Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Public Awareness of and Participation in Municipal Solid Waste Management in Urban Areas of the Mekong River Delta, Vietnam

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Futures

  • 22 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter assesses community participation in the Mekong River Delta, Vietnam, by calculating willingness to pay for a source-separated municipal solid waste (MSW) improvement program. The level of urbanization was used to stratify the data, while both contingent valuation methodology (CVM) and choice experiments (CE) were employed to determine the willingness-to-pay (WTP) values and cross-validate the results. Welfare benefits examined in both approaches suggest that MSW improvement programs can be successfully implemented in developing countries. The findings indicate that community participation may be a viable option for resolving environmental issues associated with MSW management. The findings also show that households care about various attributes related to environmental protection such as recycled, organic, and residual properties. Interestingly, households in less developed areas are more eager to participate and pay a higher price for the improvement program which may be logical, but challenging to implement. Given that both approaches generated consistent values future research employing these methodologies should be conducted to provide information to policymakers on the most effective implementation pathways.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 1,099.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 1,299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aadland, D., & Caplan, A. J. (2006). Curbside recycling: Waste resource or waste of resources? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management: The Journal of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, 25(4), 855–874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adamowicz, W., Boxall, P., Williams, M., & Louviere, J. (1998). Stated preference approaches for measuring passive use values: Choice experiments and contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 80(1), 64–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adeoti, A., & Obidi, B. (2010). Poverty and preference for improved solid waste management attributes in Delta-State, Nigeria. Journal of Rural Economics and Development, 19(1623-2016-134902), 15–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altaf, M. A., & Deshazo, J. R. (1996). Household demand for improved solid waste management: A case study of Gujranwala, Pakistan. World Development, 24(5), 857–868.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anex, R. P. (1995). A travel-cost method of evaluating household hazardous waste disposal services. Journal of Environmental Management, 45(2), 189–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arimah, B. C. (1996). Willingness to pay for improved environmental sanitation in a Nigerian City. Journal of Environmental Management, 48(2), 127–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkmann, J., Glenk, K., Keil, A., Leemhuis, C., Dietrich, N., Gerold, G., & Marggraf, R. (2008). Confronting unfamiliarity with ecosystem functions: The case for an ecosystem service approach to environmental valuation with stated preference methods. Ecological Economics, 65(1), 48–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, I. J., Carson, R. T., Day, B., Hanemann, M., Hanley, N., Hett, T., & Sugden, R. (2002). Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: A manual.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R. T. (1998). Valuation of tropical rainforests: Philosophical and practical issues in the use of contingent valuation. Ecological Economics, 24(1), 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhry, P., Singh, B., & Tewari, V. P. (2007). Non-market economic valuation in developing countries: Role of participant observation method in CVM analysis. Journal of Forest Economics, 13(4), 259–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Czajkowski, M., Kądziela, T., & Hanley, N. (2014). We want to sort! Assessing households’ preferences for sorting waste. Resource and Energy Economics, 36(1), 290–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damigos, D., Kaliampakos, D., & Menegaki, M. (2016). How much are people willing to pay for efficient waste management schemes? A benefit transfer application. Waste Management & Research, 34(4), 345–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diafas, I. (2016). Estimating the Economic Value of forest ecosystem services using stated preference methods: The case of Kakamega Forest, Kenya. Doctoral dissertation, Niedersächsische Staats-und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driesen, D. (2006). Economic instruments for sustainable development. In: B. J. Richardson, S. Wood (Eds.), Environmental law forsustainability. Portland: Hart Publishing

