Environmental Culture and Willingness-to-Pay: An Innovative Solution to Vietnam's Waste Crisis

Farida Lanawati Darsono

Faculty of Pharmacy, Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic University, East Java, Indonesia

May 29, 2025

Rapid economic growth in developing countries often presents a double-edged sword: financial prosperity on one side and escalating environmental crises on the other (UNEP, 2024). Vietnam offers a clear example of this phenomenon. Alongside strong macroeconomic expansion—with GDP growth projected at 7.09% in 2024 and per capita income reaching approximately USD 4,700 (GSO, 2025)—the country is also experiencing a massive surge in waste generation. Vietnam currently produces approximately 65,000–70,000 tons of solid waste each day. However, waste treatment infrastructure has not developed at the same pace as economic growth. Most waste still ends up in open landfills, and a staggering 90% of provinces reportedly fail to meet regulatory standards for landfill land-use efficiency (Nguyen & Nakakubo, 2025).



Courtesy of Haverman (2025)

Even more concerning, Vietnam’s current solid waste management financing system remains heavily dependent on public subsidies. Estimates suggest that 70%–90% of operational waste management costs are covered by government support through state-owned enterprises (IUCN, 2023). This financial burden significantly constrains local governments’ capacity to invest in advanced treatment technologies, such as waste-to-energy incinerators and modern recycling facilities.

To address this structural financial challenge, citizen participation in environmental financing is becoming increasingly important. A recent study published in Sustainability comprehensively examined households’ willingness to pay (WTP) for improved waste treatment services (Khuc et al., 2026). Based on a survey of 487 households across 11 communes and wards in Hai Phong City—an industrial hub characterized by high waste emissions—the study found that 79.26% of respondents were willing to contribute additional financial resources to support better waste management services. On average, households were willing to pay approximately 60,200 VND (equivalent to USD 2.32) per month. This amount exceeds the conventional environmental service fees currently imposed, indicating strong potential for collaborative financing and community-based co-financing mechanisms (Khuc et al., 2026).

What, then, motivates citizens to willingly sacrifice part of their material wealth for environmental protection? Bayesian analysis revealed that, beyond household income, environmental awareness and direct exposure to pollution play central roles. Families that frequently experience foul odors from waste collection sites or perceive worsening pollution conditions tend to contribute more financially. Likewise, pro-environmental practices—such as regularly sorting organic and non-organic waste at home—are positively associated with higher willingness to pay for improved waste treatment services (Khuc et al., 2026).

However, the study also identified an anomaly that may complicate policy implementation: the “satisfaction paradox.” Citizens who reported being “very satisfied” with existing waste collection services exhibited a significantly lower willingness to pay for future environmental improvements (Khuc et al., 2026). This sense of short-term comfort may reduce the perceived urgency of investing in long-term ecological infrastructure, whose benefits are often less immediate and less visible (Vuong, 2025; Nguyen, 2026).

Overall, the study suggests that the transition toward a circular economy depends not only on technological modernization but also on sociocultural transformation through the cultivation of a strong ecological culture at the community level (Khuc & Nguyen, 2026). By linking environmental culture with economic valuation methods, the research advances the circular economy literature through its focus on household engagement and willingness-to-pay mechanisms in sustainable waste financing. Moreover, it provides empirical evidence supporting Vietnam’s Environmental Protection Law (2020), particularly regarding the implementation of the “polluter pays” principle, waste classification at the source, and socially acceptable environmental financing mechanisms.

References

General Statistics Office (GSO). (2025, February 6). Socio-economic situation in the fourth quarter and 2024. https://www.nso.gov.vn/en/highlight/2025/02/socio-economic-situation-in-the-fourth-quarter-and-2024/

Haverman, P. (2025, June 4). Reclaiming value, restoring responsibility: Why Viet Nam should consider a Deposit Return System. https://www.undp.org/vietnam/blog/reclaiming-value-restoring-responsibility-why-viet-nam-should-consider-deposit-return-system

IUCN. (2023, September 18). Piloting volume-based waste fees in Hoi An, Viet Nam. https://iucn.org/story/202309/piloting-volume-based-waste-fees-hoi-viet-nam

Khuc, V. Q., et al. (2026). Estimating households willingness-to-pay for improved waste treatment service in Vietnam. Sustainability, 18(8), 4102. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18084102

Khuc, V. Q., & Nguyen, M. H. (2026). Cultural Additivity Theory. Available at SSRN 6767760. https://ssrn.com/abstract=6767760

Nguyen, M.-H. (2026). Ayn Rand and Kingfisher on zero-carbon bombs and a sustainable future. Visions for Sustainability, 25(13474), 1-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.13135/2384-8677/13474

Nguyen, T. D. T., & Nakakubo, T. (2025). Characteristics of solid waste landfills in Vietnam and selection of prioritized measures based on land use-focused assessment. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 27, 4285–4300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-025-02358-6

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). (2024). International solid waste association waste management outlook 2024: Beyond an age of waste—Turning rubbish into a resource. UNEP. https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/44939

Vuong, Q. H. (2025). Wild Wise Weird. AISDL. https://books.google.com/books?id=C5dDEQAAQBAJ