Skip to main content

Table 5 Average—willingness to pay for water quality improvement by different sub-groups per HHs per year (in US$ and labour days)

From: Estimating the willingness to pay for regulating and cultural ecosystem services from forested Siwalik landscapes: perspectives of disaggregated users

Services types

Category

CF nearby

CF distant

CFM nearby

CFM distant

  

Rich, n = 30

Poor, n = 31

Rich, n = 30

Poor, n = 30

Rich, n = 30

Poor, n = 30

Rich, n = 30

Poor, n = 30

Water quality improvement services (WQI)

WQIC_15%

6.0 (3.9)

2.5 (1.1)

6.0 (4.0)

3.0 (1.2)

6.5 (4.2)

3.0 (2.0)

2.0 (1.0)

1.0 (1.0)

WQIL_15%

2.4 (1.5)

2.0 (1.3)

2.0 (1.3)

2.0 (1.0)

2.7 (2.0)

1.5 (1.1)

1.0 (0.7)

0.5 (0.2)

WQIC_30%

11.9 (8.0)

5.0 (2.9)

9.0 (6.0)

4.0 (2.7)

13.0 (9.4)

5.7 (3.2)

3.0 (1.8)

1.8 (1.0)

WQIL_30%

4.7(3.2)

4.0 (2.0)

3.5 (2.4)

3.8 (2.0)

4.8 (2.0)

3.0 (1.6)

1.9 (1.1)

1.0 (0.6)

WQIC_45%

18.0 (7.9)

7.4 (5.0)

11.9 (7.8)

5.0 (3.9)

17.0 (12.0)

8.4 (5.0)

4.0 (2.0)

2.9 (1.0)

WQIL_45%

7.5 (5.0)

6.5 (5.0)

6.5 (4.5)

6.5 (3.0)

7.6 (4.0)

4.5 (2.0)

2.7 (1.0)

1.5 (0.5)

  1. WQIC water quality improvement value in cash, WQIL water quality improvement value in labour day (standard deviation in parenthesis)