Municipal solid waste management, source-separated waste and stakeholder’s attitude: a Contingent Valuation Study
- 686 Downloads
Recognition of the social costs associated with traditional practices of urban waste management in India led to the formulation of Municipal Waste Management and Handling rules (2000). However, compliance with the proposed collection and disposal involves higher commitment in terms of both time and money on the part of the residents, local bodies as well as the state and central government. In this context, information about the value of the environmental improvements conferred upon the city dwellers would be important from the planner’s perspective. Given the non-market characteristic of waste disposal services, we infer about beneficiaries’ perceived demand for the proposed service by means of Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation Survey conducted in the Bally Municipality in the district of Howrah, West Bengal. We estimate the average WTP by controlling for anchoring bias and use the annualized value of cost to examine the feasibility of the proposed system.
KeywordsContingent Valuation Survey Non-market Valuation Solid Waste Management Double-Bounded Dichotomous Choice Recursive Probit
The Contingent Valuation Study reported in this paper was funded by University Grants Commission, India. We are grateful to Dr. Arup Mallik (former Professor, Calcutta University) for useful suggestions regarding programme viability part of the study and Dr. Zakir Husain (Associate Professor, Institute of Development Studies, Kolkata) for comments on questionnaire design. The cordial help of Bally Municipality officials during field visits is gratefully acknowledged. For assistance in survey work, we thank Saikat Mitra, Susmita Paul, Subrata Majumder and Buddhadev Saren. The usual disclaimer applies.
- Asnani, P. U. (2004). United States Asia Environmental Partnership Report, United states Agency for International Development, Center for Environmental Planning and Technology, Ahmedabad.Google Scholar
- Banerjee, S., Sarkhel, P. (2008). Estimation of average willingness to pay from double bounded dichotomous choice data: Does the “Follow Up” matter?” Calcutta University, mimeo.Google Scholar
- Baumol, W. J., & Oates, W. (1988). The Theory of Environmental Policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Bhoyar, R. V., Titus, S. K., Bhide, A. D., & Khanna, P. (1996). Municipal and solid waste management in India. Indian Association of Environmental Management, 23, 53–64.Google Scholar
- Buckley, R. M., Singh, M., Kalarickal, J. (2007). Strategizing slum improvement in India: A method to monitor and refocus slum development programs. Global Urban Development, 3(1). http://www.globalurban.org/GUDMag07Vol3Iss1/Buckley.htm.
- Burra, S., Patel, S., Kerr, T. (2003). Community-designed, built and managed toilet blocks in Indian cities. Environment & Urbanization, 15(2), 26.Google Scholar
- Carson, R. T., Hanemann, W. M. (2005). “Contingent valuation”. In K.G. Maler and J.R. Vincent (Eds.), Handbook of Environmental Economics. North Holland, Ch 17, 822–920.Google Scholar
- Haab, T. C., & McConnell, K. E. (2002). Valuing Environmental and Natural Resources, The Econometrics of Non Market Valuation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Hanrahan, D., Srivastava, S. & Ramkrishna, A. S. (2006). Improving management of municipal solid waste in India: Overview and challenges. World Bank.Google Scholar
- Hoornweg, D., Thomas, L. & Otten L. (1999). Composting and it’s applicability in developing countries. Urban Waste Management Working Paper Series, No. 8, World Bank.Google Scholar
- India Infrastructure Report (2006). Oxford University Press, 320 pp.Google Scholar
- Kumar, S., Bhattacharyya, J. K., Vaidya, A. N., Chakrabarti, T., Devotta, S., & Akolkar, A. B. (2009). Assessment of the status of municipal solid waste management in metro cities, state capitals, class I cities, and class II towns in India: An insight. Waste Management, 29(2009), 883–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lauria, D. T., Whittington, D., Choe, K., Turingan, C., Abiad, V. (1999). “Household Demand for Improved Sanitation Services: A Case Study of Calamba, the Phillipines”. In I. J. Bateman and K. G. Willis (Eds.) Valuing environmental preferences; theory and practice of contingent valuation method in the US, EU and developing countries OUP (pp. 540–81).Google Scholar
- Mitchell, R. C., & Carson, R. T. (1989). Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The CVM Approach. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
- Nema, A. K. (2004). Collection and transport of municipal solid waste. In Training program on solid waste management. Delhi, India: Springer.Google Scholar
- NIUA, National Institute of Urban Affairs, Upgrading Municipal Services: Norms and Financial Implications, Vols. 1–2. NIUA Research Study Series No. 38 (New Delhi), February 1989. 118_X 1:X23 pp. (vol 1) A1:A6:B1:B104;C1:C79;D1;D7;E1:E1, pp. (vol 2).Google Scholar
- OECD factbook. (2008). Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics (pp. 294). http://www.sourceoecd.org/factbook.
- Shah, E. & Sambaraju, K. (1997). ‘Technical and economic analysis of composting enterprises in Bangalore—India’ UWEP Case-Study Report. www.waste.nl/.
- Shekdar, A. V. (1999). Municipal solid waste management—the Indian experience. Journal of Indian Association for Environmental Management, 27, 100–108.Google Scholar
- Singhal, S., & Pandey, S. (2001). Solid waste management in India: Status and future directions. TERI Information Monitor on Environment and Science, 6(1), 1–4.Google Scholar
- Whitehead, J. C., & Blomquist, G. C. (2006). The use of contingent valuation in benefit—cost analysis. In A. Alberini, D. Bjornstad, & J. R. Kahn (Eds.), Handbook of Contingent Valuation. Northampton, MA: Edaward Elgar.Google Scholar
- Zhu, D., Asnani, P. U., Zurbrugg, C., Anapolsky, S., Mani, S. (2009). Improving municipal solid waste management in India: A source book for Policy makers and practitioners. The World Bank.Google Scholar