This mixed-methods study reveals public willingness to pay for waste management in Ghana, highlighting influencing factors such as income and education levels.
Ghana faces significant challenges in solid waste management, with inadequate collection services, poor disposal practices, and limited recycling infrastructure affecting urban and rural communities alike. This study investigates public willingness to pay (WTP) for enhanced solid waste management services across selected regions in Ghana, examining the economic feasibility of service improvements and identifying factors that influence household payment decisions. Using a mixed-methods approach, this research employs contingent valuation methodology through structured surveys administered to 200 households across Techiman Municipal. The study assesses current waste management practices, households’ maximum willingness to pay for improved services, including regular waste collection, Tenancy agreement, proper disposal facilities, recycling programs, and community education initiatives. Key variables examined include household income, gender, and age, education levels, current service quality, academic qualification, amount of money willing to pay, and demographic characteristics. It was revealed that the predominantly working-age population 25 years and above capable of contributing to service delivery remains compromised by prohibitive collection costs and unprofessional conduct among waste collectors. The study also discovered that out of the 200 respondents, 56% were willing to pay for the services of waste collectors. The findings also became clear that there is a gendered dimension to waste management participation, with women assuming greater responsibility for household waste collection activities compared to their male counterparts. Significantly, the educated demographic also demonstrates understanding of the health and environmental consequences of improper waste disposal. The findings recommended the enforcement of sanitation laws, environmental education, and waste management strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Enchill et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: