KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research (대한토목학회논문집)

Korean Society of Civil Engeneers (대한토목학회)
권호 표지

Estimation of Willingness-to-pay Using Contingent Valuation Method in Planning the Construction of the Integrated Sewerage System in the Catchment of Dams Andong and Imha

조건부가치측정법을 이용한 안동.임하댐 유역의 하수도시설 확충사업에 대한 지불의사액 추정

Jeong, Dong-Hwan;Park, Kyoo-Hong
정동환;박규홍

  • Published : 2005.03.31

⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The objective of this study is to estimate the willingness-to-pay (WTP) using contingent valuation method as a tool of the analytical model of economical feasibility, which will help policy makers make decisions in implementing the program of integrated sewerage construction and operation in the catchment of Dams Andong and Imha. In order to analyze general characteristics of residents around the catchment area, a set of questionnaire was prepared and asked to 800 residents at downstream area as well as upstream area of both dams. As a result, willingness of residents to pay was relatively low as 27%. It seemed that residents of Dams Andong and Imha have feeling of being victimized since two adjacent dams was constructed in this area, the upstream area was designated as drinking water source protection zone, and thereafter their economical actions have been restricted. The explanatory variables to estimate the WTP were willingness to pay (yes or no), bid, residing in upstream area or downstream area, sex, age, education level, income level (total income per household every month), whether or not being educated on the environment preservation, and the number of family members. The WTP of residents in the catchment of Dams Andong and Imha was investigated by single-bounded dichotomous choice method and analyzed to be 3,086 wons per month through estimating the two regression parameters using the linear logistic model of SPSS.

