The Price of Purity: Willingness to Pay for Air and Water Purification Technologies in Rajasthan, India

  • Alexandra K. Shannon
  • Faraz Usmani
  • Subhrendu K. Pattanayak
  • Marc JeulandEmail author


Diarrheal illnesses and acute respiratory infections are among the top causes for premature death and disability across the developing world, and adoption of various technologies for avoiding these illnesses remains extremely low. We exploit data from a unique contingent valuation experiment to consider whether households in rural Rajasthan are unwilling to make investments in “domain-specific” environmental health technologies when faced with health risks in multiple domains. Results indicate that demand for water-related risk reductions is higher on average than demand for air-related risk reduction. In addition, households’ private health benefits from mitigating diarrheal (respiratory) disease risks are higher (no different) when community-level air pollution risks, rather than community-level water pollution risks, have previously been mitigated. This asymmetric response cannot fully be explained by survey order effects or embedding, but rather suggests that that the broader health environment and the salience of particular risks may be important in households’ decision to adopt environmental health technologies.


Household air pollution Diarrheal diseases Technology adoption Contingent valuation 

JEL Classification

Q51 Q53 Q56 

Supplementary material


  1. Anenberg SC, Balakrishnan K, Jetter J, Masera O, Mehta S, Moss J, Ramanathan V (2013) Cleaner cooking solutions to achieve health, climate, and economic cobenefits. Environ Sci Technol 47:3944–3952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashraf N, Berry J, Shapiro JM (2010) Can higher prices stimulate product use? Evidence from a field experiment in Zambia. Am Econ Rev 100:2383–2413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banerjee AV, Duflo E (2007) The economic lives of the poor. J Econ Perspect 21:141–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bennett D (2012) Does clean water make you dirty? Water supply and sanitation in the Philippines. J Hum Resour 47:146–173Google Scholar
  5. Bensch G, Grimm M, Peters J (2015) Why do households forego high returns from technology adoption? Evidence from improved cooking stoves in Burkina Faso. J Econ Behav Organ 116:187–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bensch G, Peters J (2015) The intensive margin of technology adoption—Experimental evidence on improved cooking stoves in rural Senegal. J Health Econ 42:44–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Beyene AD, Koch SF (2013) Clean fuel-saving technology adoption in urban Ethiopia. Energy Econ 36:605–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bhojvaid V, Jeuland M, Kar A, Lewis JJ, Pattanayak SK, Ramanathan N, Ramanathan V, Rehman I (2014) How do people in rural India perceive improved stoves and clean fuel? Evidence from Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Int J Environ Res Public Health 11:1341–1358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blanton E, Ombeki S, Oluoch GO, Mwaki A, Wannemuehler K, Quick R (2010) Evaluation of the role of school children in the promotion of point-of-use water treatment and handwashing in schools and households-Nyanza Province, Western Kenya, 2007. Am J Trop Med Hyg 82:664–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boisson S, Kiyombo M, Sthreshley L, Tumba S, Makambo J, Clasen T (2010) Field assessment of a novel household-based water filtration device: a randomised, placebo-controlled trial in the Democratic Republic of Congo. PLoS ONE 5:e12613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boyle KJ, Welsh MP, Bishop RC (1993) The role of question order and respondent experience in contingent-valuation studies. J Environ Econ Manag 25:S80–S99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Braveman P (2006) Health disparities and health equity: concepts and measurement. Annu Rev Public Health 27:167–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brooks N, Bhojvaid V, Jeuland M, Lewis J, Patange O, Pattanayak S (2016) How much do alternative cookstoves reduce biomass fuel use? Evidence from North India. Resour Energy Econ 43:153–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Brown J, Hamoudi A, Jeuland M, Turrini G (2016) “Seeing, believing, and behaving: Heterogeneous Effects of an Information Intervention on Household Behaviors to Improve Water Quality” (Submitted)Google Scholar
  15. Carson RT (2000) Contingent valuation: a user’s guide. Environ Sci Technol 34:1413–1418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Carson RT, Flores NE, Hanemann WM (1993) “On the Creation and Destruction of Public Goods: The Matter of Sequencing,” CUDARE Working Paper 690Google Scholar
  17. Clark J, Friesen L (2008) The causes of order effects in contingent valuation surveys: an experimental investigation. J Environ Econ Manag 56:195–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Clasen T, Schmidt W-P, Rabie T, Roberts I, Cairncross S (2007) Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 334:782–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Cook J, Jeuland M, Maskery B, Whittington D (2011) Giving stated preference respondents “Time to Think”: results from four countries. Environ Resour Econ 51:473–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Diamond PA, Hausman JA (1994) Contingent valuation: is some number better than no number? J Econ Perspect 8:45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dow WH, Philipson TJ, Martin X S i (1999) Longevity complementarities under competing risks. Am Econ Rev 89:1358–1371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dupas P, Robinson J (2013) Why don’t the poor save more? Evidence from health savings experiments. Am Econ Rev 103:1138–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fewtrell L, Kaufmann RB, Kay D, Enanoria W, Haller L, Colford JM (2005) Water, sanitation, and hygiene interventions to reduce diarrhoea in less developed countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Diseases 5:42–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Freeman MC, Quick RE, Abbott DP, Ogutu P, Rheingans R (2009) Increasing equity of access to point-of-use water treatment products through social marketing and entrepreneurship: a case study in western Kenya. J Water Health 07:527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gasana J, Morin J, Ndikuyeze A, Kamoso P (2002) Impact of water supply and sanitation on diarrheal morbidity among young children in the socioeconomic and cultural context of Rwanda (Africa). Environ Res 90:76–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Greene WH (2011) Econometric analysis, 7th edn. Pearson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Guerrant RL, DeBoer MD, Moore SR, Scharf RJ, Lima AAM (2012) The impoverished gut—a triple burden of diarrhoea, stunting and chronic disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 10:220–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Haab TC, McConnell KE (2002) Valuing environmental and natural resources: the econometrics of non-market valuation. Edward Elgar Publishing, CheltenhamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Halvorsen B (1996) Ordering effects in contingent valuation surveys. Environ Resou Econ 8:485–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hamoudi A, Jeuland M, Lombardo S, Patil S, Pattanayak SK, Rai S (2012) The effect of water quality testing on household behavior: evidence from an experiment in rural India. Am J Trop Med Hyg 87:18–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hanemann WM (1994) Valuing the environment through contingent valuation. J Econ Perspect 8:19–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hensher D, Shore N, Train K (2005) Households’ willingness to pay for water service attributes. Environ Resour Econ 32:509–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hoehn JP, Loomis JB (1993) Substitution effects in the valuation of multiple environmental programs. J Environ Econ Manag 25:56–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hunter PR (2009) Household water treatment in developing countries: comparing different intervention types using meta-regression. Environ Sci Technol 43:8991–8997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (2013) GBD: Profile India. Accessed 10 April 2016
  36. Jessoe K (2013) Improved source, improved quality? Demand for drinking water quality in rural India. J Environ Econ Manag 66:460–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jeuland M, Bhojvaid V, Kar A, Lewis J, Patange O, Pattanayak SK, Ramanathan N, Rehman I, Soo JT, Ramanathan V (2015a) Preferences for improved cook stoves: evidence from rural villages in north India. Energy Econ 52:287–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jeuland M, McClatchey M, Patil S, Poulos C, Pattanayak SK, Yang J-C (2015b) Do decentralized community treatment plants provide better water? Evidence from Andhra Pradesh.’ Duke Environmental and Energy Economics Working Paper EE-15-01Google Scholar
