- P-ISSN2287-1608
- E-ISSN2287-1616
- KCI
The External Benefits of Research and Development Investment in Waste-to-Energy Technology in Korea
Hyo-Jin Kim (Department of Energy Policy, Graduate Sc)
유승훈 (서울과학기술대학교)
Abstract
The Korean government considers expanding the WtE share of total energy from 1% to 5% by 2020 through research and development (R&D) in waste-to-energy (WtE) technologies. This study attempts to measure the external benefits of investing in R&D in these technologies. To this end, a contingent valuation (CV) is employed. More specifically, a 2016 national survey of randomly selected 1,000 households was carried out across the nation to gauge the willingness to pay (WTP) for the investment. One-and-one-half-bounded dichotomous choice question was used in the CV survey, and the spike model was applied to dealing with zero WTP responses. The mean yearly WTP is estimated to be KRW 4,175 (USD 3.57) per household, which is statistically significant at the 1% level. Expanding the value to the entire nation translates into an investment of about KRW 79.1 billion (USD 67.6 million), which can be interpreted as the annual external benefit of the R&D investment in WtE technology.
- keywords
- Waste-to-energy, external benefit, willingness to pay, contingent valuation, spike model
참고문헌
Arrow, K., Solow, R., Portney, P.R., Leamer, E.E., Radner, R., and Schuman, H. (1993), Report of the NOAA panel on contingent valuation, Federal Register, 58, 4601-4614.
Bateman, I.J., Langford, I.H., Jones, A.P., and Kerr, G.N. (2001), Bound and path effects in double and triple bounded dichotomous choice contingent valuation, Resource and Energy Economics, 23, 191-213.
Cameron, T.A., and Quiggin, J. (1994), Estimation using contingent valuation data from a ‘dichotomous choice with follow-up’ questionnaire, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 27, 218-234.
Cooper, J.C., Hanemann, M., and Signorello, G. (2002), One-and-one-half-bound dichotomous choice contingent valuation, Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 742-750.
Eurostat (2013), http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/waste/introduction/
Hanemann, W.M. (1984), Welfare evaluations in contingent valuation experiments with discrete responses, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 66, 332-341.
International Maritime Organization (accessed at: 2016. June) http://www.imo.org
Kaiser, M.J., and Pulsipher, A.G. (2003), A generalized modeling framework for public benefit fund program valuation, Energy, 28, 519-538.
Krinsky, I., and Robb, A.L. (1986), On approximating the statistical properties of elasticities, Review of Economics and Statistics, 68, 715-719.
Kriström, B. (1997), Spike models in contingent valuation, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 79, 1013-1023.
Kwak, S.-Y., and Yoo, S.-H. (2015), The public's value for developing ocean energy technology in the Republic of Korea: a contingent valuation study, Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 43, 432-439.
McFadden D. (1994), Contingent valuation and social choice, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 76, 689-708.
Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (2015), 2014 Technology Level Evaluation, Korea Institute of S&T Evaluation and Planning.
Mitchell, R.C., and Carson, R.T. (1989), Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: The Contingent Valuation Method, Washington, D.C: Resources for the Future.
World Energy Council. (2013), World Energy Resources 2013 Survey, London.
Yoo, S.-H., and Chae, K.-S. (2001), Measuring the economic benefits of the ozone pollution control policy in Seoul: results of a contingent valuation survey, Urban Studies, 38, 49-60.
Yoo, S.-H., and Kwak, S.-J. (2002), Using a spike model to deal with zero response data from double bounded dichotomous contingent valuation survey, Applied Economics Letters, 9, 929-932.
- 다운로드 수
- 조회수
- 0KCI 피인용수
- 0WOS 피인용수