Willingness to Pay for Water Quality Improvement: A Study of Powai Lake in India
The Powai Lake in Mumbai, India, spreading over 2.10 square kilometres, is in the heart of the most crowded India’s premier metropolis. It consists of rich ecosystem of considerable value and interest, supporting wide variety of flora and fauna and a habitat for wild variety of aquatic animals. Now, it is increasingly being impacted by human activities, resulting in choking off the shoreline, and deteriorating water quality. In this context it is important to understand how to effectively protect the present status and to improve the water quality of the lake. Benefits of improvement as perceived by the users serves as a critical input for devising policy instrument based on economic principles. This paper attempts valuing improvement in water quality through ‘Contingent Valuation Method’ (CVM). Then the paper analyses the factors determining the WTP by the users for improvement in water quality using regression tool. A survey was conducted of about 300 samples, living in approximately five kilometres radius of the lake. The survey was done in two rounds, one in 2005 and another in 2007 to determine the changes that occur over time in terms of quality as well as perception of the users regarding the benefits of the lake. The results indicate that the average WTP have increased from 2005 to 2007 after adjusting for general price increase. Income, occupation and uses of the lake are the important attributes explaining WTP. On an average, salaried class is willing to pay 30% more according to 2007 survey. The respondents attach more values to the aesthetic benefits. The results are useful in designing policies based on market-based instruments such as charges or taxes for the purpose of improving the lake quality.
BMC (2006). The Powai Works – 1890, Mumbai’s Water, 79-85.
Carson, R.T. and R.C. Mitchell (1993b). The Issue of Scope in Contingent Valuation Studies. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 75(5): 1263-1267.
Carson, R.T. (2000). Contingent Valuation: A User’s Guide. Environmental Science and Technology, 34: 1413-1418.
Carson, R.T. and R.C. Mitchell (1993a). The Value of Clean Water: The Public’s Willingness to Pay for Boatable, Fishable, and Swimmable Quality Water. Water Resources Research, 29(7): 2445-2454.
Ciriacy-Wantrup, S.V. (1947). Capital Returns from Soil-Conservation Practices. Journal of Farm Economics, 29: 1188-1190.
Cooper Philip, Poe Gregory. L. and Ian J. Bateman (2004). The Structure of Motivation for Contingent Values: A Case Study of Lake Water Quality Improvement. Ecological Economics, 50(1-2): 69-82.
Diamond, P.A. and J.A. Hausman (1994). Contingent valuation: Is some number better than no number? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4): 45-64.
Douglas, Lipton (2003). The Value of Improved Water Quality to Chesapeake Bay Boaters. Working Paper 03-16, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Maryland.
Hadker, N., Sharma, S., David, A. and T.R. Muraleedharan (1997). Willingness to Pay for Borivali National Park: Evidence from a Contingent Valuation.
Ecological Economics, 21: 105-122.
Hanemann, W.M. (1994). Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(4): 19-43.
Hausman, J.A. (ed.) (1993). Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment. North Holland, New York.
Huang Ju-Chin, Haab Timothy, C. and J.C. Whitehead (1997). Willingness to Pay for Quality Improvements: Should Revealed Preference and Stated Preference Data be Combined? Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 34: 240-255.
Jorgensen Bradley, S., Wilson Mathew, A. and A. Heberlein Thomas (2001). Fairness in the Contingent Valuation of Environmental Public Goods: Attitude toward Paying for Environmental Improvements at Two Levels of Scope. Ecological Economics, 36(1): 133-148.
Kahneman, D. and J.L. Knetsch (1992). Valuing public goods: The purchase of moral satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 14: 57-70.
Smith, V., Kerry, Desvousges, William H. and A. Ann Fisher (1986). Comparison of Direct and Indirect Methods for Estimating Environmental Benefits.American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 68(2): 280-290.
Wang, Hua (1997). Treatment of Don’t-know Responses in Contingent Valuation Surveys: A Random Valuation Model. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 32: 219-232.
Wang Hua, Laplante, B., Wu, Xun and Craig Meisner ( 2004). Estimating Willingness to Pay with Random Valuation Models: An Application to Lake Sevan, Armenia. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3367.
Whittington, Dale (2002). Improving the Performance of Contingent Valuation Studies in Developing Countries. Environmental and Resource Economics, 22: 323-367.
Zhang Yaoqi and Li Yiqing (2005). Valuing or Pricing Natural and Environmental Resources. Environmental Science and Policy, 8(2): 179-186.