  39. Jeuland M, Orgill J, Shaheed A, Revell G, Brown J (2015c) A matter of good taste: investigating preferences for in-house water treatment in peri-urban communities in Cambodia. Environ Dev Econ 21:291–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jeuland M, Pattanayak SK, Bluffstone R (2015d) The economics of household air pollution. Annu Rev Resour Econ 7:81–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kahneman D, Knetsch JL (1992) Valuing public goods: the purchase of moral satisfaction. J Environ Econ Manag 22:57–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kartman B, Stålhammar N-O, Johannesson M (1996) Valuation of health changes with the contingent valuation method: a test of scope and question order effects. Health Econ 5:531–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kremer M, Leino J, Miguel E, Zwane AP (2011) Spring cleaning: rural water impacts, valuation, and property rights institutions. Q J Econ 126:145–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lewis JJ, Pattanayak SK (2012) Who adopts improved fuels and cookstoves? A systematic review. Environ Health Perspect 120:637–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Longo A, Hoyos D, Markandya A (2015) Sequence effects in the valuation of multiple environmental programs using the contingent valuation method. Land Econ 91:20–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lozano R, Naghavi M, Foreman K, Lim S, Shibuya K, Aboyans V, Abraham J, Adair T, Aggarwal R, Ahn SY, AlMazroa MA, Alvarado M, Anderson HR, Anderson LM, Andrews KG, Atkinson C, Baddour LM, Barker-Collo S, Bartels DH, Bell ML, Benjamin EJ, Bennett D, Bhalla K, Bikbov B, Abdulhak AB, Birbeck G, Blyth F, Bolliger I, Boufous S, Bucello C, Burch M, Burney P, Carapetis J, Chen H, Chou D, Chugh SS, Coffeng LE, Colan SD, Colquhoun S, Colson KE, Condon J, Connor MD, Cooper LT, Corriere M, Cortinovis M, de Vaccaro KC, Couser W, Cowie BC, Criqui MH, Cross M, Dabhadkar KC, Dahodwala N, Leo DD, Degenhardt L, Delossantos A, Denenberg J, Jarlais DCD, Dharmaratne SD, Dorsey ER, Driscoll T, Duber H, Ebel B, Erwin PJ, Espindola P, Ezzati M, Feigin V, Flaxman AD, Forouzanfar MH, Fowkes FGR, Franklin R, Fransen M, Freeman MK, Gabriel SE, Gakidou E, Gaspari F, Gillum RF, Gonzalez-Medina D, Halasa YA, Haring D, Harrison JE, Havmoeller R, Hay RJ, Hoen B, Hotez PJ, Hoy D, Jacobsen KH, James SL, Jasrasaria R, Jayaraman S, Johns N, Karthikeyan G, Kassebaum N, Keren A, Khoo J-P, Knowlton LM, Kobusingye O, Koranteng A, Krishnamurthi R, Lipnick M, Lipshultz SE, Ohno SL, Mabweijano J, MacIntyre MF, Mallinger L, March L, Marks GB, Marks R, Matsumori A, Matzopoulos R, Mayosi BM, McAnulty JH, McDermott MM, McGrath J, Memish ZA, Mensah GA, Merriman TR, Michaud C, Miller M, Miller TR, Mock C, Mocumbi AO, Mokdad AA, Moran A, Mulholland K, Nair MN, Naldi L, Narayan KMV, Nasseri K, Norman P, O’Donnell M, Omer SB, Ortblad K, Osborne R, Ozgediz D, Pahari B, Pandian JD, Rivero AP, Padilla RP, Perez-Ruiz F, Perico N, Phillips D, Pierce K, Pope CA, Porrini E, Pourmalek F, Raju M, Ranganathan D, Rehm JT, Rein DB, Remuzzi G, Rivara FP, Roberts T, León FRD, Rosenfeld LC, Rushton L, Sacco RL, Salomon JA, Sampson U, Sanman E, Schwebel DC, Segui-Gomez M, Shepard DS, Singh D, Singleton J, Sliwa K, Smith E, Steer A, Taylor JA, Thomas B, Tleyjeh IM, Towbin JA, Truelsen T, Undurraga EA, Venketasubramanian N, Vijayakumar L, Vos T, Wagner GR, Wang M, Wang W, Watt K, Weinstock MA, Weintraub R, Wilkinson JD, Woolf AD, Wulf S, Yeh P-H, Yip P, Zabetian A, Zheng Z-J, Lopez AD, Murray CJ (2012) Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 380:2095–2128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lucas ME, Jeuland M, Deen J, Lazaro N, MacMahon M, Nyamete A, Barreto A, von Seidlein L, Cumbane A, Songane FF, Whittington D (2007) Private demand for cholera vaccines in Beira, Mozambique. Vaccine 25:2599–2609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Luoto J, Najnin N, Mahmud M, Albert J, Islam MS, Luby S, Unicomb L, Levine DI (2011) What point-of-use water treatment products do consumers use? Evidence from a randomized controlled trial among the urban poor in Bangladesh. PLoS ONE 6:e26132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Martín-Fernández J, del Cura-González MI, Rodríguez-Martínez G, Ariza-Cardiel G, Zamora J, Gómez-Gascón T, Polentinos-Castro E, Pérez-Rivas FJ, Domínguez-Bidagor J, Beamud-Lagos M, Tello-Bernabé ME, Conde-López JF, Aguado-Arroyo Ó, Sanz-Bayona MT, Gil-Lacruz AI (2013) Economic Valuation of health care services in public health systems: a study about willingness to pay (WTP) for nursing consultations. PLoS ONE 8:e62840CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. McPhail AA (1993) The “five percent rule” for improved water service: can households afford more? World Dev 21:963–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Miller G, Mobarak AM (2015) Learning about new technologies through social networks: experimental evidence on nontraditional stoves in Bangladesh. Mark Sci 34:480–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mobarak AM, Dwivedi P, Bailis R, Hildemann L, Miller G (2012) Low demand for nontraditional cookstove technologies. Proc Nat Acad Sci 109:10815–10820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Murray CJ, Lopez AD (2013) Measuring the global burden of disease. N Engl J Med 369:448–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Null C, Kremer M, Miguel E, Hombrados JG Meeks R, Zwane AP (2012) Willingness to pay for cleaner water in less developed countries: systematic review of experimental evidence. 3ie Syst Rev 006Google Scholar
