Skip to Main Navigation

Willingness to pay for water and energy: an introductory guide to contingent valuation and coping cost techniques (English)

In order to determine the impact of many water and energy reforms, analysts need to elicit the preferences of users and their demand for the goods in question. When these goods are not routinely bought and sold in the market, the standard approach of demand estimation based on observed prices and quantities is not viable. Instead, analysts must resort to the types of non-market methods described in this paper. The two methods most widely used in the context of water and energy are contingent valuation and coping cost. These methods are described in the paper with particular emphasis on their application in developing countries. The paper suggests that both the contingent valuation and coping cost methods are useful tools for the evaluation of water and energy projects, particularly if they are used together to validate results. Moreover, it is critically important that the analyst carefully confront a number of technical and practical issues before the results of these non-market approaches to preference elicitation may be validated. These issues are also described in the paper.


  • Author

    Devicienti,Francesco, Klytchnikova,Irina I., Paternostro,Stefano

  • Document Date


  • Document Type


  • Report Number


  • Volume No


  • Total Volume(s)


  • Country


  • Region

    The World Region,

  • Disclosure Date


  • Disclosure Status


  • Doc Name

    Willingness to pay for water and energy: an introductory guide to contingent valuation and coping cost techniques

  • Keywords

    alternative sources of water;cubic meter of water;Water and Energy;dichotomous choice;contingent valuation method;travel cost method;participatory rapid appraisal;Energy and Mining;improved water supply;water supply system;linear regression model;price and quality;water supply service;purposes of payment;types of fuel;demand for good;term of data;purchase of water;water quality improvement;demand for energy;form of investment;cost recovery policy;benefit of service;water treatment equipment;provision water;provision of water;law of demand;water service improvements;average household water;payment for service;gains and losses;stated preference methods;water treatment system;hedonic pricing approach;reveal preference;improved service;public good;energy service;Water Services;bottled water;municipal water;consumer preference;extension worker;strategic behavior;welfare impact;public action;private good;choice experiments;econometric model;market price;assessment technique;tariff structure;water improvement;survey questions;water system;social dimension;price change;implicit price;institutional environment;improved public;sample selection;theoretical model;water utility;water utilities;initial price;hypothetical bias;household behavior;cost-benefit analysis;survey respondent;household use;market good;demand curve;consumer survey;welfare effect;industrial country;water connection;water sector;expenditure function;observed change;monetary term;conjoint analysi;environmental resource;public concern;good information;household survey;random utility;single market;empirical counterpart;water bill;water authority;household characteristic;household size;Industrialized countries;targeted population;statistical software;potable water;supply function;electricity service;household head;local circumstance;econometric method;traditional techniques;survey implementation;assessment panel;state service;industrialized country;coefficient estimate;price differential;demand model;field survey;consumer choice;comparative analysis;infrastructure network;model specification;Environmental Resources;qualitative approach;noise pollution;evaluation strategy;electricity network;hourly wage;adverse health;sunk cost;Public Utilities;remote area;water problem;poverty impact;quantitative approach;econometric approach;household expenditure;production loss;irrigation water;substitute good;opinion poll;hand pump;investment program;urban system;household labor;boil water;opportunity cost;minimum wage;rural supply;welfare change;loss method;accurate price;Funding agencies;external funding;private provision;government regulation;community volunteer;community energy;institutional regime;environmental amenity;accurate estimate;market datum;baseline data;public impact;precise cost;household welfare;surrogate market;payment arrangement;storage tank;electricity generator;empirical work;empirical study;standard approach;water market;energy reform;explanatory variable;bid format;binary choice;consumer demand;household production;budget constraint;optimal choice;household income;utility function;private market;water requirement;energy choice;methodological issue;natural monopolies;water vendor;community for use;relative demand;local situation;strategic interest;public water;market methods;private connections;tap water;econometric analysis;opening of bid;information base;empirical issue;variance-covariance matrix;methodological aspect;political opposition;energy source;



Official version of document (may contain signatures, etc)

  • Official PDF
  • TXT*
  • Total Downloads** :
  • Download Stats
  • *The text version is uncorrected OCR text and is included solely to benefit users with slow connectivity.


Devicienti,Francesco Klytchnikova,Irina I. Paternostro,Stefano

Willingness to pay for water and energy: an introductory guide to contingent valuation and coping cost techniques (English). Washington, D.C. : World Bank Group.