© 1990 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank
research-article |
Toward Equitable and Sustainable Rural Water Supplies: A Contingent Valuation Study in Brazil
John Briscoe is a unit chief in the Water and Sanitation Division, Infrastructure Department, the World Bank. Paulo Furtado de Castro is an economist at the Institute of Social and Economic Planning, Brasilia, Brazil. Charles Griffin is an associate professor in the Department of Economics, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon. James North is a graduate assistant in the Department of Economics, University of Oregon. Orjan Olsen is the research director of the Brazilian Institute of Public Opinion and Statistics (IBOPE), S
o Paulo, Brazil. The IBOPE team, comprising Marcia Cavalcanti Nunes, Olival No'boa Leme, Hélio Gastaldi Filho, Fredimar Alex Vasconcelos, and Lidio Shimizu, made major contributions to the design and execution of this study. The authors have benefited from numerous discussions with colleagues including Wilton Bussab, Emilio Rodriguez, V. Kerry Smith, and Dale Whittington. Financial support was provided by the United Nations Development Programme, the Swiss Development Corporation, the Norwegian Agency for International Development, the World Bank, and the government of Brazil.
Because many rural people are poor, it is usually assumed that rural water supplies must be financed by government agencies. It is now widely recognized, however, that many rural people can and will pay for improved water supplies, and that sustaining and extending services depends on mobilizing this willingness to pay. This article describes a study of willingness to pay for water in Brazil. The study shows that surveys of actual and hypothetical water-use practices can provide policy-relevant information on willingness to pay, which is shown to vary according to household socioeconomic characteristics and the characteristics of the existing and new supplies of water. In rural Brazil, tariffs for yard taps can be increased substantially before significant numbers of households would choose not to connect to an improved system, whereas provision of free water at public taps can protect the poor without jeopardizing the financial viability of the scheme.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  L. S. Prokopy, R. Thorsten, A. Bakalian, and W. Wakeman Evaluating the Role of Postconstruction Support in Sustaining Drinking Water Projects Evidence from Peru Journal of Planning Education and Research, March 1, 2008; 27(3): 294 - 305. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. K. Israel Impact of Increased Access and Price on Household Water Use in Urban Bolivia The Journal of Environment Development, March 1, 2007; 16(1): 58 - 83. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Gulyani, D. Talukdar, and R. Mukami Kariuki Universal (Non)service? Water Markets, Household Demand and the Poor in Urban Kenya Urban Stud, July 1, 2005; 42(8): 1247 - 1274. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. P. Hoehn and D. J. Krieger An Economic Analysis of Water and Wastewater Investments in Cairo, Egypt Eval Rev, December 1, 2000; 24(6): 579 - 608. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Anjum Altaf and J. A. Hughes Measuring the Demand for Improved Urban Sanitation Services: Results of a Contingent Valuation Study in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso Urban Stud, December 1, 1994; 31(10): 1763 - 1776. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|