  55. Orgill J, Shaheed A, Brown J, Jeuland M (2013) Water quality perceptions and willingness to pay for clean water in peri-urban Cambodian communities. J Water Health 11:489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Orgill-Meyer J, Jeuland M, Albert J, Cutler N (2018) Comparing contingent valuation and averting expenditure estimates of the costs of irregular water supply. Ecol Econ 146:250–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ouedraogo B (2006) Household energy preferences for cooking in urban Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. Energy Policy 34:3787–3795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pattanayak SK, Pfaff A (2009) Behavior, environment, and health in developing countries: evaluation and valuation. Annu Rev Resour Econ 1:183–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Poulos C, Yang J-C, Patil SR, Pattanayak SK, Wood S, Goodyear L, Gonzalez JM (2012) Consumer preferences for household water treatment products in Andhra Pradesh, India. Soc Sci Med 75:738–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Powe N, Bateman I (2003) Ordering effects in nested ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ contingent valuation designs. Ecol Econ 45:255–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rehfuess EA, Puzzolo E, Stanistreet D, Pope D, Bruce NG (2013) Enablers and barriers to large-scale uptake of improved solid fuel stoves: a systematic review. Environ Health Perspect 122(2), 120–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rosa G, Majorin F, Boisson S, Barstow C, Johnson M, Kirby M, Ngabo F, Thomas E, Clasen T (2014) Assessing the impact of water filters and improved cook stoves on drinking water quality and household air pollution: a randomised controlled trial in Rwanda. PLoS ONE 9:e91011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rufener S, Mäusezahl D, Mosler H-J, Weingartner R (2010) Quality of drinking-water at source and point-of-consumption - drinking cup as a high potential recontamination risk: a field study in Bolivia. J Health Popul Nutr 28Google Scholar
  64. Samples KC, Hollyer JR (1990) Contingent valuation of wildlife resources in the presence of substitutes and complement. In: Johnson RL, Johnson GV (eds) Economic valuation of natural resources: issues, theory, and applications. Westview Press, Boulder, pp 177–192Google Scholar
  65. Thurber MC, Warner C, Platt L, Slaski A, Gupta R, Miller G (2013) To promote adoption of household health technologies, think beyond health. Am J Public Health 103:1736–1740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Usmani F, Steele J, Jeuland M (2017) Can economic incentives enhance adoption and use of a household energy technology? Evidence from a pilot study in Cambodia. Environ Res Lett 12:035009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. van der Kroon B, Brouwer R, van Beukering PJ (2014) The impact of the household decision environment on fuel choice behavior. Energy Econ 44:236–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Van Houtven GL, Pattanayak SK, Usmani F, Yang J-C (2017) What are households willing to pay for improved water access? Results from a meta-analysis. Ecol Econ 136:126–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Walker CLF, Perin J, Katz J, Tielsch JM, Black RE (2013) Diarrhea as a risk factor for acute lower respiratory tract infections among young children in low income settings. J Glob Health 3Google Scholar
  70. Whittington D (2002) Improving the performance of contingent valuation studies in developing countries. Environ Resour Econ 22:323–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Whittington D, Jeuland M, Barker K, Yuen Y (2012) Setting priorities, targeting subsidies among water, sanitation, and preventive health interventions in developing countries. World Dev 40:1546–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. World Health Organization (2011) Guidelines for drinking-water quality. World Health Organization, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  73. World Health Organization (2014) Global Health Estimates for 2000–2012. Accessed 10 April 2016
  74. World Health Organization (2015) India: WHO Statistical Profile. Accessed 10 April 2016

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.University Program in Environmental Policy, Nicholas School of the EnvironmentDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  3. 3.Sanford School of Public PolicyDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  4. 4.Nicholas School of the EnvironomentDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  5. 5.Duke Global Health InstituteDuke UniversityDurhamUSA
  6. 6.Institute of Water Policy, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public PolicyNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore
  7. 7.RWI-Leibniz Institute, for Economic ResearchEssenGermany

Personalised recommendations