article frome a thesis

iman danaeifar ¹

1 - Master of Science in Agricultural Economics, Researcher of Jahad Daneshgahi of Unit Kohgiluyeh and Boyer Ahmad Province.

Received: 2020-03-25 Accepted : 2021-08-02 Published : 2021-07-23

Keywords: Contingent Valuation, Willingness for Payment, Quality of Drinking Water, Dogonbadan,

Abstract :

This study aimed to estimate the economic value of drinking water in Doganbadan using the contingent valuation method (CVM). In order to examine the economic and social factors affecting the willingness to pay, the logit econometric model was used. The required data were collected through a field study, questionnaire completion, and in-person interviews with 600 residents of Dogonbadan using the multi-stage cluster sampling method. According to the results of the study, 79% of people were willing to pay amounts to help improve the quality of drinking water so that they wished to pay the amount of 5666 Riyals per cubic meters per month to improve the quality of drinking water. As well as, on the basis of this study, gender variable had no significant effect on households' willingness to pay. Other variables of the model including age, education level, family size, monthly income, satisfaction with the quality of water, and bid price were significant. Thus, taking into account the high value and importance of improving the quality of drinking water, it is recommended that policies be adopted to maintain water quality standards.

References:

1. Khani M, Sharifipoor R. Environmental Health: Water and Water Pollution. 9th ed. Tehran: Khaniran; 2011 (in Persian).


2. Sepehrnia B, Fahiminia M, Hoseyni S. Assessment of present position and canonical systems for use in water treatment in rural areas. The First Conference on Protect of Environment & Rural Sustainable De-velopment; Qom University of Medical Sci-ence, Iran.2007. (in Persian).https://civilica.com/doc/144562/

3. Zazoli M, Bazrafshan E.Water & Wastewater Tech-nology. Tehran: Samat;2009. (in Persian).https://rayabook.net/?option=com_hikashop&ctrl=product&task=show&cid=10004

4. راسخی س، حسینی طالعی س ر. برآورد و عوامل تعیین کننده تمایل به پرداخت برای بهبود کیفیت آب آشامیدنی: یک مطالعه موردی برای استان مازندران. فصلنامه اقتصاد کاربردی، 3(8): 111-140.https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=210213

5. Turner, K. Georgiou, S. Clark, R. Brouwer, R. Economic valuation of water resources in agriculture. From the sectoral to a functional perspective of natural resource management. Fao Water Reports 27. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2004.http://www.fao.org/3/y5582e/y5582e00.htm

6. راسخی س، حسینی طالعی س ر. ارزش­­گذاری مشروط کیفیت آب آشامیدنی: یک مطالعه موردی برای پل سفید. فصلنامه مدل­سازی اقتصادی، 4(1): 55-71.https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=163298

7. Khodavardizadeh, M.; Hayati, B.; & Kavosi Kelashami, M. Estimating Recreational value of the Tourist Village of Kandovan in East Azarbaijan Using Contingent Valuation. Environmental Sciences.2008. 4 (5): 43-52 (in Persian).https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=88311

8. Mitchell, R. C. and Carson, R. T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.1989. 488 pp.https://www.amazon.com/Using-Surveys-Value-Public-Goods/dp/0915707322

9. Venkatachalam, L.The contingent valuation method: A review. Environmental Impact Assessment Review.2003. 24: 89-124.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222433375_The_contingent_valuation_method_a_review_Environ_Impact_Assess_Rev

10. پژویان ج، فلیحی، ن. ارزشگذاری اقتصادی منابع زیست محیطی: مورد تالاب انزلی. پژوهشنامه اقتصادی، 8(28): 147-171.https://joer.atu.ac.ir/article_3236.html

11. Hanemann, W. M. Carson, R.T. Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 1985. 71(3), 332-341.https://asu.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/welfare-evaluations-in contingent-valuation-experiments-with-disc-2

12. Jin J, Wang ZH, Ran SH . Comparison of contingent valuation and choice experiment in solid waste management programs in Macao. Ecological Economics. 2006. 57:430-441.https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v57y2006i3p430-441.html

13. Gnedenko E, Gorbunova Z, Safanove G.Contingent Valuation of Drinking Water Quality in Samara City, EERS Working Paper Series.2000. 98-263.htmhttps://econpapers.repec.org/paper/eerwpalle/98-263e.htm

14. Emami Meybodi A, ghazi M. Estimating recreational value of Saee Park of Tehran Using Contingent Valuation (CV). Quarterly Iranian Economic Research. 2008. 36(12):187-202 (In Persian).https://www.sid.ir/en/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=143976

15. Lee C . Valuation of nature-based tourism resources using dichotomous choice contingent valuation method. Tourism Management.1997. 18(8):587- 591.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0261517797000769

16. Lehtonen E, Kuluvainen J, Pouta E, Rekola M, Li C. Non-market benefits of forest conservation in southern Finland. Environmental Science and Policy. 2003. 6:195-204.https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Non-market-benefits-of-forest-conservation-inLehtonenKuuluvainen/7333849ba66a5146e52f88db517f6847ddb20e61

17. دلاور ع. مبانی نظری و عملی پژوهش در علوم انسانی و اجتماعی‌. انتشارات رشد، چاپ چهارم.https://www.adinehbook.com/gp/product/9646115179

18. Genius M.; Tsagarakis KP. Water Shortages and Implied Water Quality: a Contingent Valuation Study. Water Resources Research.2006.https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2005WR004833

19. Genius, M.; Hatzaki, E.; Kouromichelaki, E. M.; Kouvakis, G.; Nikiforaki, S.; Tsagarakis, K. P. Evaluating Consumers’ Willingness to Pay for Improved Potable Water Quality and Quantity, Water Resource Manage, NO. 2008. 22, PP. 1825- 1834.https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11269-008-9255-7

20. Haq, M.; Ahmad I.; Sattar A. Factors Determining Public Demand for Safe Drinking Water (A Case Study of District Peshawar), Working Papers Seri 58.2010.https://ideas.repec.org/p/pid/wpaper/201058.html

21. Van Houtven, G., Pattanayak, S., Usmani, F. and Yang, J . What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis, Ecological Economics.2017. 136: 126-135.https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v136y2017icp126-135.html

22. Tahami Pour M, Kavoosi Kalashami M. Applying CVM for Economic Valuation of Drinking Water in Iran, International Journal of Agricultural Management & Development. 2012. 2: 209-214.https://www.sid.ir/en/Journal/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=268363

23. محمدیاری ف، شایسته ک، مدبری ا. برآورد ارزش کیفیت آب آشامیدنی با استفاده از روش ارزش­گذاری مشروط (مطالعة موردی: شهر کرمانشاه). فصلنامه محیط شناسی، 44 (3): 489-501.https://jes.ut.ac.ir/article_69577.html

24. دانائی­فر ا، انواری ا، مهدی زاده م. ارزیابی تمایل به پرداخت مشترکان آب شرب اهواز در جهت کمک به بهبود کیفیت آب آشامیدنی. فصلنامه تحقیقات منابع آب ایران، 15(2): 110-120.http://iwrr.sinaweb.net/article_82581.html