본 연구의 목적은 안동?임하댐 상류지역의 하수도시설 확충사업을 실시하기에 앞서 조건부 가치측정법을 이용하여 더욱 정확한 지불의사액의 추정을 통한 경제적 타당성 분석의 모형을 제시함으로써 정책결정자들이 올바른 의사결정을 하도록 하는 것이다. 안동.임하댐 유역 주민의 일반적인 특성을 분석하기 위해 800가구를 대상으로 설문을 실시하였고, 설문조사 결과 27%의 주민이 지불의사를 가지고 있었다. 지불의사가 있다고 한 응답자가 매우 낮은 이유는 해당 지역 근처에 안동댐과 임하댐이 함께 건설되어 상수원보호구역으로 규제를 받아 경제적 활동에 제약을 받기 때문인 것으로 판단된다. 지불의사액을 추정하기 위해 제시금액, 댐의 상.하류 거주여부, 남녀성별, 나이, 교육수준, 소득수준, 환경교육여부, 가족수 등 응답자들로부터 자료를 쉽게 획득하여 활용할 수 있는 설명변수를 사용하였다. 단일양분선택형 질문방법을 이용하여 선형로지스틱 모형(로짓모형)을 통하여 회귀계수($\alpha$, $\beta$)를 구하여 유역별 지불의사액을 추정하였다. 그 결과 안동.임하댐 유역의 지불의사액은 가구당 월 3,086원으로 추정되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. 곽승준, 유승훈, 김찬춘 (2002) 농촌폐비닐의 재활용확대정책에 대한 경제적 편익측정, 한국재정 . 공공경제학회 정책논총, 제17권 제1호, pp. 23-45
  2. 김광임, 민동기, 정희성, 염현정, 김미숙 (1999) 수질오염의 사회적 비용 계량화 연구 : 한강수계톨 중심으로, 연구보고서, KEI/1999/RE-09, 한국환경정책 . 평가연구원
  3. 김종대, 이동수, 조문기 (2002) 조건부가치측정법 (CVM)에 의한 지불의사액 (WTP)의 추정, 충북대학교 산업과 경영, 제15권 제1호, pp. 173-191
  4. 신영철 (1997) 이중양분선택형 질문 CVM을 이용한 한강 수질 개선 편익 측정, 환경경제연구, 제 6권 제 1호, pp. 171-192
  5. 엄영숙 (2001) 만경강 수질개선 편익측정을 위한 조건부가치평가에 있어서 범위효과 분석, 자원 . 환경경제연구, 제 10권 제 3호, pp. 387-412
  6. 유승훈, 김태유 (1999) 조건부가치측정법을 이용한 서울시 오존 오염 저감정책의 편익분석, 한국정책학회보, 제 8권 제 3호, pp. 191-211
  7. 장태구 (1997) 임의가치법 (CVM)을 이용한 환경재의 가치평가 낙동강의 편익 산출을 중심으로, 한국지역개발학회지, 제9권 제1호, pp. 55-69
  8. 정동환 (2004) 하수도시설 확충사업의 타당성 평가를 위한 계층분석 및 편익추정 기법 적용에 판한 연구, 박사학위논문, 중앙대학교, 서울
  9. 정동환, 박규홍, 진영선, 조중무 (2004) 충주댐 상류지역 하수도시설 확충사업에 관한 주민의 지불의사액 추정을 위한 CVM의 적용에 판한 연구, 환경영향평가, 제13권 제2호, pp. 73-86
  10. 홍성표, 김정흠 (1996) 조건부가치측정법에 의한 대기환경의 경제적 가치평가, 충남대학교 경영경제연구소 경제논총, 제 12권, pp. 65-75
  11. 황영순, 엄미정, 김태유 (1999) 수돗물 공급신뢰도 개선의 가치 측정, 환경경제연구, 제 8권 제 1호, pp. 109. 126
  12. Bateman, I.J., Carson, R.T., Day, B., Hanemann, W.M., Hanley, N. and Hell, T. (2002) Economic valuation with stated preference techniques: a manual, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
  13. Bateman, I.J. and Turner, R.K. (1993) Valuation of environment, methods and techniques: the contingent valuation method, In: Kerry Turner R.(ed.), Sustainable environmental economics and management: principles and practice, Belhaven Press, London, UK
  14. Brauer, I. (2003) Money as an indicator: to make use of economic evaluation for biodiversity conservation, Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, Vol. 98, pp. 483-491 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00107-5
  15. Christie, M. (2001) A comparison of alternative contingent valuation elicitation treatments for the evaluation of complex environmental policy, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 62, No.3, pp. 255-269 https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.2001.0439
  16. Cummings, R.G.. Brookshire, D.S. and Schulze, W.D. (ed.) (1986) Valuing environmental goods: a state of the arts assessment of the contingent valuation method, Roweman and Allanheld, NJ: Totowa, USA
  17. Damigos, D. and Kaliampakos, D. (2003) Assessing the benefits of reclaiming urban quarries: a CVM analysis, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 64, No.4, pp. 249-258 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(02)00243-8
  18. Hanemann, W.M. (1985) Some issues continuous- and discrete-response contingent valuation studies, Northeastern Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 14, No.1, 5-13
  19. Hanemann, W.M. and Kristrom, B. (1995) Preference uncertainty, optimal designs and spikes, In: Advances in Environmental Economics, Per-Olov Johansson, Bengt Kristrom, and Karl-Go ran Maler, eds. Manchester University Press, England
  20. Howe, W.C. and Smith, M.G. (1994) The value of water supply reliability in urban water systems, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 26, No. 1, 19-30 https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1994.1002
  21. Kawabe, M. and Oka, T. (1996) Benefit from improvement of organic contamination of Tokyo bay, Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 32, No. 11, pp. 788-793 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(96)00035-5
  22. Kossa, P. and Khawaja, M.S. (2001) The value of water supply reliability in California: a contingent valuation study, Water Policy, Vol. 3, No.2, pp. 165-174 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1366-7017(01)00005-8
  23. Margai, F.L. (1995) Evaluating the potential for environmental quality improvement in a community distressed by manmade hazards, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 181-190 https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1995.0038
  24. Mitchell, R.C. and Carson, R.T. (1989) Using surveys to value public goods: the contingent valuation method, Washington, DC: Resource for the Future
  25. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1994) Proposed rules, oil pollution act: natural resource damage assessments, Federal Register, Vol. 59, No.5, Jan. 7. Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1139-1164
  26. Piper, S. and Martin, W.E. (2001) Evaluating the accuracy of the benefit transfer method: A rural water supply application in the USA, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 63, No.3, pp. 223-235 https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.2001.0464
  27. Roomratanapun, W. (2001) Introducing centralised wastewater treatment in Bangkok: a study of factors determining its acceptability, Habit International, Vol. 25, No.3, pp. 359-371 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0197-3975(00)00041-2
  28. Stenger, A. and Willinger, M. (1998) Preservation value for groundwater quality in a large aquifer: a contingent-valuation study of the Alsatian aquifer, Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 53, No.2, pp. 177-193 https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.1998.0197
  29. Turpie, J.K. (2003) The existence value of biodiversity in South Africa: how interest, experience, knowledge, income and perceived level of treat influence local willingness to pay, Ecological Economics, Vol. 46, No.2, pp. 199-216 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00122-8
  30. Willis. K.G. and Garrod, G.D. (1998) Water companies and river environments: the external costs of water abstraction, Utilities Policy, Vol. 7, No.1, pp. 35-45 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0957-1787(97)00028-3