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, S., & Marques, R. C. (2015). Contingent valuation method applied to waste management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 99, 111–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, M. (2003). The measurement of environmental and resource values: Theory and methods. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuda, K., Isdwiyani, R., Kawata, K., & Yoshida, Y. (2018). Measuring the impact of modern waste collection and processing service attributes on residents’ acceptance of waste separation policy using a randomised conjoint field experiment in Yogyakarta Province, Indonesia. Waste Management & Research, 36(9), 841–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gellynck, X., Jacobsen, R., & Verhelst, P. (2011). Identifying the key factors in increasing recycling and reducing residual household waste: A case study of the Flemish region of Belgium. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(10), 2683–2690.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillespie, R., & Bennett, J. (2013). Willingness to pay for kerbside recycling in Brisbane, Australia. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 56(3), 362–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Government of Vietnam. (2020). Directive No. 33/CT-TTg of the Prime Minister: On strengthening the management, reuse, recycling, treatment and reduction of plastic waste. Hanoi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, N., MacMillan, D., Wright, R. E., Bullock, C., Simpson, I., Parsisson, D., & Crabtree, B. (1998a). Contingent valuation versus choice experiments: Estimating the benefits of environmentally sensitive areas in Scotland. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 49(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, N., Wright, R. E., & Adamowicz, V. (1998b). Using choice experiments to value the environment. Environmental and Resource Economics, 11(3), 413–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, N., Wright, R. E., & Koop, G. (2002). Modelling recreation demand using choice experiments: Climbing in Scotland. Environmental and Resource Economics, 22(3), 449–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, B., Wang, W., Bates, M., & Zhuang, X. (2008). Three-dimensional super-resolution imaging by stochastic optical reconstruction microscopy. Science, 319(5864), 810–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin, J., Wang, Z., & Ran, S. (2006). Comparison of contingent valuation and choice experiment in solid waste management programs in Macao. Ecological Economics, 57(3), 430–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ko, S., Kim, W., Shin, S.-C., & Shin, J. (2020). The economic value of sustainable recycling and waste management policies: The case of a waste management crisis in South Korea. Waste Management, 104, 220–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lancaster, K. J. (1966). A new approach to consumer theory. Journal of Political Economy, 74(2), 132–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, L., & Tietenberg, T. (2019). Environmental economics and policy. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Longe, E. O., Longe, O. O., & Ukpebor, E. F. (2009). People’s perception on household solid waste management in Ojo Local Government Area in Nigeria. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering, 6, 209–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior a theoretical analysis. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maimoun, M. A., Reinhart, D. R., & Madani, K. (2016). An environmental-economic assessment of residential curbside collection programs in Central Florida. Waste Management, 54, 27–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massarutto, A., Marangon, F., Troiano, S., & Favot, M. (2019). Moral duty, warm glow or self-interest? A choice experiment study on motivations for domestic garbage sorting in Italy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 208, 916–923.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFadden, D. (1974). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior. In P. Zarembka (Ed.), Frontiers in econometrics. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Environment of Japan. (2014). History and current state of waste management in Japan. Tokyo: Ministry of Environment of Japan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Vietnam. (2016). Report on the current state of the national environment for the period 2011–2015. Hanoi: Publishing House of Natural Resources – Environment and Maps of Vietnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Vietnam. (2017). Report on the current state of the national environment 2016. Hanoi: Publishing House of Natural Resources – Environment and Map of Vietnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Vietnam. (2018). Report on the current state of the national environment 2017. Hanoi: Publishing House of Natural Resources – Environment and Maps of Vietnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Vietnam. (2020). Report on the state of the national environment in 2019. Hanoi: Dan Tri Publishing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Othman, J. (2007). Economic valuation of household preference for solid waste management in Malaysia: A choice modeling approach. International Journal of Management Studies (IJMS), 14(1), 189–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palatnik, R., Body, S., Ayalon, O., & Shechter, M. (2014). Greening household behaviour and waste (OECD Environment Working Paper 76).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D., Atkinson, G., & Mourato, S. (2006). Cost-benefit analysis and the environment: recent developments. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pek, C. K., & Othman, J. (2010). Household demand for solid waste disposal options in Malaysia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahji, M. A. Y., & Oloruntoba, E. O. (2009). Determinants of households’ willingness to pay for private solid waste management services in Ibadan, Nigeria. Waste Management & Research, 27(10), 961–965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sakata, Y. (2007). A choice experiment of the residential preference of waste management services – The example of Kagoshima city, Japan. Waste Management, 27(5), 639–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schübeler, P., Christen, J., & Wehrle, K. (1996). Conceptual framework for municipal solid waste management in low-income countries (Vol. 9). St. Gallen: SKAT (Swiss Center for Development Cooperation).

    Google Scholar 

  • Slack, R. J., Gronow, J. R., & Voulvoulis, N. (2009). The management of household hazardous waste in the United Kingdom. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(1), 36–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stafford, R. (2002). The role of environmental stress and physical and biological interactions on the ecology of high shore littorinids in a temperate and a tropical region. Doctoral dissertation, University of Sunderland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Struk, M., & Pojezdná, M. (2019). Non-market value of waste separation from municipal perspective. In Proceedings of 17th International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium (Sardinia 2019).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarfasa, S., & Brouwer, R. (2018). Public preferences for improved urban waste management: A choice experiment. Environment and Development Economics, 23(2), 184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thurstone, L. L. (1927). A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review, 34(4), 273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vietnam Ministry of Finance. (2015). Financial resources for environmental protection for the period 2011–2015, orientation for the period 2016–2020. The 4th National Environment conference, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, T., & Arnold, P. (2008). A new model for solid waste management: an analysis of the Nova Scotia MSW strategy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(4), 410–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (2018). Report on solid and industrial hazardous waste management assessment options and action areas to implement the national strategy. Hong Duc Publishing House. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/352371563196189492/pdf/Solid-and-industrialhazardous-waste-management-assessment-options-and-actions-areas.pdf

  • Yuan, Y., & Yabe, M. (2015). Residents’ preferences for household kitchen waste source separation services in Beijing: A choice experiment approach. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(1), 176–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yusuf, S. A., Salimonu, K. K., & Ojo, O. T. (2007). Determinants of willingness to pay for improved household solid waste management in Oyo State, Nigeria. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, 2(3), 233–239.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Economics, Can Tho University, Can Tho, Vietnam

    Tien Dung Khong & Dan Xuan Thi Huynh

  2. Centre for Global Food and Resources, School of Economics and Public Policy, Faculty of the Professions, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Adam Loch

Authors
  1. Tien Dung Khong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adam Loch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dan Xuan Thi Huynh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam Loch .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Our Future Water, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Robert C. Brears

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Khong, T.D., Loch, A., Huynh, D.X.T. (2022). Public Awareness of and Participation in Municipal Solid Waste Management in Urban Areas of the Mekong River Delta, Vietnam. In: Brears, R.C. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Urban and Regional Futures. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87745-3_306

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation