Application of CVM method in the evaluation of flood control and water and sewage management projects

Open access

Abstract

Traditional methods of economic evaluation of projects in the field of environmental protection do not reflect the full value of these projects. In particular, it doesn’t take into account non-market effects that have an impact on the level of social welfare. The issue of valuation of natural resources and related services is also related to this problem. The evaluations and valuations of areas generally ignored the value of natural resources or take into account only the part which has the market value.

The article presents the results of study the economy of non-market goods using contingent valuation method. The first part of the results concerns the willingness to pay for improvement of safety sense from flood risk. The second part concerns willingness to pay for the use of municipal sewage treatment plants. The population living of the area of the Żuławy of Vistula delta valued their improvement of safety sense from flood risk of at more than twice the value of the compared to current expenditures incurred flood protection. The vast majority of respondents considered it reasonable protection of polder areas. Indicating simultaneously that in the reduction of flood risk allows possible resettlement and restoration polder parts. The majority of residents (98%) agreed to the construction of wastewater treatment plants and were willing to pay for its construction and operation. The majority of respondents (especially those in middle age and older) found that the collective sewage development would contribute to improving the environment quality and thus the residents living standard. However, not all were willing to pay for the use of collective sewage collection and treatment. 18% of respondents did not want to pay an amount greater than the current charges for the sewage removal and treatment. In addition, the residents of the municipality cannot afford to pay, or believe that water supply and sanitation services should be free.

Biller D., Rogge K., Ruta G. 2006. The use of contingent valuation in developing countries. A quantitative analysis. In: Handbook on contingent valuation. Ed. A. Albertini, J.R. Kahn. Cheltenham. Edward Elgar Publishing. ISBN 9781840642087 pp. 448.

Bowen H.R. 1943. The interpretation of voting in the allocation of economic resources. Quarterly Journal of Economics. No 58 p. 27–48.

Ciriacy-Wantrup S.V. 1947. Capital returns from soil-conservation practices. Journal of Farm Economics. No 29 p. 1181–1196.

Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds [online]. [Access 20.11.2014]. Available at: http://eurlex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:31999R1260&rid=5

Czajkowski M. 2006. Polskie badania wyceny dóbr środowiskowych jako przykład międzynarodowej współpracy i zastosowania najnowocześniejszych osiągnięć nauki. W: Konferencja Młodych Naukowców: Współczesne zjawiska w gospodarce pt. Teoria a rzeczywistość [Polish study of environmental goods valuation as an example of international cooperation and the application of advanced scientific achievements. In: Young Researchers Conference: Contemporary Occurrence in the Economy en. Theory and Reality] Toruń. UMK.

Czajkowski M. 2007. Jak podejmować racjonalne decyzje dotyczące środowiska? Przykłady aplikacji badań wyceny dóbr środowiskowych w Polsce. W: Uwarunkowania rozwoju społeczno-gospodarczego Polski. [How to make rational decisions about the environment? Examples of the application of environmental goods valuation studies in Poland. In: Determinants of socio-economic development in Poland]. Ed. A.P. Balcerzak, D. Górecka. Toruń. Wydaw. Adam Marszałek p. 209–221.

Czajkowski M. 2008. Nośniki wartości dóbr środowiskowych [Media of environmental goods value]. PhD Thesis. Warszawa. UW pp. 302.

Czajkowski M., ščasný M. 2010. Study on benefit transfer in an international setting. How to improve welfare estimates in the case of the countries’ income heterogeneity? Ecological Economics. No 69 (12) p. 2409–2416.

Davis R.K. 1963. The value of outdoor recreation: an economic study of the maine woods. PhD Thesis. Harvard University. USA.

EC 2008. Guide to costbenefit analysis of investment projects. Structural Funds, Cohesion Fund and Instrument for Pre-Accession pp. 257.

Georgiou S. 1996. Metody wyceny warunkowej. W: Ekonomiczna wycena środowiska przyrodniczego [Contingent valuation method. In: Economic valuation of the natural environment]. Ed. G. Anderson, J. Śleszyński. Białystok. Wydaw. Ekon. Środ. p. 120–146.

GUS 2014a. Aktywność ekonomiczna ludności Polski. II kwartał 2014 [Labour force survey in Poland]. Warszawa ISSN 1425-7890 pp. 131.

GUS 2014b. Ludność. Stan i struktura w przekroju terytorialnym. Stan w dniu 30 VI 2014 [Population in Poland. Size i structure in territorial division. As of June, 30, 2014]. Warszawa. ISSN 1734-6118 pp. 121.

Juster F.T. 1966. Consumer buying intentions and purchase probability: an experiment in survey design. Journal of the American Statistical Association. No 61 p. 658–696.

KZGW, RZGW Gdańsk 2014. Program „Kompleksowe zabezpieczenie przeciwpowodziowe Żuław – do roku 2030” zwany Programem Żuławskim – 2030. Plan działań dla etapu II (2014–2020) [Programme „Comprehensive flood protecion in Żuławy till 2030” called Żuławy Programme – 2030]. Gdańsk pp. 85.

Liziński T. 2010. Podstawy ekonomii środowiska i zarządzania środowiskiem [Fundamentals of environmental economics and management]. Elbląg. Wydaw. PWSZ. ISBN 8392731530 pp. 260.

Liziński T., Bukowski M. 2008. An assessment of the tourist value of the Elblag Canal. Journal of Water and Land Development. No 12 p. 37–48.

Markowska A. 2004. Koszty i korzyści wdrożenia w Polsce dyrektywy 91/271/EWG w sprawie oczyszczania ścieków komunalnych [The costs and benefits of the implementing in Poland Directive 91/271/EEC concerning urban waste-water treatment]. PhD Thesis. Warszawa. UW.

Markowska A., Żylicz T. 1999. Costing an international public good: The case of the Baltic sea. Ecological Economics. No 30 p. 301–316.

Rauba K. 2012. Społeczna akceptowalność spełnienia zasady zwrotu kosztów usługi zbiorowego oczyszczania ścieków na obszarach wiejskich [Social acceptability meeting of cost recovery basis for collective wastewater treatment services in rural areas]. Handel Wewnętrzny. Nr spec. lipiec–sierpień. T. 2 p. 258–266.

Wróblewska A. 2014. Wartościowanie dóbr środowiskowych w świetle badań ankietowych według metody wyceny warunkowej [Evaluation of environment al goods in survey studies]. Woda-Środowisko-Obszary Wiejskie. T. 14. Z. 2 (46) p. 155–171.

UG Miastkowo [online]. [Access: 12.01.2010]. Available at: www.miastkowo.pl

UG Zbójna [online]. [Access: 12.01.2010]. Available at: www.zbojna.powiatlomzynski.pl

UG Dubicze Cerkiewne [online]. [Access: 12.01.2010] Available at: www.dubicze-cerkiewne.pl

Żylicz T. 2000. Costing nature in a transition economy. Case studies in Poland. Chelthenham. Edward Elgar Publ. ISBN 978-1858984933 pp. 192.

Journal of Water and Land Development

The Journal of Committee for Land Reclamation and Environmental Engineering in Agriculture of Polish Academy of Sciences and Institute of Technology and Life Sciences in Falenty

Journal Information


CiteScore 2017: 1.04

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.304
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 1.024

Ministry of Science and Higher Education: 14 points

Cited By

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 220 217 22
PDF Downloads 98 97 8